In these tough and troubling times, why are government contractors allowed a profit?

[hootinholler]

Wouldn't it be their patriotic duty to only charge enough to cover the employee salaries and office overhead?

We need to make the defense industry non-profit as the patriotic duty of the company involved. This will stimulate the business to seek profit in other sectors, hopefully with needed products. Until the profit is removed, or well diminished, I fear we have no hope to rein in the MIC.

Just thinking...

-Hoot

[Arctic Dave]

1. Why just the MIC. If times are so bad that government workers

have to get a pay cut why shouldn't the for profit companies that provide government services slash their profit margins.

[Llewlladdwr]

2. Are you saying that the Government should no longer pay contractors for the work they do?

That sounds a bit...slavish, don't you think?

[hootinholler]

5. Where did I say anything like that?

:shrug:

-Hoot

[Cid_B]

6. I think it was the part where you said they should work...

... but not receive any profit from it...

edit - Also don't forget about the part where its for the benefit of the greater good and/or the govt

[hootinholler]

9. What greater good does profiting from the government do?

Especially when we as a country are so indebted that per the republican plan we have to starve our grandparents and parents to pay for the wars.

-Hoot

[Llewlladdwr]

7. "Wouldn't it be their patriotic duty to cover the employee salaries and office overhead?"

How exactly is the Contractor supposed to cover these things?

[hootinholler]

8. Ah, put an only in there, I mis-typed...

:blush:

I fixed it. Thanks!

-Hoot

[Brickbat]

3. Delete.

[jody]

4. Makes sense as long as govt. absorbs contractor losses. Better yet, just have govt. nationalize all

businesses and run them like other govt. organizations, e.g. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

[hootinholler]

10. What losses?

I can't count how many times I've heard budget over-run in connection with the development of new military hardware.

I have no desire to nationalize any business, unless it is to dissolve a monopoly.

-Hoot

[pnwmom]

13. Oh yeah, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are great examples.

:sarcasm:

[cherokeeprogressive]

17. Perfect. That would put us one step closer to having some government hack decide who works in what

field based on genetic makeup just like you said in another thread.

"...one is assigned possible careers at birth because one's genes contribute to IQ..."

I hope I'm dead before the world you wish to see comes to fruition.

[zipplewrath]

11. Not really

I think there is alot that could be improved about government contracting. But the big ticket items take alot of risk and money to develop and no one is going to put up that kinda cash without some realistic hope of a profit.

The real problem is that government contracting is very risk adverse. So they spend alot of money ensuring no big failures, or at least none traceable back to the government.

[pnwmom]

12. Because that's why the companies are in business -- to make a profit.

[EFerrari]

14. In troubled times, we learn who is really in charge.

Government contractors are coddled while our social programs are attacked, one after the other.

[hootinholler]

15. I'm surprised at the responses I've drawn

Even though I misspoke at first, I have yet to see a justification.

The rec history is laughable.

-Hoot

[EFerrari]

21. It's our god given right as Muricans to defend lawless, corrupt multinationals

who contract with the USA! :patriot:

[hootinholler]

23. And I would die defending that right...

After they tell me why it should be so.

-Hoot

[stray cat]

16. the same can be said for any company or employee

[apocalypsehow]

18. Because (and I think you know this) then there would be no more defense contractors working for the

U.S. government.

If the goal is to "rein in the MIC" I have a much more practical solution for you: work to get the U.S. Congress to slash defense appropriations. Congress could make the so-called "Military industrial complex" go away tomorrow by simply refusing to fund the elaborate (and expensive) weapons system the generals and admirals are always insisting they have got to have.

To the extent your OP has that goal in mind (as indicated by your follow-up comments in the OP), the recommendation is a bit disingenuous. I UnRecced it for that very reason, though I do believe we need to slash defense spending dramatically.

[hootinholler]

22. I'm trying to puzzle out an effective way to accomplish that...

I think it will take more than what we can bring to bear on public opinion to get congress to slash MIC spending, however that will not happen given the current circumstances. We could however get them to possibly trim profit from the public funding.

I'm actually not intending to be disingenuous. I'm actually very interested in the answer to my question of why do we tolerate profit taking on things that are so vital to our defense?

-Hoot

[geek tragedy]

19. They'd just refuse to do business with the government.

The government can't force them to perform work for it.

[tammywammy]

20. Defense contractors also sell to foreign governments.

They could be making quite a bit of profit from those sales vs US sales.

[hootinholler]

24. I'm very surprised at the responses to this. n/t

[Recovered Repug]

25. Is this for all government contractors

or just defense?

[hootinholler]

28. It could work for all, but defense is the low hanging fruit. n/t

[Swamp Rat]

26. k&r

:D

[lonestarnot]

27. I like your idea as well Hoot.

[hootinholler]

29. I wonder if we can sell it to the teabaggers?

If we could just once get them yelling on the same side we are yelling about, something wonderful might happen.

-Hoot

[lonestarnot]

30. If the yelling is what it takes, I say we do that too.

[Swamp Rat]

31. Dat's what I'm talkin' 'bout, y'all!!

:kick:

YELL in their FUCKING FACES!! at the next town hall meeting, in front of an official motorcade or gubment bld., in the supermarket isle, ANYWHERE AND EVERYWHERE!!