Leaderboard

Yep. Some paths easier, some more difficult, but every able-bodied and -minded person has a choice and a chance to work for their own version of success. Every one. Allow myself to quote myself: show me "disadvantaged" and I'll show you "opportunity."

First off : TIB Sucks. I hate them with the fire of 1,000 suns. Second: Suggest we lay off (On her YouTube page at least). She's an early 20's enlisted kid who probably joined to "See the world" and TIB offers that. She hasn't gotten a "chance" to deploy yet, and seeing all those places they spend our tax dollars on to get to sounds pretty exciting to some kid fresh off the farm. Can't exactly blame her for that. The stupid YouTube video, on the other hand is a different story. Standing by for spears.

And those examples of insurances are there for catastrophic damages- which medical insurance should, in theory, only be used for. Day to day visits to the family doctor, urgent care clinincs, or ER for non life threatening injuries should be out-of-pocket affordable for everyone. This is what the ACA SHOULD HAVE addressed- medical costs.

I don't think that an abundance of flight hours = leadership, but a lack of flight hours = a lack of credibility.

Here's my problem with the whole debate, is life for Americans really unfair, just because others have more wealth? These poor Americans, who are the global richest 1%, would probably not garner a lot of sympathy tears from the average Nigerian or Indonesian. I just find it funny that the "poverty line" has to be redrawn every time there is a new technology or quality of life breakthrough in the states. We have all heard about how even the poor have a roof over their head, cable TV, cars, and most importantly, smartphones to text each other with and keep up with politics. So, yes, I for the most part agree with the numbers in this video propaganda piece about the distribution of wealth, but why don't they mention the absolute values of all of that wealth - even the lowest 20% - compared to the global average??? All I have to say is that all those people on the bottom should thank God every day that this entire statistical distribution takes place in the States. I mean, those really poor guys on the bottom literally have more wealth and a higher standard of living than the Pharaohs of Egypt, the Caesars of Rome, and all the kings and queens of the Middle Ages. So back to reality - this is why I am a fan of the "a rising tide lifts all ships" theory. Why the fuck should someone making $15K care that the wealthy have 10 millions time as much wealth? In our society, $15K is enough to get a decent roof over your head, heating/cooling, a used car, and enough food to make you morbidly obese by the time you are 10 years old. Oh, you can also afford a nice smartphone, complete with data plan, on that money too, if you budget wisely enough. Every form of government and every society - monarchy, communism, capitalism - since time immemorial has had a pyramid distribution structure of talent, competitiveness, wealth, strength, or whatever. It's just that our current system affords everyone to have a decent standard of life. And every future government system will have a pyramid structure, and every system must have a pyramid structure. Why, because God made all of us with unequal skills and talents. I kind of agree with this, for the most part, but I really don't think it will be an issue in our society until people are getting thrown out of their homes/apartments (laws make that a pretty long and difficult process), or not having means to provide basic necessities of food and cellphones for their family. Food is actually crazy cheap here, and for those who mis-allocate their wealth on cable TV, drugs, playstations, they have access to food stamps, or debit cards, or whatever they are today. Bottom line, in my opinion, yes, wealth inequality can be dangerous in some more desperate societies, but probably not until peoples security, belongings, home, family, or food is in danger - things that I think we are very far from.

abmwaldo, I recently completed the AU OLMP and you can start RE5610 without a topic but you will have to pick something pretty quick to start completing the assignments. In theory, you could survive the whole first research elective still narrowing down your topic with it changing slightly week to week but I would recommend having a solid topic at the start of the second research electives course so that you spend all your time fine tuning your paper versus fine tuning your topic and then rushing to turn that into your paper.

Flight hours: More than 4,400

Its amazing that people managed to pay for medical care and education for decades prior to Pell grants or medicare/big insurance. The care would be more affordable and therefore available to more people without a bankrupting government program. For that small group that maybe can't afford it, that's where free clinics and other charity programs come into play. Neither idea will cover 100% anyways but one provides affordable and quality care to most through competition and the other provides government bureaucratic care with no competition and costs that will run the government even more into the ground. Income is wealth, and the Estate tax is a wealth tax, how the hell can you justify the government taking up to 55% of someones wealth because they die. Considering cradle-to-grave government structures have yet to be sustainable, I would say the Democrats squarely don't understand how countries operate long-term. Free market ideas and capitalist ideas brought this country from nothing to number #1 superpower in less than 250 years, yet socialist ideas have yet to produce a country that lasted a century. China even realized they couldn't keep going down the track they were started opening their economy to capitalist ideas. The GOP may not be perfect, but they don't punish success and they want to give you the best chance to choose for yourself without being constantly regulated to death by the government.

What do you suggest? Taking wealth from those who have earned it in order to give those who have not? Oh wait, we already do that with the estate tax...though I guess the dead aren't able to defend themselves from that form of theft. Dude, I am doing better than my parents, who did better than their parents, and who did better than their parents. Like others have said, it's not like there is a limited amount of wealth--liberals (and those who are uneducated and buy into their liberal point of view because it's easier to play the victim) like to believe that the wealthy are only wealthy because they took that money from somebody else. Now ever since Lincoln, government has been taking from people to give to wealthy in the form of corporate welfare...but people constantly support government taking and redistributing, whether it is to the lazy or to corporations--both of which in the end reduces competition and efficiency. I will most likely never be as wealthy as those in the '1%', and that is more than fine with me. As long as I have Liberty to live my life the way I chose and can take chances to increase my personal wealth, I am more than happy. Trust me, if someone in the bottom 50% had a remarkable idea/product that people viewed as desirable and of good value, that person would build wealth. But if people live just to keep their heads above water than that is the best they will ever do...and if they stumble along the way (drugs/alcohol abuse, out of wedlock births, gambling addictions, and overall bad decisions, etc), then as you correctly point out, they will probably go backwards.

Stop subsidizing both and let the market drive the cost. Accounting for inflation costs for education at colleges have nearly doubled since the early 1980s, the government gives out more money the colleges raise their prices. Medical is the same way, charge the maximum amount of money the insurance will pay. Its no different than our lodging caps on TDY, are you going to stay in a $60 Motel 6 when the nightly cap is a $150? Its the principle of the matter, once you open the door to the idea that the government can confiscate a super-wealthy persons money because they have "too much", where the hell do you draw the line?

No, of course not. But it is an indicator.... Someone who signs up to be an aviator, and is fortunate enough to be selected and graduate training is expected to enjoy their job and get really good at it. When someone appears more interested in box checking, visibility, and staff opportunities at the expense of what most of us believe should be their focus, it reeks of careerist douchebaggery. However, practical leadership for us in the USAF is usually quite limited (especially compared to other services) until FGO levels. Some guys do well, some don't, but the guys with several ops tours usually have more credibility and an ops focus, both of which usually equal "great commander" in our minds. I know plenty of great leaders with zero hours. But I'm wary of an O5 with 1200 hours and 6 years at the pentagon.

UAVs. It's not figurative: at RF they actually put us in the corner. Can't comment on selectees, though. Edit: After hearing list of CH selectees, 2/3 decent at least.

13-07 Drop: U-28 x2 HC-130 Patrick Reserves B-52 B-Dale EC-130 Ewo E3 Tinker B-1B Dyess KC-135 McConnell F-15E x2 SJ C-130 Charlotte ANG

Huggy...you asked.

Maybe I am wrong here, but based on the O-6 select list that just came out I would say the Air Force is doing a pretty damn good job of promoting the right people....at least in my corner of the AF.

Lame

You guys deserve the Distinguished Warfare Medal for being able to watch that whole thing. You know those people who compulsively post way too much superfluous BS on Facebook that's just so amazingly insignificant it infuriates you that you spent 0.69 seconds reading it? Well, that's just a much longer video version of that. For everyone who hasn't seen it, I'll summarize: Inherently annoying girl with 80s hairstyle that pre-dates her birth whines/rambles about not making the government version of the high school band and dog-sitting on a Saturday night. It is apparent the dog also hates her and fakes sleeping to be left alone. She also seems completely oblivious that her company's primary job is killing and undoubtedly annoys said war fighters by screwing up their travel vouchers and PCS orders. That's all I could stand, so if something really entertaining happened after that, then I missed it.

Navs

TIB 3-1 is a great read. Starts with BFM, Basic Fabulous Manuevers, for individuals. Stuff like jazz hands. The moves to more advanced concepts like ACM, Assembled Cast Manuevering, which covers singing and dancing as a group.

Dude. My roll is pretty slow compared to yours. Here's some facts: Slander: Joined BODN Jul 2005, 154 active posts. NSPlayer: Joined BODN Apr 2008, 1977 active posts. When I post I think about it for a very long time before I do, and then I usually don't. I triple dog dare you to try that on for size, just see how it feels. Just the tip, just for a little bit if you must. Ball busting aside (sts), to answer the original question, I don't think UPT dudes are going to a UAV directly outside of the guard/reserve guys. Nowadays it seems like most dudes are 11M types or 18U direct.

They've got a point man. You post and type too fucking much as it is. Stay in your lane.

Nsplayer, If he slows his roll, will you slow your posts? Even if I ignored you, responses to your posts clog the message board and make this forum much less enjoyable. Consider shutting the hell up.

So you are saying you are 100% successful in your debunkery? Can you now argue against THAT statistic? ;)

Some photos from the Beale facebook page: Nice reflective belt!

I heard that since your mom is so old and expensive, your dad just logs currency hours in the co-located pool boy.