@itchytooth: Hey, I was right! They fixed it. Thanks military, keep the change!

itchytooth

That's fine, as long as they don't go spending the money on healthcare or food and shelter for bums.

bobdobbs

So they spent 5.2B of our fxcking tax dollars man!!!
Are you serious! WHAT A GREAT NATION (-overwhelming sarcasm-)
So if they freed up 1Trillion dollars in their budget how about they put that to paying back the trillions we owe to foreign nations or paying back some of that staggering defecit???
If we dont owe anyone we'll be the richest country for sure. I mean c'mon the EURO isnt that much higher than the dollar.

SneakerFiend

is that really our 1 trillion thats freed up or china's?

Alex2643

Uhh. [www.federalbudget.com]

txpunk

Will the two that they have built actually form a part of the US Navy fleet?

SyphonFilter

I don't know where that 313-ship fleet plan figure comes from. In reality 32 Zumwalt class destroyers were planned.

Small and stealthy is the current direction in many navies in the world for many reasons. First of all a large ship makes a large target. Second, you no longer need a massive ship to carry killer weapon systems. Third, like this article states the modern enemy is no longer a massive invasion but rather small and mobile and thus you need to be agile to fight it. As a result various kinds of littoral, stealth combat ships in the corvette to frigate size class is what's hot.

Some good examples of that include ships from various Scandinavian countries, such as the insanely fast (60 knots) Norwegian Skjold class, the Swedish Visby class and the Finnish Hamina class corvettes - all are stealth and are basically the naval equivalent to snipers in the army. Stealthy, fast, manouverable, can move in shallow waters, killer long-range anti-ship missiles.

Of course the USA has very different geography with long and straight coasts rather than the fjord and archipelago filled Nordic coasts so the USA also needs larger ships like destroyers and cruisers. But still, small, stealthy and nimble is clearly the direction for the future!

Kim98

$1 TRILLION! $1 FRIKIN TRILLION!!
Well now they can afford to redo all the seat belts on the first class pods they want for the upper brass. Or maybe something like, oh I don't know, body armor for all the troops? I'm just talking crazy again...

CaptEO2000

What do with the extra trillion bucks? Start another bullshit war and funnel that money back into heartless corporations, what else?

Puck

Misleading headline. They are scrapping plans, not actual destroyers.

robjennings

We'll regret that decision the day war with China starts and we're stuck with a military focused on fighting terrorists and militia forces...

Gessho

With a trillion dollars, why, I bet they could fix Gizmodo's RSS feed!

itchytooth

Whatever will they do with that $1 trillion. They'll be hard pressed to find something to spend that on.

Aoi

free imacs for all!

wizardofpants

dangit

dorylomorphs

@Kim98: "But still, small, stealthy and nimble is clearly the direction for the future!"

We're doing it! Check out the LCS [dvice.com] It's sahweeeet.

@Gessho: Maybe we can use that money for our Star Wars Death Rays. That should make the Chinese nervous.

Covert_tron

Are they frickin' preparin' for WWIII or something! There's only one friggin' battle goin' on right now, and it really don't involve the Navy! How bout building something constructive, not destructive... :S

redrabbit

you know, you could pay your bills with it?

it's funny - if i had $13 in debt, and i decided not to buy a $1 coffee today, i should, in theory, put it towards my $13 debt. But, that's $1 that won't ever buy killing machines.. I err.. uh... mean coffee.

robot-shmobot

Pay down the national debt! Who the hell do we owe anyway?

duuktoprock

@weatherman: The class should have had 32 destroyers not 313.

Redwraithvienna

I think Kim98 is right - have to do a little fact-checking here. 313 of these stealth destroyers would be more than the US Navy has of all the vessels together right now (only 52 of which are destroyers). So if Kim98 has the right number, we're really only talking about 84 billion in savings.

weatherman

@SneakerFiend: Sure, just as soon as other countries start paying back the money we give them every year.

It's always a shame to see such cool technology get stopped short of its full potential.

venomous_duck41

Well, at least we only built two this time, instead of the three boats from the Seawolf-class SSNs. Meh, I wish we still were trying for a 600-ship Navy---might have room for more carriers, more battleships, and other cool ways to spend taxpayer dollars.

John Lehman, come back! All is forgiven!

Convair 990A

SneakerFiend. Relax. Oh and 1USD = 0.6370 Euro.

They still have 2 stealth destroyers. They're not scuttling them. They're just not building the other 30 or um 300+ where ever that number came from.

RyaninCalgary

Ok so do these boats come with a blender? Oh and where do I plug in my iPod?

VideoVampire

@johnnyabnormal: Or here's an idea, how 'bout let's stop trying to turn our capitalistic society into a socialistic one? If a company makes consistently bad business decisions, it fails. The ones that make consistently good business decisions don't. It's that simple. The same goes for individuals who purchase mortgages they can't afford.

If I wanted to live in a socialist state, I'd move to North Korea.

Harkonian

@duuktoprock: Our grandchildren.

BaseVilliN

Lets buy a trillion worth of asphalt and pave iraq and afghanistan. No where to hide in a parkinglot. Then in a few months a walmart will pop up in that parkinglot along with a wnedy's and a 7-11. We will then defeat them with consumerism and obesity.
Whoo-hoo. Im a genius.

shamusjack

$1 trillion? Holy muther. The should give the money to Batman.

sharmanova

I'm sure that would make a nice down payment for our war with Iran. Go McCain!

/sarcasm

atomx

@itchytooth: It's the gov't dude... they can't even hang a picture without spending $50,000 on a hammer.

hagrun

Maybe that can make a tiny dent in the Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae bailout that is projected to cost USA taxpayers 25 billion? Or maybe it can go to education so our citizens aren't so f@#king stupid. Especially with geography:

+ Watch video

johnnyabnormal

@Harkonian:

If your plan is for one year, plant rice;
If your plan is for ten years, plant trees;
If your plan is for a hundred years,
Educate children.' Confucius

As long as our government and our citizenry continue to deny children the right to a good, higher education we will continue to fail as a nation.

Education is not some superfluous use of money, it is a necessity. If the citizenry are not properly educated they will consistently make bad choices about their government and about their own lives. In the end a nation fails.

Roivas

Actually, the plans more than likely won't free-up any money, because those weren't budgeted items yet, and probably were scrapped because of future budget pressures. You could also argue that anything taken off the budget and not reallocated would just lessen the % of debt we'd roll up this year, so we're technically not gaining anything there either. We have two now, at any rate. I mean, how many stealth boats capable of deploying nukes do you really need?

hagrun: just FYI, the $500 hammer is a bit of a myth, a common joke tossed around using averages with govt budgets. Someone will take a project parse out the costs and apply them across materials costs. Hammers, believe it or not, cost the government $15 too.

Oneon1isto

@Harkonian: Funny you say that. I don't think it is as simple as you stated. Even conservatives are starting to get pissed that unregulated capitalism is "backfiring into socialism". I read this just an hour ago, check it out:

"11 reasons America's a new socialist economy"
[www.marketwatch.com]

johnnyabnormal

One war going on? Seriously, Iraq, Afghanistan, not to mention NATO peacekeeping missions, and just ferrying troops and equipment around the world is not exactly a job for a buncha kids with canoes, right?

Yes, billions of dollars are spent on the warS in Iraq and Afghanistan. Yes that money could be well spent at home. But...

Just think of how different our lives would be, however, if the money spent on the destroyers and warships that delivered ordinance in the first Gulf War had been spent on paying down the national debt. Saddam would have kept driving through Kuwait to KKMC in Saudi and we'd all be paying more for gas than we are now.

Two of these ships, while expensive, still gives us two brand new - and might I add freakin' cool - destroyers. I'm sure the Newport News engineers and designers will work many of the technology advances into other warships and defense systems, too.

zanella

zeitgeist

Ariel_Wollinger

@Roivas: I for one am in complete agreement with you.

radikaled

Remember that the money spent is not simply heaped up in a pile and set on fire. The $2.6 billion went to pay people (scientists, construction workers, executives, shareholders, administrators, navy personnel). They were built in someone's Congressional District. The expenditure was approved by your representatives.

What?! You didn't want Congress to spend $2.6 billion on destroyers for the Navy? Well, then you should change the parties you vote for.
www.lp.org

CGANIERE

@johnnyabnormal: Interesting stuff. Thanks!

Harkonian

@zanella:

Well, that was the Gulf War. We're not fighting that now are we?

We're fighting the useless imperial Second Gulf War.

@Harkonian:

I second all the other responses to your post.

By the way, you do realize the American economy is by no means a simple capitalist economy, right? There are PLENTY of socialist elements in the American economy. And unregulated capitalism is what causes so much exploitation and, well...stupidity. IMO, the ideal is a capitalistic society with government regulations and some socialist elements.

- PR-0927

PR-0927

313 ships was the goal for the whole Navy, not the Zumwalts. The item is written (at best) unclearly.

AirSix

As long as the LCS is still on track, I could give a rats ass about the DD(X)

MrDo

blame Canada!
invade Canada!

Costermonger

$2.6 billion apiece is split between the R&D cost and the actual construction of the vessels. R&D is what keeps the US military the most advanced fighting force in the world. We dont have numerical advantage like the Chinese do in their army. We rely on being ahead of the curve in technology which requires lots of money to be allocated to R&D programs, some of which are prematurely cancelled after they dont live up to their roles, are too expensive, or unnecessary.

As far as % of GDP and % of tax dollars going to the military, the US isnt the highest on the list. The military budget is the highest in actual dollars, but not % of tax revenue or GDP.

Please.. spare me the comments about 'WE SHOULD SPEND THIS ON EDUCATION!!" The vast majority of money in education goes to Administrative overhead and teacher's salaries. Pumping more money into education does not improve it at all.

Aturayd

@usntom:

Buy you a brain

Puck

actually this is old... the DDX was always on the chopping block... the cash from the DDX is meant to move to increase the size and scale of the LCS project that was seen as a more capable ship...

though i wish they made a couple more of the DDX's just for longterm securitys sake.

phantam

buy nancy polsy a new dress!!!!!!! buy harry reid a reality check cat scan!!!!!!! make obama write 100 times that theirs only 50 states in the USA...pay for pictures of nancy polcy and put at every gas station thats 4.00 a gallon

usntom

They have a choice.

Relocate funds to help bolster the fledging economy.

Buy bigger guns.

Itsuru

@redrabbit: "How bout building something constructive, not destructive..."

It's the military, and it's purpose is to kill people and break things. Grow up.

@Roivas: "As long as our government and our citizenry continue to deny children the right to a good, higher education"

What an incredible load. Honey! Would you bring the shovel? Yeah, Mother Jones just took a crap on the porch again!

@PR-0927: "There are PLENTY of socialist elements in the American economy."

Hence most of our problems.

@Aturayd: "Pumping more money into education does not improve it at all."

Thank you.

GadgetPlay

@Aturayd: Ok, then what is your solution to Americans becoming as dumb as a bag of hammers...more guns? Please enlighten us.

"We rely on being ahead of the curve in technology which requires lots of money to be allocated to R&D programs"

Good thing the Chinese loan us all that money!

@usntom: There should be pictures of oil execs and their yearly salaries at every gas pump in America.

"make obama write 100 times that theirs only 50 states in the USA"

This proves my point about the education needs of America. This is NOT a role model:

johnnyabnormal

@Aturayd: "The vast majority of money in education goes to Administrative overhead and teacher's salaries. Pumping more money into education does not improve it at all."

What are you doing messing around with this blog??? You clearly belong on Fox News!!!

txpunk

Is that what the ships really look like? Those look like they were made from the Deathstar.

Digo

eBay or Craigslist?

FiveLiters

@GadgetPlay: Hey Mr. Gadget. Did you read the link I gave Harkonian? You might want a shovel to dig yourself out of your pants if you do. :)

johnnyabnormal

Yes I get to witness firsthand how schools, which in my state cost an average of $12,000 per child to goto public school per year, are increasingly absorbing more and more of the school budgets while the quality of education, average point averages, and numbers of students actually finishing are all declining. Taxes in my town take 66% of the budget just for the schools. In Hartford, its around $14,000 per student per year and 40% of the students are graduating high school with a 4th grade reading level.

Public education= EPIC FAIL

Pumping more money into it will not fix it. The problem IS the tremendous amount of money in education these days. Teachers unions have a strangehold over the system.

Aturayd

What's with those funky looking ships? Is that you, CSS Virginia?

If this is the only comment you read in this mASS of comments, here's the summary:

People are incredibly opinionated and don't know nearly as much as they think they do.

albtms

@johnnyabnormal: It sounds interesting, and I doubt that I'll object to much of it, if any. I just tucked Ben Franklin's ghost in on the couch and I need to get to bed. I'll TTU tomorrow.

GadgetPlay

@Roivas: Good one.
We're all doomed anyway.

plailleur

@GadgetPlay: *burp*

johnnyabnormal

@johnnyabnormal: "11 reasons America's a new socialist economy"

I hope you didn't mistake this writer for a conservative. Most of the facts are in the ballpark, (except of course that 47 million uninsured crap) but the conclusions and rhetoric are so twisted that my head will ache all day. The very premise of blaming conservatism for socialism is incredibly contorted. But yes, things are screwed up, with plenty of blame to go around.

GadgetPlay

In Soviet Russia, money spend you!

thesum

I highly doubt they are going to scrap the DDG, there is a piece of it in 48/50 states, eliminating the project would cut jobs in every state so you have 95% of the legislators that wouldn't want to let that happen.

ender84567

@GadgetPlay: He actually is a conservative. It isn't rhetoric either, he's citing solid facts. Go ahead and fact check his article, It's a incredibly accurate viewpoint, regardless of his political leanings. When you have govt. intervening to bail out failed businesses with american taxpayer money, it is most definitely socialism in the making. Made possible by our current administration, no doubt. It is a very important lesson in regulation and ethics.

johnnyabnormal

@txpunk: Doh, wasn't aiming my 1984 and Mills reference to you Johnny - meant to be a general comment to every one of us.

txpunk

johnnyabnormal: Actually, what we have here is more leaning toward Fascism. I recommend re-reading 1984 and maybe The Power Elite, and then realize we're all f-ed anyway, so there's no point in arguing the details on this blog. Then we can all go get some beers. I have already started.

txpunk

@txpunk: And to make up for it, I'll defend you a bit. I have worked with hospitals, so I have seen the statistics on uninsured:
ncmhd.nih.gov
[www.nchc.org]
Sad but true.

txpunk

@txpunk: No worries. I've read those books as well! What cracks me up is how often "Fascism" is misused as a word. It is quite clearly:

an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. (in general use) extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant views or practice.

Yet, wing-nuts try to use this word to describe liberals (when not referring to them as Nazis). It's a battle against dumb and dumber stupider edumacation misunerestimation!

johnnyabnormal

Tom Clancy is going to be pissed when he hears about this.

Jesse in Japan

@GadgetPlay:

You got it backwards. And putting money into education DOES help.

- PR-0927

PR-0927

@Gessho: LOL. good one, that made me laugh.

krom

As a former navy officer and having just finished 5 years on a school board.

@Kim98 - Size matters; small ships are less stable, have shorter range (assuming they're not nukes) and are finished off with a single hit. It's the classic debate between a brown water (coastal defense) fleet vs a blue water (sea lane control) fleet, in the US it goes back to Thomas Jefferson who favored the brown water navy. The reason that the Scandinavian countries can concentrate on coastal defense is that the US Navy defends the sea lanes, keeping them open for commerce. And yes I know that no one is currently try to disrupt the sea lanes, but look at how long it took the USSR/Russia to build a blue water fleet and the long road the Brits have traveled to re-constitute their aircraft carrier fleet. Either you have the ships and deploy them or you are vulnerable to having your overseas commerce choked off.

@Rovias - unfortunately the first thing that your local school board will do is give the administrators a pay raise, then send the football team half way across the continent to play an "exhibition game". After that comes physical plant improvements, such as the superintendent's office needing redecorating, then teacher salaries; and finally if there is any left some new technology kit that the students will actually see. The system is broke and money won't fix it until the people in charge are held accountable. Now if you were to give the money to parents for school vouchers you'd be on to something.

BTW my son is on active duty right now, ten courses away from getting hos BS in Electronics through the Navy, so Education vs Military spending is a false dichotomy.

Flame on!

PeaceDividend

As a pre- and post- Cold War US Navy Veteran, I don't see the need for a 300+ ship navy anymore. There isn't a navy on the planet that can match the United States Navy, but more importantly, there isn't a need for a navy of this size to protect the shipping lanes anymore. A navy of this size is expensive, and ill suited to the demands of the modern military.

The current fleet of ships are more than capable of handling any current and future naval threat for the next 10, 15 or 20 years. It's not like the Russians are going to give China the designs for a Kirov class cruiser and then boom, China has produced 20+ of them. Besides that, even if China built up a significant fleet, they would not be able to sustain a long open ocean deployment because they lack the logistical capability of a true "blue water" navy. That was a problem the Soviets had as well. The US Navy has the whole naval logistics issue solved and can spend many months out at sea.

Spineless

1) @kim98: You're right. 313 is the number set forth by SECNAV for ENTIRE US Naval fleet, not just for Zumwalt class ships.

2) The third ship had been budgeted for but not appropriated, so the only amount "freed" is $2.6B. DoD budgets go up and down all the time, and the 32 ships were to be built over the course of 20 years. And keep in mind that the more ships you build, the cheaper they get (like an automotive production line). Just because the third ship was to cost $2.6 doesn't mean that ships 4, 5, ... 32 cost the same.

3) @Oneon1isto: What makes you think Zumwalt had a stealth mission? When you have submarines - the only real kind of naval stealth - that can fire ICBMs without surfacing, why bother with surface ships?

wizhill

This is truly poor reporting. The Navy has plans for a 313 ship fleet in total numbers of all types, not just this class of destroyer. Additionally, as mentioned previously, they are "scrapping" the plans to build the full number of the class. "One trillion dollars" has absolutely nothing to do with anything because, as I stated, they weren't building 313 of these ships.

AbelHarpie

They aint scrap nothin, it's now just top secret and when the project is finished, it will be unveiled in 2020 or something as a super-intimidating ship for all countries to fear.

FinalValgas

@Roivas:
"And if your plan is to be able to fend off an aggressive enemy and to be able to advance your interests abroad without fear of intimidation, you build some very good weapons." - Me

You may want to sprinkle a little Sun Tzu in with your Confucius before you make pronouncements about social priorities. Or maybe ask a Tibetan how his hundred year plan is working vs. the modern (armed) Chinese heirs to Confucius.

Probably wouldn't hurt to develop a basic understanding of the term "right", either, given that you're obviously confusing the lack of an easy opportunity to get a secondary education with the denial of a right to get one.

AtomicPlayboy