| Author |
Topic:
Publicly traded Defense Contractors - Best interests of the country or stockholders?
[Locked] |
Moe_Nox
Title: In Moe We Trust
Posts: 1,962
Registered: 2007-2-4 12:17:56
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:00am
Subject:
Publicly traded Defense Contractors - Best interests of the country or stockholders?
|
The interests of national defense needs to be a high priority for a nation even in times of peace and without crisis.
One of the things that Reagan ran on and implemented was The Socrates Program, which ensured that our national defense needs would be met by American companies.
This has been dismantled since Reagan has left office.
Now not only are the nation's defense needs met by private companies, but often times foreign companies that can turn off production in a time of war.
Do we really want China making our tanks?
-----signature-----
The Nanny State cometh
Currency should be bacon cheeseburgers and blow jobs... - Reese
Life at the Outpost: http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1771556
|
|
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:00am
Subject:
Publicly traded Defense Contractors - Best interests of the country or stockholders?
|
Moe_Nox posted:
There shouldn't be publicly traded defense contractors.
All weapons and armaments R&D as well as production should be entirely under government management.
This eliminates the two largest negatives:
1. That our most sophisticated designs are not being taken away by a company and sold to the highest bidder.
2. Eliminating the biggest profit earners from conflict and war. There will always be someone in the food chain benefiting, but it will be greatly reduced.
You believe this because Government does such a bang up job? I guess you guys have learned nothing from the Volt. With government you get a car that instructs you to add oil and gas, and then shake the car to mix it. I wish liberals would stop getting their world view of things from Hollywood.
-----signature-----
There are three kind of liberals;
Stupid, ignorant or evil
The result is always evil but the intent is not always evil. Not that it makes much difference in the long run.
No one here is exactly as they seem. - G'Kar
|
Moe_Nox
Title: In Moe We Trust
Posts: 1,962
Registered: 2007-2-4 12:17:56
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:00am
Subject:
Publicly traded Defense Contractors - Best interests of the country or stockholders?
|
Fist here is a list of our contractors.
Everyone of those companies is in it for the money.
I would prefer to have our military needs met without turning it into a lucrative machine that benefits by blowing up children in war.
Why do you hate the children Fist?
-----signature-----
The Nanny State cometh
Currency should be bacon cheeseburgers and blow jobs... - Reese
Life at the Outpost: http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1771556
|
Hsi_Kang
Posts: 115
Registered: 2003-11-8 00:08:30
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:00am
Subject:
Publicly traded Defense Contractors - Best interests of the country or stockholders?
|
Fist_de_Yuma posted:
The very rich have one thing in common. That is they are honest to the core. I know that Hollywood told you something different but I'm taking about the real world. The cheats and liars might profit in the short term but never in the long term. Remember that the ones with the biggest press are in jail.
I love you, Fist!
|
Yukishiro1
Posts: 3,243
Registered: 2002-9-20 23:52:57
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:00am
Subject:
Publicly traded Defense Contractors - Best interests of the country or stockholders?
|
Fist_de_Yuma posted:
The very rich have one thing in common. That is they are honest to the core.
This is going too far even for you. 
|
Kjarhall
Title: The Pungent One
Posts: 915
Registered: 2002-3-1 15:47:21
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:00am
Subject:
Publicly traded Defense Contractors - Best interests of the country or stockholders?
|
Fist_de_Yuma posted:
The very rich have one thing in common. That is they are honest to the core.
This may be the single most idiotic statement you've ever uttered here, and that's saying ALOT.
-----signature-----
You're a crazy moron*
*http://vnboards.ign.com/outpost/b22180/115147923/r115151508/
hah! true story tho i'm a woman an i even love boobs..how can you not??- HallowEve
|
Brother_Tempus
Title: Patriot
Posts: 985
Registered: 2001-1-9 08:07:00
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:00am
Subject:
Publicly traded Defense Contractors - Best interests of the country or stockholders?
|
Taliesihne posted:
War profiteering used to be a crime. It's now an industry. 
There was a reason why the Founding Fathers did not want standing armies
-----signature-----
You win ACF, dude - Osmenthe
BT is usually right - Onslaught
i think we need more BT on page 1 - FighterUSAF
Yep, BT is right - Aerlinthian
Got guns & ammo? Food? Precious metals?
|
bstulic
Posts: 761
Registered: 2002-7-26 04:55:00
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:00am
Subject:
Publicly traded Defense Contractors - Best interests of the country or stockholders?
|
Fist_de_Yuma posted:
Their job is to work in the best interest of the stockholders. It is government job to insure they get the best bang for the buck. If you have a vender who do you think they are working for; to get the most for you or to get the most for themselves? Why would it be any different with Government?
Before you go off without thinking remember that putting out the very best product is in the best interest of the stockholders as well. This is true no matter who you are working for. The very rich have one thing in common. That is they are honest to the core. I know that Hollywood told you something different but I'm taking about the real world. The cheats and liars might profit in the short term but never in the long term. Remember that the ones with the biggest press are in jail.
George Soros has awful reputation in Croatia as a liar
Not sure about Donald Trump or Bill gates, though
-----signature-----
|
theredkay1
Posts: 611
Registered: 2008-5-16 10:37:09
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:00am
Subject:
Publicly traded Defense Contractors - Best interests of the country or stockholders?
|
paulg_68 posted:
SoBaKi posted:
Defense Contractors should be treated in such a way that profit is capped, say at 10%.
If you do that then you eliminate the benefits of dealing with a private company. You'd be better off just nationalizing the business. Which of course is worse than leaving them private with uncapped profit.
The government is the only consumer. Capping profit at 10% is the same as paying less. As the largest purchaser the US can drive down prices if it wants to and this would not eliminate any of the benefits brought by private industry.
This is different than regulating the profit margin of most other goods since American citizens arent going to the store to hire defense contractors. Here the gov't would not be messing with the interaction of private producers and consumers...they are simply making rules about their own government spending.
pauls logic would tell us that WalMart is destroying the economy by paying producers less. That doesnt seem true. Paul is also telling us that controlling government spending is worse than nationalizing an industry. confuzzling
|
Yukishiro1
Posts: 3,243
Registered: 2002-9-20 23:52:57
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:00am
Subject:
Publicly traded Defense Contractors - Best interests of the country or stockholders?
|
|
I think his point was that by capping the profit margin you give contractors no incentives to spend less and great incentive to spend more.
Which is true, but sorta pointless in a world where costs-plus contracts are common.
|
RzZuVqyAQI