Just curious, but why is monetizing videos as a member of the military unethical? Is it because it's seen that you're making money off of the taxpayer funding your job? Or that it opens you up to potential bribery? Or just seen as unprofessional for a military member?
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
The impossible to make separate thread (Ghost F-35)
- Thread starter ChuckMK23
- Start date
Let’s not overstate the recruiting value of a guy with cockpit videos on YouTube whose subscribers were already military aviation enthusiasts. I don’t know what CNATRA’s or TRAWING’s specific bases are for not approving T-45 footage, but at some point, these kinds of things become a distraction and a liability that creates extra work for everyone. Asking that someone on the TRAWING staff have the collateral duty of reviewing content for Pail’s YT channel is not reasonable or appropriate.
It’s against the law to gain from one’s official government position. You needn’t have a particularly vivid imagination to understand why.
Don't get me started on how corrupt that branch of our government is.
Wait, so you're saying Rep George Santos and Sen Bob Menendez aren't on the level? Sacrilege!?
The fact that the entire organization can more or less engage in unchecked insider trading blows my mind.
Yep, there have been bipartisan efforts for years to ban senators/representatives from owning individual stocks. Of course it never went anywhere, or ever will.
What's also amazing to think about is that the current size of the House (435) isn't from the Constitution, it was capped that size in 1929. This means that as the U.S. population continues to grow, the amount of people each Congressman represents grows as well, so basically the House becomes less and less representative. To bring the number of people represented by each Congressman back down , the House would need to be significantly expanded. For example, right now each Congressman (on average) represents about 700,000+ people. To get to each one representing 50,000+ people, the House would need to be expanded to 6,000+ members.
Are my interests better represented in a district of 50,000 vice 700,000 people? Probably not. Obviously, there's a balance to be struck, but I'm not sure increasing the size of the House makes any sense.
Oh I agree. Just thought it was an interesting issue to point out. Congress is dysfunctional and corrupt enough!
I know she made an appearance on a show hosted by Mario Lopez (the host of the show where she made that flub) and they talked about it, however IMO she didn't redeem herself all that well. She talked about how when she and he were "conversating" and how she has had "accompligements."
Here is the clip:
I don't expect teen beauty queen contestants to be on the ball WRT world affairs (although it was hilarious), but I do expect the voting public to be better than this...
Public education is not a high enough priority. They like us dumb, fat, and dependent on government while they enrich themselves.
I wish I was kidding.
You also don't own the content that's being generated while on duty. An over-simplification, but there's more details if you look up an hold HeyJoe post. Any single video or picture belongs to the people, not the service-member.
Something like Heater's book The Cutting Edge is a little different because he added additional content to the pictures he took while in service. So the book itself is a new piece of IP.
That map is unfair. There's technically an Iraan in Texas, about where someone said there's an Iran in Texas.
Picture taken while traveling the land, like Cane from Kung Fu.
