Real Change

[Phi for All]

Let’s talk about change. There are two major changes I'd like to see in the US that I’ve been chewing on for years. Any major change is viewed as radical in the US, and thus most politicians steer clear of them. We’re now seeing that, in hindsight, moderate changes in our energy policies thirty years ago would have helped us a great deal to avoid our current oil dependencies and the need for radical change. This is probably the best political climate EVER to gain support for some sweeping changes we can make now to avoid regrets later.

 

The first change I’d like to see is in the military. Back in the 60’s, Sen. Stuart Symington (D-MO) proposed unifying the military under one Chief of Staff and abolishing the separate commands that cost so much money. One of the reasons we spend more than the rest of the world combined on our military is that we have four hands reaching for every dollar allotted to defense, with four complete administrative staffs filing all the necessary formalities. And because the buying power of the military isn’t unified, we spend ridiculous amounts of money satisfying petty procurement differences (like when the Air Force wanted to give up the A-10 Thunderbolt because they didn’t like it’s close support mission and wanted the Army to support itself with helicopters while the AF flew high in fighters; the Army loved what the A-10 did for close support in the first Gulf War but wanted it’s own version, partly because they didn’t like AF snobbery over the matter). By unifying the military into a single fighting force, part of which is trained for sea missions, part for land and part for air, we don’t lose capabilities and most likely gain more bang for less bucks. This is something that needs to transition starting as soon as possible in order to realize the savings while maintaining superior defensive capabilities.

 

The second change is the way we build our roads. Allowing people to drive on asphalt the same day it’s put down guarantees potholes and repaving within the next year or two. This keeps a lot of people working but wastes a tremendous amount of money. Let asphalt cure for 90 days before anyone drives on it and you get glass-smooth roads for at least 10 years (Germany does this with the Autobahn, the most pleasurable driving surface I’ve ever experienced). For the transition period between not-curing and curing, the savings can be used to retrain superfluous road workers. Even if this results in the same amount of money being spent (at least until the system stabilizes), we trade some inconvenience for Autobahn-style pothole-free roads.

 

I’d like to hear about some changes you’d like to see in the United States of America, whether you live here or not.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Education.

 

The rise of standardized testing, and testing in general, means the focus of school has gone from learning to getting grades. School is done for the sake of doing school, not for the sake of future benefit or improvement. And I don't just mean the big assessment tests: every class I've taken seems to throw in extra tests and quizzes and assignments that have no purpose but to be another grade, not to make the students learn and benefit.

 

If we could get out of our "let's test them until their brains melt into their torso and cause a hernia" mindset, and more into a "let's get students to learn and think" mindset, we might get somewhere.

[ecoli]

The first change I’d like to see is in the military. Back in the 60’s, Sen. Stuart Symington (D-MO) proposed unifying the military under one Chief of Staff and abolishing the separate commands that cost so much money. One of the reasons we spend more than the rest of the world combined on our military is that we have four hands reaching for every dollar allotted to defense, with four complete administrative staffs filing all the necessary formalities.

 

I would also suggest rolling the CIA and Dep't. of defense into the military. I think these intelligence communities would also benefit from unification with the armed forces and also I question the legitimacy and constitutionality of having a military-like unit not officially associated with the armed forces.

 

The second change is the way we build our roads. Allowing people to drive on asphalt the same day it’s put down guarantees potholes and repaving within the next year or two. This keeps a lot of people working but wastes a tremendous amount of money. Let asphalt cure for 90 days before anyone drives on it and you get glass-smooth roads for at least 10 years (Germany does this with the Autobahn, the most pleasurable driving surface I’ve ever experienced). For the transition period between not-curing and curing, the savings can be used to retrain superfluous road workers. Even if this results in the same amount of money being spent (at least until the system stabilizes), we trade some inconvenience for Autobahn-style pothole-free roads.

 

Either that or privatize roads. I question the government's ability to keep up with demand in this respect.

 

Education.

If we could get out of our "let's test them until their brains melt into their torso and cause a hernia" mindset, and more into a "let's get students to learn and think" mindset, we might get somewhere.

Again, I'd like to see more private alternatives being pursued here. Charter schools have had great affects in inner schools, if John Stossel's 20/20 report is to be believed.

[Pangloss]

It's an interesting idea gathering the military into a single unit, but think the effect of that move would not be significant change. As you point out, the military is already unified in purchasing, and the influences within the Pentagon that try to skew purchasing would not change under that arrangement -- pilots are still pilots, skippers are still skippers, ground-pounders are still ground-pounders. I think we could have some interesting discussions along these lines, though, and I don't think your suggestion is without merit. I'm not sure if the rest of the board is interested. I wouldn't mind pondering some serious change in military spending.

[iNow]

I'd like to see some real change in the area of climate, and human contributions of greenhouse gases. Tell the AM talk radio nutters to shut up, get out of the way, and let us do what needs to be done. Yes, humans are the primary forcing factor, and we need to fix it.

[Phi for All]

Education.

 

The rise of standardized testing, and testing in general, means the focus of school has gone from learning to getting grades.

You're right, education is another area that needs real change, but I didn't even know where to start to fix it. The best I could come up with was a funnel system where young people start out with broad learning parameters and get more specialized into certain areas as they progress, with the aim of educating them into careers they not only want but are best qualified for.

 

I think one state needs to figure out something really progressive and effective and when that state's kids start outperforming all others, the rest will jump on board. But who will be willing to forgo federal funding?

 

Either that or privatize roads. I question the government's ability to keep up with demand in this respect.

As long as we don't fall for this current trick of trading convenience for durability, privatization could work. I believe Germany makes it's contractors guarantee their roads for 10 years. I think the taxpayers would trade extra detours and redistribution of jobs for lack of potholes, huge tax savings, driving safety and longer vehicle life.

 

But from what I've seen of privatization so far, it just means more expensive. We're already paying too much for roads unnecessarily.

 

It's an interesting idea gathering the military into a single unit, but think the effect of that move would not be significant change. As you point out, the military is already unified in purchasing, and the influences within the Pentagon that try to skew purchasing would not change under that arrangement -- pilots are still pilots, skippers are still skippers, ground-pounders are still ground-pounders. I think we could have some interesting discussions along these lines, though, and I don't think your suggestion is without merit. I'm not sure if the rest of the board is interested. I wouldn't mind pondering some serious change in military spending.

I think unifying the military is a practical solution, rather than just cutting military spending and forcing them to do without. Rivalry (albeit friendly) has cost us much over the years, as has "tradition".

[Saryctos]

You're right, education is another area that needs real change, but I didn't even know where to start to fix it.

 

De-unionize

[Sisyphus]

I'm having a hard time imagining the person saying they're going to close down a lane of the Long Island Expressway for three months not getting lynched.

[ecoli]

I'm having a hard time imagining the person saying they're going to close down a lane of the Long Island Expressway for three months not getting lynched.

YEah ouch. The traffic would be horrendous, even if they gave up the HOV lane for a while.

[npts2020]

I am sure nobody on this board can guess (sarcasm) that I think automating the road/rail system in America is the radical change I would like to see. As for the "cured asphalt" highways, you could do it without shutting down the roads for months through prefabrication.

[ecoli]

De-unionize

My dad is a high school teacher. We were talking the other day about how poisonous the teachers unions are. But, among teachers, there is such a cult of union loyalty that you would be hard pressed to make teachers leave unions. Not only that, teachers that don't want to be in the union face animosity from their colleagues.

[bombus]

The first change I’d like to see is in the military. Back in the 60’s, Sen. Stuart Symington (D-MO) proposed unifying the military under one Chief of Staff and abolishing the separate commands that cost so much money.

 

I remember once reading a book of lists. It listed the reliability of armies in various countries ranked 1-20. The British Army was ranked as No.1, and the US Army was ranked No.2. The explanation for the British Army being so reliable was apparently due to the regiment system, which makes a military coup virtually impossible. Having the entire army under one leader is a sure way to encourage military coups!

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

De-unionize

 

Texas has no teacher unions, and it is no better than any other US state.

[Pangloss]

In what regard?

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

In what regard?

 

Pretty much any measure of academic achievement you can think of. Texas was ranked 48th in the states in education recently, I believe.

[iNow]

We also just elected a bunch of creationists to the school board. FFS, some of these people have published their own creationist-based biology texts. No conflict of interest there. I wonder how long before they try to bring those into the schools. It pains me deeply to see this type of ignorance forced upon our youngsters.

 

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/10/prepare_for_an_ugly_battle_in.php

[Phi for All]

I'm having a hard time imagining the person saying they're going to close down a lane of the Long Island Expressway for three months not getting lynched.

Perhaps those who drive that Expressway should pay extra for their convenience. Short-sightedness and impatience costs extra.

[Sisyphus]

Perhaps those who drive that Expressway should pay extra for their convenience. Short-sightedness and impatience costs extra.

 

Maybe they should, but that's not really the point. (I already think commuters are insane, let alone automotive commuters - who knows what will actually discourage them.) That's a road that carries several hundred thousand vehicles per day in some places, and it's pretty much expanded to the maximum physically possible already. Repaving is done in the middle of the night only, and it's still a major inconvenience. Effectively removing a lane more or less permanently would be absurd.

 

I'm not saying that method shouldn't be done more often, of course. It probably makes sense in lots of places. But not everywhere.

[Phi for All]

Maybe they should, but that's not really the point. (I already think commuters are insane, let alone automotive commuters - who knows what will actually discourage them.) That's a road that carries several hundred thousand vehicles per day in some places, and it's pretty much expanded to the maximum physically possible already. Repaving is done in the middle of the night only, and it's still a major inconvenience. Effectively removing a lane more or less permanently would be absurd.

 

I'm not saying that method shouldn't be done more often, of course. It probably makes sense in lots of places. But not everywhere.

Yeah, it's too bad there are no alternative ways for people to get around in NY the way they did each time the LIE was expanded, or an effective way to give people notice that there will be a period of inconvenience that will result in less road maintenance, less wear and tear on their cars and smoother driving.

 

So, for busy roads, I guess it's automatically NO WE CAN'T.

[john5746]

I think it would be nice to consider a diversity of ideas, to realize that there may be more than one answer to certain problems, especially considering the large, diverse country we live in.

 

 

Hmmm... maybe below is a start.

 

http://www.change.org/

[bascule]

I would love to see the Pentagon audited regularly. Right now they're the only federal department exempt from auditing. It's not for reasons of secrecy or protection of confidential projects. Rather the Pentagon's accounting system is both antiquated and byzantine. That said over the years they've accumulated trillions of dollars in spending they can't account for.

 

Unifying the command structure would certainly be a great step forward in helping the Pentagon be accountable.

[JohnB]

I've put the idea forward for Australia and can see no reason it would not help the US too.

 

Rather than building new roads, spend the money to encourage telecommuting for thos who do not physically have to be at their workplace.

[Genecks]

I think the military expense thing is true.

 

I once read that the cost of ammo/guns for a year for one soldier is the same amount as a soldier's annual salary: about $14000 USD.

 

Education...

 

All of you have heard my argument. I blame it on the teachers. If they think they have enough skill to teach someone, then they ought to have enough skill to be creative and supply students in an excellent fashion. They don't. Maybe they should go back to school and do something else.

 

If schools were setup correctly, people would be obeying T.A.s.

The T.A.s would advance to their new career.

And students would move onto the next grade, during which they meet a new teachers and T.A..

 

Of course, children will grow up with detachment issues.

It's not like America will get any better with people doing dead-end jobs, though.

[Pangloss]

Cutting military spending is almost to the point of trivial now. This country spent over five trillion dollars this year (on receipts of 2.7 trillion!). The budget of the Department of Defense was something like $550 billion, not counting Iraq and Afghanistan, which will decrease next year but will not be eliminated (even if Obama changed his tune and removed us immediately, the budget he'll be operating under next year came from Bush's office).

 

So even if you slashed the Pentagon's budget in half you'd still be freeing up less money than the 2007 FARM BILL.

 

(Now there's a political fight I'd like to see -- with ONE STROKE of a pen you could free up $300 billion in subsidies currently being given to already-profitable mega-corporations. But there is probably not one person in congress who would support such a measure. Well okay, maybe one.)

 

I do agree that we need to work on the defense budget, but we have bigger fish to fry. Much bigger.

 

----

 

BTW, just for fun, let me repost this, since it seems appropriate to the thread. Who wants to be a richer man anyway?

 

Edited November 7, 2008 by Pangloss
multiple post merged

[bascule]

The budget of the Department of Defense was something like $550 billion, not counting Iraq and Afghanistan, which will decrease next year but will not be eliminated (even if Obama changed his tune and removed us immediately, the budget he'll be operating under next year came from Bush's office).

 

So even if you slashed the Pentagon's budget in half you'd still be freeing up less money than the 2007 FARM BILL.

 

Okay, seriously Pangloss, back the f**k up

 

The 2007 farm bill covers a $288 billion over the course of five years.

 

I'll just defer to Wikipedia on the Defense Department:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_the_United_States

 

For 2009, the base budget rose to US$515.4 billion, with a total of US$651.2 billion when emergency discretionary spending and supplemental spending are included.[1] This does not include many military-related items that are outside of the Defense Department budget, such as nuclear weapons research, maintenance and production (~$9.3 billion, which is in the Department of Energy budget), Veterans Affairs (~$33.2 billion) or the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (which are largely funded through extra-budgetary supplements, ~$170 billion in 2007) - the United States government is currently spending at the rate of approximately $1 trillion per year for all defense-related purposes

 

Seriously, these don't even compare. One TRILLION dollars in a year, that's:

 

$1,000,000,000,000 in ONE YEAR

 

versus:

 

$2,880,000,000 over FIVE YEARS (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_U.S._Farm_Bill)

 

What are you talking about? Please defend your position, which is completely incongruent with the facts. America is set to spend twice as much on "defense" as the rest of the world combined

Edited November 7, 2008 by bascule