Regarding cost of battleships and how the NeoMarxist propaganda will (is) attempt to spin it...
By John ^ Konrad V
Just as I predicted yesterday…. MSM will falsely claim the Secretary of the Navy was fired because of Battleships.
And the NYTimes is actually worse than I thought. Let me explain….
The mainstream media will make this about the ships because the defense “experts” never want more hulls. They want money flowing into consulting fees, AI “solutions,” and think tank white papers. Steel produces nothing for the Beltway class. A flight deck you can launch F-35s off of does not generate PowerPoints.
But the NYTimes is running an even more sinister play.
Throughout the Biden administration, and later during DOGE’s audit work, I translated every major spending bill into a unit every American can actually visualize: one nuclear aircraft carrier.
Nuclear supercarrier cost: $15 billion.
Biden’s BEAD rural broadband program, which connected zero homes to the internet: $42.5 billion, or roughly three carriers.
Pete Buttigieg’s infrastructure package: $1.1 trillion, or seventy three carriers.
Total DOGE savings to date: $215 billion, or fourteen carriers.
Known Somali-linked fraud in Minnesota, per federal prosecutors: $18 billion, or one carrier plus an Arleigh Burke destroyer.
Why do I keep doing this?
Because for the past two decades the NYTimes has run the same story on loop: the military is the reason for America’s skyrocketing national debt.
That is a psyop. It conditions Americans to believe that steel and sailors, not social programs and grift, are what is bankrupting the country.
Human beings are not wired to understand $15 billion. The mind goes blank at that scale. But every American, left or right, understands the sheer weight and menace of a nuclear aircraft carrier. It is the most visible, most photogenic instrument of state power on earth.
So the NYTimes runs the obvious play.
Paint the carrier as expensive. Pile on delays and cost overruns. Quote an anonymous Pentagon source worrying about bloat. Then anchor the defense budget to “discretionary spending,” a small slice of the real pie, and express it as a percentage of that smaller number.
The Pentagon instantly looks like the whale in the room.
But Medicare alone, roughly $1 trillion in 2025, already eclipses the entire defense budget. Add Medicaid and ACA subsidies and federal health spending hits $1.8 trillion, more than double defense. None of those programs are labeled “discretionary,” so by NYTimes accounting, they “don’t count.”
This is a magic act. The NYTimes holds a shiny capital ship up in one hand to keep your eyes off the social programs bankrupting the country in the other.
Once you see the trick, you cannot unsee it. Every time the NYTimes runs a carrier or battleship exposé, ask one question: what is on the page they did not write?
Nine times out of ten, the answer is sitting just outside the “discretionary” column, quietly metastasizing, while a Ford class carrier gets blamed for the deficit.
America is not going broke building warships. Warships are one time expenses that last decades and are a tiny fraction of the total annual budget.
America is going broke pretending the ledgers that matter do not exist, while a national newspaper gets paid to keep the audience looking the other way.
That’s why they hate battleships. That’s why they tell you they are ridiculous and antiquated warships that are a waste of money. To make you think THIS is the reason why the nation is $39T in debt.
And the best part? Their psyop works on both sides of the aisle… on liberals who hate the military and conservatives who hate federal spending.
Battleships are not a waste of money. All the many fraudulent programs that cost more annually than a single carrier are.
https://x.com/johnkonrad/status/2047642503440933305
Regarding cost of battleships and how the NeoMarxist propaganda will (is) attempt to spin it...
By John ^ Konrad V
Just as I predicted yesterday…. MSM will falsely claim the Secretary of the Navy was fired because of Battleships.
And the NYTimes is actually worse than I thought. Let me explain….
The mainstream media will make this about the ships because the defense “experts” never want more hulls. They want money flowing into consulting fees, AI “solutions,” and think tank white papers. Steel produces nothing for the Beltway class. A flight deck you can launch F-35s off of does not generate PowerPoints.
But the NYTimes is running an even more sinister play.
Throughout the Biden administration, and later during DOGE’s audit work, I translated every major spending bill into a unit every American can actually visualize: one nuclear aircraft carrier.
Nuclear supercarrier cost: $15 billion.
Biden’s BEAD rural broadband program, which connected zero homes to the internet: $42.5 billion, or roughly three carriers.
Pete Buttigieg’s infrastructure package: $1.1 trillion, or seventy three carriers.
Total DOGE savings to date: $215 billion, or fourteen carriers.
Known Somali-linked fraud in Minnesota, per federal prosecutors: $18 billion, or one carrier plus an Arleigh Burke destroyer.
Why do I keep doing this?
Because for the past two decades the NYTimes has run the same story on loop: the military is the reason for America’s skyrocketing national debt.
That is a psyop. It conditions Americans to believe that steel and sailors, not social programs and grift, are what is bankrupting the country.
Human beings are not wired to understand $15 billion. The mind goes blank at that scale. But every American, left or right, understands the sheer weight and menace of a nuclear aircraft carrier. It is the most visible, most photogenic instrument of state power on earth.
So the NYTimes runs the obvious play.
Paint the carrier as expensive. Pile on delays and cost overruns. Quote an anonymous Pentagon source worrying about bloat. Then anchor the defense budget to “discretionary spending,” a small slice of the real pie, and express it as a percentage of that smaller number.
The Pentagon instantly looks like the whale in the room.
But Medicare alone, roughly $1 trillion in 2025, already eclipses the entire defense budget. Add Medicaid and ACA subsidies and federal health spending hits $1.8 trillion, more than double defense. None of those programs are labeled “discretionary,” so by NYTimes accounting, they “don’t count.”
This is a magic act. The NYTimes holds a shiny capital ship up in one hand to keep your eyes off the social programs bankrupting the country in the other.
Once you see the trick, you cannot unsee it. Every time the NYTimes runs a carrier or battleship exposé, ask one question: what is on the page they did not write?
Nine times out of ten, the answer is sitting just outside the “discretionary” column, quietly metastasizing, while a Ford class carrier gets blamed for the deficit.
America is not going broke building warships. Warships are one time expenses that last decades and are a tiny fraction of the total annual budget.
America is going broke pretending the ledgers that matter do not exist, while a national newspaper gets paid to keep the audience looking the other way.
That’s why they hate battleships. That’s why they tell you they are ridiculous and antiquated warships that are a waste of money. To make you think THIS is the reason why the nation is $39T in debt.
And the best part? Their psyop works on both sides of the aisle… on liberals who hate the military and conservatives who hate federal spending.
Battleships are not a waste of money. All the many fraudulent programs that cost more annually than a single carrier are.