Ed note: The crux of this article made it to the U.S. budget radar scope yesterday; is the Fed reading Jaxonia?
The United States Navy has 13 aircraft carriers and another one named and ready to be built. No one disputes the value of these ships, but do we need THIRTEEN of them? Let's look at some facts and figures --
It costs anywhere between 10 and 15 BILLION dollars to develop and build a nuclear carrier and roughly $160,000,000 a year to keep it afloat and active. That's around 2 1/2 billion annually in upkeep
Currently two of these rather large puppies are in their home ports, and FIVE of them are undergoing routine maintenance. So six carriers are routinely deployed around the world. Where? Right now one's in the Bay of Bengal, one's in the South China Sea, three are roaming around the Atlantic and the last one's in the Persian Gulf. Sounds like we've got the world pretty much covered!
Couldn't we de-commission 3 or 4 of these giants? We have never needed more than one of them at a time since WWII, and we would save half a billion dollars a year in upkeep; Hold the line at nine carriers, and we'll save another 60 billion.
By the way, our science, technology and energy budgets total $45 billion; maybe we could spend a little more to help get a 50 MPG automobile? Or maybe toss $20-30 billion at Africa? It couldn't hurt!
Previously published 1/27/09
Shame on you! Mothballing aircraft carriers!? One more such mental transgression and I will see that you are drummed out of every sci-fi coven and technology-lover association I know of.
ReplyDeleteAircraft carriers are the penultimate technology deployment and employment generator. Without these floating money pits, how would the US maintain its position as the world's premier technology exemplar and defense industry employer? Think not of efficiency, but of jobs. Each of these behemoth employs 5,000+ seamen and between 75 and 90 expensive-to-build and expensive-to-maintain aircraft. In addition, think of nuclear reactor makers, aeronautical and naval engineers, shipyard workers, jet fuel suppliers, food suppliers, uniform makers, barkeeps and ladies of ill repute. The Defense Department is the premier employment generator in a downturn (see WW II) and we should feed the beast as long as it creates jobs. As much as we need more fuel-efficient cars, what good will it do us to pour money into the auto makers and this new technology if no one has jobs and hence can�t buy the damned things anyway?