Like the TSA, spaceforce is just another government employment program. I'd prefer we waste less on the performative function and just pay more in entitlements.
Geospatial intelligence collection and analysis is extremely important, but before the USSF, this capability and mission was disjointed across multiple branches.
Furthermore, where should missiles lie? This distracts from the Army, Navy, and AF's core missions.
This is why ALL countries are constituting their own "Space Force" or "Rocket Force" - to manage missiles and geospatial intel gathering.
Back when nuclear weapons were relevant, every service wanted them. The air force wanted bombers and ground-based missiles. The navy wanted submarine-launched missiles. Even the army got in on it, with nuclear artillery.
Why have we waited until missiles are fading from relevance, years after the end of the cold war, and only now decided they need their own branch?
Basically, most countries need a dedicated org to manage A2AD and Geospatial strategy - Missiles, Rockets, Satellites, you name it.
Before the USSF the closest thing to this was a couple sub-departments within the USAF, US Army, and USN plus the NGA (which is just a supporting agency).
This has been something on the books for decades now [0]
At the end of the cold war. In the present day, a launch is inconceivable.
That's why we don't much care if the missile crews sitting around in underground bunkers are napping, playing xbox, wearing pyjamas, taking LSD and cheating on their proficiency exams.
And the fact there won't be a launch is a great thing - No reasonable person would enjoy it if mutually assured destruction was to occur.
one quarter of countries worldwide do not make or publish basic national statistics. Countries are political-economic entities and carry huge historical technical debt.. bombastic declarations about "all countries" are hallmark to shallow thinking
What is the substantive difference between a government employment program and entitlements in your view? Is it that people don't have to do the performative function of working for an entitlement?
Note that Social Security, pretty much the leading entitlement program, requires that you pay into it before being able to draw.
Space Force is an actual military branch now just like the Air Force, Navy or Army. It isn't an employment program because it's no different than the other branches. You have to go through all the standard army training, bootcamp, rules, etc.
US Defense spending is a US employment program. I really wish we would drop the pretense and just make it a full employment jobs program. Anyone that wants to work should be able to get a job.
The private sector can then get employees by paying above the minimum wage offered by the defense department job program.
Obviously the military doesn't literally do nothing. Many of the people involved work very hard; lots of hard physical work, risk of death etc etc
But the military is uniquely patient when, for example, an already-very-expensive jet fighter ends up 10 years late and 80% over budget. And uniquely able, among government departments, to buy things like Javelin missiles that cost $200,000 a shot. Or to send $12bn in cash into Iraq, as literal pallets and truckloads of banknotes, into Iraq and somehow... lose it all and not be able to account for it. Or to be unable to pass any sort of account audits, as they can't find about 63% of their assets.
What's more, from the perspective of a politician, military spending makes for a great jobs program - because you can reasonably require your suppliers manufacture in America from components sourced in America AND small government types will approve military spending AND you get to look tough and strong.
Those are all situations where a commercial entity has put private funds at risk.
Most of these defense contracts that have gone way over have left the taxpayer paying for it all. In many cases, the defense contractor ends up better off because of the slip. And even very troubled programs that would have been killed in industry ages ago continue to survive.
This is what he was referring to with "But the military is *uniquely patient* when..." It's not the failure that's the problem.
Government pay scales is public knowledge. You'd pay based on seniority and function. You'd have an outside committe audit the jobs. You'd have KPIs and fire people that weren't performing, same as you would at a business.
The government already exists and has solved these problems before, I don't know why explicitly having jobs programs would be any different. Calling for UBI is a failure of imagination. As a society we should take care of those on the lowest rungs of the ladder, but there's more than enough work and thus jobs out there to be done, the only problem is funding them. If the government paid out $100 for every tree planted, we'd do well for the environment and have a whole lot more gardeners.
1. Federal min wage would be a good place to start.
2. Uh, the same as now? Just because you work for the government doesn't mean you earn min eage. I'm pretty sure Generals make more than $15k per year.
3. People that have jobs spend money in the economy to buy things. Private sector economy benefits from this.
4. You would have to do tasks to get paid. It's a job if you want it. Not forced. The idea is to curb unemployment.
