lowing wrote:
JohnG@lt wrote:
lowing wrote:
No it is not, jobs created by the govt. for the function of govt. is not wealth redistribution, the people have hired people to manage its affairs.
the govt. does not build weapons or design them. They tell a group of contractor what they are looking for then they compete for the contract. this also is not wealth redistribution. It is the people paying for a service.
Wealth redistributions is when the govt. takes money form one person and GIVES IT, (not buy anything) to another for the sake of "fairness", or govt. forced charity, (which is not charity at all)
In times of peace, most government contracts to the defense industry are indeed charity. That's why they have teams of lobbyists. It's why 30 or so F-22s were pushed into the stimulus bill last year, so congressmen could keep people employed in their own districts even though the military didn't want the aircraft.
You are straying. ALL of the backroom deals and cut throat payoffs is a different matter. that has nothing to do with the fact that govt. does not create jobs and that the govt. hiring a contractor is not wealth redistribution.
Ok, so we're halfway there now. You agree that the government can't create jobs. One down.
Now, I know you have your hand in the cookie jar personally so this one kind of stings but government contracting is indeed wealth redistribution. They are taking money from some and rewarding others. Granted, they do get something in return most of the time but it is at a vastly inflated price comparative to what the people receiving the contract would get on the open market. Fair wage laws and other stupidity mandates this.
-----
Let's pretend that a highway is privately owned instead of federally owned. Mr Galt owns this highway and understands that it is in his best interest to maintain this highway to the best of his abilities. This prevents lawsuits from motorists who may charge him with negligence if he gets into an accident and it also encourages people to use his road instead of his competitors. It is, of course, a toll road. He's not running a charity.
Now, because Mr Galt is diligent about maintaining his highway but is also beholden to his shareholders who seek maximum profit, he is forced to balance cost and quality when dealing with contractors who wish to work on his highway. He might take bids or he might seek out the best contracting company in the country/world to maintain his road. The decision is his. This is the free market approach.
Compare this to the government approach which is forced to accept the lowest bid, even if there are no competing bids. Fair wage laws that I mentioned earlier push the price of the bids into the stratosphere. Politics also comes into play as politicians line up to force the contracts into their own district at the expense of others that may or may not do a better job. This is counteracted by lobbying groups trying to do the same thing as the politicians, with other politicians. Quality and price don't even factor into the equation because they've been artificially bumped out.
-----
I'll take Mr Galt's approach every single time because it's efficient, is not wasteful and it actually creates jobs instead of pulling them from elsewhere in the economy. The defense industry should not be paid up front for it's R&D. It needs to create a product that the military finds useful and then profit off of it in that way. The bottomless pit of money that goes into canceled R&D projects is atrocious all because some Pentagon asshat had a dream for an unneeded product. Let him go into private industry, design it, and then come back to sell it. If he can't sell it, it's his own problem and his own loss. He failed to gauge the market correctly.
Now, should we privatize the military? Absolutely not. Does it need to be scaled back immensely? Yes. The turnover in equipment within our military comes at a snails pace precisely because it is so large and cumbersome. We can't keep up with changes in technology because of the sheer cost of replacing gear. Hell, we're using 50 year old assault rifles, 60 year old packs etc.
