You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

5
7

[–] acheron2012 5 points 7 points (+12|-5) ago  (edited ago)

That's an unfortunate analogy. The Sherman tank was, arguably, the worst tank of WW II. It's main design features were that it could be MASS constructed on the cheap. And since it lacked any meaningful armor protection you could transport a lot of them at a time.

When I was younger we had a neighbor that had been a Sherman tank driver in Europe. He had 4 of them blown out from under him. He said he was practically the only survivor from his entire group. In many ways a Sherman tank was a Kamikaze plane that didn't fly. At the Aberdeen museum in Maryland I saw a Panzer that had a direct hit from a Sherman - it looked like someone had scooped out a big chunk of armor with a giant ladle. Sherman's main gun could not defeat panzer armor unless fired at the weakest points at point blank range

Although the analogy may end up being pretty accurate when the "average American voter" finds out his taxes are going up with this bill.

0
8

[–] Flour 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

How are my taxes going up?

1
3

[–] foltaisaprovenshill 1 point 3 points (+4|-1) ago 

It won't, he's lying.

2
1

[–] acheron2012 2 points 1 point (+3|-2) ago  (edited ago)

The base rate for the middle class remains basically unchanged. But we will pay modestly more (MY guess is between $500 and $3000 a year) due to the elimination of deductions.

It is not crippling. But it make things worse than they are now. I would love to be wrong. But am quite certain I am not.

Any REAL tax reform would have to start with making the 48% of the population (that receives 99% of federal handouts) pay ANYTHING AT ALL! There is no moral defense whatsoever for utter freeloaders. If they paid even $100 / year it would at least make them participate in funding the system they so wantonly abuse.

2
-2

[–] redsedfred 2 points -2 points (+0|-2) ago 

It's going to take a bit of time but it will. Who else will fund the payments to the super wealthy and corporations?

1
3

[–] foltaisaprovenshill 1 point 3 points (+4|-1) ago 

Although the analogy may end up being pretty accurate when the "average American voter" finds out his taxes are going up with this bill.

Too bad this has no basis in fact, and almost everyone will be seeing a tax cut of a few thousand per year.

3
-2

[–] GrandmasWarmPie 3 points -2 points (+1|-3) ago 

and almost everyone will be seeing a tax cut of a few thousand per year.

"almost everyone" is a funny way of spelling "Jewish saboteurs".

0
1

[–] jamesed 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

While the Sherman had many flaws it also had its strong points. It's first advantage was it was reliable. In most tank on tank combat on the western front up to 80% of all German armor was dead lined do to maintenance problems. The Sherman had a 90% availability rate in most Tank battalions. The second advantage of the Sherman was its range. A Sherman could run for up to 6 hours on a single tank of fuel. The German Panzers had a range of only about an hour. You must also remember that the Sherman was designed to combat the Panzer Kamph Wagen II and III of which it was a match. When the Germans introduced the Panzer Kamph Wagen IV the Sherman was outclassed. How ever the Panzerkamphwagen IV were made by three different companies in Germany and none of the parts were interchangeable. There were about 8500 PKW IV's produced during the war compared to 49,234 Sherman's. You also must figure in the ease of construction on war materials and the standardization of Parts allowed all but the most severely damaged Sherman' s to be quickly repaired and returned to service. The Sherman also had it's ammo stored in a water filled compartment so when it was hit the ammo did not explode like on the German tanks. According to official U.S. army records for the First Army from D-Day to the end of the war the First army lost 898 Sherman's to all causes with a causality of 848, Or about 25% of the crew of each tank destroyed. So the actual numbers does not live up to the Myth. It seems to be an American Trait that the enemy is armed with better weapons that we have. See the ongoing argument about the AK-47 vs the M-16. Yet when you give a ISIS fighters in the Mid East a choice he ditches his trusty AK for a M4.

0
1

[–] tarnished_spoons 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

It seems to be an American Trait that the enemy is armed with better weapons that we have.

I think it has to do with propaganda. How can we be the bad guys if we're the underdogs?