billvon 3,084 #76 August 9, 2012 >Surely you understand the difference between successful ventures and utter failures. Yes. And I recall right wingers bitching about Arpanet and what an utter, miserable failure it was. A colossal waste of money for something that private firms like Travelnet and Bitnet could handle just as well. (This, of course, was back when Usenet was the only place you could discuss anything on line.) One guy was lamenting the lack of security and complained "let's see you defend Al Gore's Internet after you find out that anyone with a modem can read your mail!" Nowadays I hear people talking about what a failure solar power is. And yet I have a 10kW system on my house that provides more power than I need - and it's ten times cheaper than it was 20 years ago. And the industry employs over 100,000 people in the US and is growing by 6% a year even in this economy. Not bad for an utter failure. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #77 August 9, 2012 Quote>Surely you understand the difference between successful ventures and utter failures. Yes. And I recall right wingers bitching about Arpanet and what an utter, miserable failure it was. A colossal waste of money for something that private firms like Travelnet and Bitnet could handle just as well. (This, of course, was back when Usenet was the only place you could discuss anything on line.) One guy was lamenting the lack of security and complained "let's see you defend Al Gore's Internet after you find out that anyone with a modem can read your mail!" Nowadays I hear people talking about what a failure solar power is. And yet I have a 10kW system on my house that provides more power than I need - and it's ten times cheaper than it was 20 years ago. And the industry employs over 100,000 people in the US and is growing by 6% a year even in this economy. Not bad for an utter failure. I'm not referring to any particular technology. I'm referring to poor management and the political and financial boondoggle that occurred. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,084 #78 August 9, 2012 >I'm not referring to any particular technology. I'm referring to poor management and >the political and financial boondoggle that occurred. Yep. Every technology out there - from the space program to the Internet to solar to defense - has had hideous levels of mismanagement at one point or the other. Sort of comes with the territory when you try to fund development of new technologies. Still, I am glad that we spent the money we did on the Internet, the space program, nuclear power, solar and wind power and fusion power. (Well, maybe not fusion. But that's a lot easier to say in hindsight.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,113 #79 August 9, 2012 QuoteQuote>Surely you understand the difference between successful ventures and utter failures. Yes. And I recall right wingers bitching about Arpanet and what an utter, miserable failure it was. A colossal waste of money for something that private firms like Travelnet and Bitnet could handle just as well. (This, of course, was back when Usenet was the only place you could discuss anything on line.) One guy was lamenting the lack of security and complained "let's see you defend Al Gore's Internet after you find out that anyone with a modem can read your mail!" Nowadays I hear people talking about what a failure solar power is. And yet I have a 10kW system on my house that provides more power than I need - and it's ten times cheaper than it was 20 years ago. And the industry employs over 100,000 people in the US and is growing by 6% a year even in this economy. Not bad for an utter failure. I'm not referring to any particular technology. I'm referring to poor management and the political and financial boondoggle that occurred. Right, it's amazing how much money has been wasted on defense projects and nuclear weapons development. Makes all the rest look like peanuts.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
yourmomma 0 #80 August 9, 2012 Not only is it tasteless it just fucking stupid. Growth slowing to a reasonable pace does not mean the tech sector popped. Just because the jobs are not in the bay area does not mean the jobs do not exist ,or the money has disappeared. On top of that the markets were roaring because the dollar was overvalued. It is not coincidental that the dollar lost value when the incoming president who proudly proclaimed he was going to run the country at a deficit in order to make things fair, followed thru with his plan which slowed the growth which let people blame it on a non existing bubble. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #81 August 9, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuote>Surely you understand the difference between successful ventures and utter failures. Yes. And I recall right wingers bitching about Arpanet and what an utter, miserable failure it was. A colossal waste of money for something that private firms like Travelnet and Bitnet could handle just as well. (This, of course, was back when Usenet was the only place you could discuss anything on line.) One guy was lamenting the lack of security and complained "let's see you defend Al Gore's Internet after you find out that anyone with a modem can read your mail!" Nowadays I hear people talking about what a failure solar power is. And yet I have a 10kW system on my house that provides more power than I need - and it's ten times cheaper than it was 20 years ago. And the industry employs over 100,000 people in the US and is growing by 6% a year even in this economy. Not bad for an utter failure. I'm not referring to any particular technology. I'm referring to poor management and the political and financial boondoggle that occurred. Right, it's amazing how much money has been wasted on defense projects and nuclear weapons development. Makes all the rest look like peanuts. Are you claiming the planes don't fly and the bombs don't work? Are you claiming the companies did not fulfill their contract? You may not like what the money was spent on but you cannot claim the contractors didn't do what they were paid to do or that they took the money, paid their executives huge salaries and then filled bankruptcy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,113 #82 August 9, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote>Surely you understand the difference between successful ventures and utter failures. Yes. And I recall right wingers bitching about Arpanet and what an utter, miserable failure it was. A colossal waste of money for something that private firms like Travelnet and Bitnet could handle just as well. (This, of course, was back when Usenet was the only place you could discuss anything on line.) One guy was lamenting the lack of security and complained "let's see you defend Al Gore's Internet after you find out that anyone with a modem can read your mail!" Nowadays I hear people talking about what a failure solar power is. And yet I have a 10kW system on my house that provides more power than I need - and it's ten times cheaper than it was 20 years ago. And the industry employs over 100,000 people in the US and is growing by 6% a year even in this economy. Not bad for an utter failure. I'm not referring to any particular technology. I'm referring to poor management and the political and financial boondoggle that occurred. Right, it's amazing how much money has been wasted on defense projects and nuclear weapons development. Makes all the rest look like peanuts. Are you claiming the planes don't fly and the bombs don't work? Are you claiming the companies did not fulfill their contract? You may not like what the money was spent on but you cannot claim the contractors didn't do what they were paid to do or that they took the money, paid their executives huge salaries and then filled bankruptcy. Nice strawman, but that's not what I wrote.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #83 August 9, 2012 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote >Surely you understand the difference between successful ventures and utter failures. Yes. And I recall right wingers bitching about Arpanet and what an utter, miserable failure it was. A colossal waste of money for something that private firms like Travelnet and Bitnet could handle just as well. (This, of course, was back when Usenet was the only place you could discuss anything on line.) One guy was lamenting the lack of security and complained "let's see you defend Al Gore's Internet after you find out that anyone with a modem can read your mail!" Nowadays I hear people talking about what a failure solar power is. And yet I have a 10kW system on my house that provides more power than I need - and it's ten times cheaper than it was 20 years ago. And the industry employs over 100,000 people in the US and is growing by 6% a year even in this economy. Not bad for an utter failure. I'm not referring to any particular technology. I'm referring to poor management and the political and financial boondoggle that occurred. Right, it's amazing how much money has been wasted on defense projects and nuclear weapons development. Makes all the rest look like peanuts. Are you claiming the planes don't fly and the bombs don't work? Are you claiming the companies did not fulfill their contract? You may not like what the money was spent on but you cannot claim the contractors didn't do what they were paid to do or that they took the money, paid their executives huge salaries and then filled bankruptcy. Nice strawman, but that's not what I wrote. Strawman....right...... is that all you have? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,113 #84 August 9, 2012 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote >Surely you understand the difference between successful ventures and utter failures. Yes. And I recall right wingers bitching about Arpanet and what an utter, miserable failure it was. A colossal waste of money for something that private firms like Travelnet and Bitnet could handle just as well. (This, of course, was back when Usenet was the only place you could discuss anything on line.) One guy was lamenting the lack of security and complained "let's see you defend Al Gore's Internet after you find out that anyone with a modem can read your mail!" Nowadays I hear people talking about what a failure solar power is. And yet I have a 10kW system on my house that provides more power than I need - and it's ten times cheaper than it was 20 years ago. And the industry employs over 100,000 people in the US and is growing by 6% a year even in this economy. Not bad for an utter failure. I'm not referring to any particular technology. I'm referring to poor management and the political and financial boondoggle that occurred. Right, it's amazing how much money has been wasted on defense projects and nuclear weapons development. Makes all the rest look like peanuts. Are you claiming the planes don't fly and the bombs don't work? Are you claiming the companies did not fulfill their contract? You may not like what the money was spent on but you cannot claim the contractors didn't do what they were paid to do or that they took the money, paid their executives huge salaries and then filled bankruptcy. Nice strawman, but that's not what I wrote. Strawman....right...... is that all you have? Let's see - you've admitted that higher taxes don't automatically lead to a bad economy, you can't dispute that waste on defense contracts far exceeds waste in other areas of govt. spending, and now you've admitted to a strawman argument. Why do I need more?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,084 #85 August 9, 2012 >Are you claiming the planes don't fly and the bombs don't work? Most do. Some defense companies were dismal failures; the Solyndras of their day. Google the Valkyrie by North American; an $11 billion (in 2012 dollars) failure. Good thing we didn't abandon military aviation, eh? >Are you claiming the companies did not fulfill their contract? Often they do not: ============================= Pentagon Reports Billions of Dollars in Contractor Fraud 1/13/2011 The Pentagon paid hundreds of billions of dollars to defense contractors engaged in criminal or civil fraud -- in some cases paying the companies after they were convicted, according to a new Defense Department report. At least 91 contractors holding contracts worth $270 billion were the subjects of civil fraud judgments -- and in some cases criminal fraud convictions as well, many of which resulted in fines, suspensions or debarments. Even so, Defense Department contracting officers still assigned $4.9 billion worth of work with these companies after the fraud was uncovered, the report said. The contractors identified in the report include such blue-chip entities as Boeing, Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, Pratt & Whitney, IBM and even the Yale medical school. =============================== Fraudulent Defense Contractors Paid $1 Trillion October 20, 2011 WASHINGTON, Oct. 20 - Hundreds of defense contractors that defrauded the U.S. military received more than $1.1 trillion in Pentagon contracts during the past decade, according to a Department of Defense report prepared for Sen. Bernie Sanders. Sanders (I-Vt.) called the report "shocking." He said aggressive steps must be taken to ensure taxpayer dollars aren't wasted. "The ugly truth is that virtually all of the major defense contractors in this country for years have been engaged in systemic fraudulent behavior, while receiving hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer money," said Sanders. ============================== All of which, of course, they are now trying to fix. So how about it? Should we cancel all contractor support of the US military because of the massive fraud, arguably much worse than Solyndra's? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #86 August 9, 2012 QuoteShould we cancel all contractor support of the US military because of the massive fraud, arguably much worse than Solyndra's? Arguably? $530 million << $1,100,000 millionMath tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #87 August 9, 2012 QuoteQuoteShould we cancel all contractor support of the US military because of the massive fraud, arguably much worse than Solyndra's? Arguably? $530 million << $1,100,000 million In all fairness you have to net out product and services delivered for that $1,100,000 million. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #88 August 9, 2012 QuoteNot only is it tasteless it just fucking stupid. Growth slowing to a reasonable pace does not mean the tech sector popped. Just because the jobs are not in the bay area does not mean the jobs do not exist ,or the money has disappeared. On top of that the markets were roaring because the dollar was overvalued. It is not coincidental that the dollar lost value when the incoming president who proudly proclaimed he was going to run the country at a deficit in order to make things fair, followed thru with his plan which slowed the growth which let people blame it on a non existing bubble. you seem to have an emotional attachment to this odd belief that the bust did not occur. Again, where were you in 2001? You sure as hell weren't here. We went from waiters quitting restaurants to become web developers, then we hit a 2 year period where a techie with 5+ years experience would go 6 months without an interview. That's a bubble bursting. Anyone that was working at the startups took a long vacation. Those working at established companies did much better - but they didn't think about changing jobs. Do you have a very special definition of bubble bursting you need to share? We had a similar discussion earlier in the week around what a surplus meant. Right now your definition of slowing to a reasonable pace is a funny one - negative growth isn't reasonable. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #89 August 9, 2012 Quote>I'm not referring to any particular technology. I'm referring to poor management and >the political and financial boondoggle that occurred. Yep. Every technology out there - from the space program to the Internet to solar to defense - has had hideous levels of mismanagement at one point or the other. Sort of comes with the territory when you try to fund development of new technologies. Still, I am glad that we spent the money we did on the Internet, the space program, nuclear power, solar and wind power and fusion power. (Well, maybe not fusion. But that's a lot easier to say in hindsight.) think how much we'll rue the day if the Chinese corner the solar and fusion industries because we were cheap on R&D. They already have us by the balls on rare earth minerals supply. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanuckInUSA 0 #90 August 9, 2012 QuoteQuotewhich let people blame it on a non existing bubble. you seem to have an emotional attachment to this odd belief that the bust did not occur. There was a Tech Bubble and it did burst (I have been working in IT since the mid 1980s and I very much experienced this Tech Bubble). However the bursting Tech Bubble did not effect everyone the same way. Obviously the hardest hit were the VCs who were far too loose with their money and most of the VCs learned a hard lesson and became much more diligent after the bubble. Next effected were people invested in Tech stocks in the market who did not get out before the bubble burst. Obviously people working at the failed tech companies were personally effected with numerous job losses, but anyone who relied on business from those in the tech sector who had money to spend were also effected to some degree. No it did not effect everyone the same way, but there very much was a Tech Bubble that burst in the 2000-2001 time frame. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,113 #91 August 9, 2012 QuoteQuote>I'm not referring to any particular technology. I'm referring to poor management and >the political and financial boondoggle that occurred. Yep. Every technology out there - from the space program to the Internet to solar to defense - has had hideous levels of mismanagement at one point or the other. Sort of comes with the territory when you try to fund development of new technologies. Still, I am glad that we spent the money we did on the Internet, the space program, nuclear power, solar and wind power and fusion power. (Well, maybe not fusion. But that's a lot easier to say in hindsight.) think how much we'll rue the day if the Chinese corner the solar and fusion industries because we were cheap on R&D. They already have us by the balls on rare earth minerals supply. R&D is indeed expensive, for most R&D projects don't pan out. "There are many ways to lose money. Women are the most fun. Gambling is the fastest. Research is the most certain.” — Ernest Hives, former Chairman of Rolls Royce. (Hives was responsible for setting up the production of 160,000 Merlin engines during WWII so presumably he knew what he was talking about).... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
