I hate government mandated wealth re-distribution!

[originalpckelly]

You have to pay your taxes by law.

The government requires a particular service to operate, feeding the soldiers in Iraq, for example.

A private government contractor feeds the troops in Iraq, but built into the price of the service is a profit margin for the stockholders of that company.

Many stockholders will tend to have enough money to invest, excess money that is not being spent on taxes, food, shelter, and the rest of the essentials.

That means there is government mandated wealth re-distribution from the poor and middle class tax payers to the rich, and between the rich, to the favored companies of those in power.

Where is the outrage about this wealth re-distribution? Why don't these investors go out and get jobs and stop mooching off the federal government, and thusly you and I?

:P

[Squatch]

1. Note: most government contractors are privately held companies

and, as such, have no stockholders.

[Beausoleil]

2. The big ones are public

Lockheed Martin, Halliburton, GE, Boeing. That's a very large chunk of taxpayer money going to rich stockholders right there.

[originalpckelly]

6. As I explained before, private companies still have stock.

It's just privately held and isn't trade on a stock exchange. It is actually far more likely to be unjust if it is a privately held corporation, it suggests the person has full or nearly full control over the company, and is therefore already high net worth.

[Squatch]

7. Have you ever worked with defense contractors?

I do on a daily basis. The vast majority of contractors are companies with only a handful of employees (less than 100) and most of them are only in the business because they can offer goods and services to the gov't by undercutting the big boys. As a result, most of these "mom-and-pop" contractors are working on a shoestring budget and razor thin profit margins and their employees/owners are definitely NOT in the high net worth arena.

[Winterblues]

11. I believe any S- Corporation has stock issued

It is probably not publicly traded but the stock holders do get a return on their value.I don't think there are any government contractors that lose money...The government is overly generous and if it appears there will be a loss they institute "cost overruns" I don't buy your barely eek by argument..

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

13. Many times contracting makes sense

I used to work for USACE and they started to have private contractors do their dredging this saved the COE a *ton* of money and thus the taxpayers why?

Well when the USACE did dredging they had to maintain a single purpose fleet of equipment only for dredging federal waterways! When they contract they are having someone who also earns allot of income from dredging harbors and other private waterways the the overhead is split. and USACE was saving about 50% of the cost per cubic foot of dredged material.

Companies like Boing and LM make sense as well do we really want to start having the federal govet set up is own manufactures and designers to make planes when there is someone already doing it that can split the overhead of running such an agency?

The problem arises when oversight is eliminated or not properly done. I was damn hard on contractors when I inspected sites because they were being paid by the taxpayers ( I remember groans when they would realize I was inspecting their site that day )

BTW not all stock holders are rich (albeit few are poor) many are middle class folks who have a 401K

[originalpckelly]

4. Well, not publicly traded stock.

Corporations are stock-based entities, what private company means, is that the stock is privately held and not publicly traded on a stock exchange. I was using a company like KBR as an example.

[xchrom]

3. great turn of phrase -- and tax payer dollars have turned into ever renewing

gold mines for many companies.

whether it's through tax credits or tax write offs or contracts to the government. -- the amount of money flowing from
the tax coffers to business entities is enormous.

i have to recommend this.

[John Q. Citizen]

5. Even worse than that, you (and I as well) live in a state where more tax money flows in than is paid

by the residents of your state.

So every year, the taxpayers of other states are subsidizing your state's existence.

I guess all you can do is to vote against politicians who bring federal funds to your state for hospitals, water projects, healthcare, roads, etc.

[JHB]

8. Every transaction is a redistribution of weath.

The only question is in which direction.

[navarth]

9. you dirty commie! k/r

please excuse the smart ass subject line, too much coffee

actually you didn't mention that perhaps our armies are possibly, in effect a police force for the oil companies??

I'm just sayin', sure seems that way to me a lot of the time. I mean, I see the Iraq occupation as more of a hostile corporate takeover than a war.

sorry if that offends any vets here....maybe they might rather be offended by the people that fucked them over rather than me pointing a finger at it...but still sorry if I offend any vets, although I must say I know a lot of vets and all of them agree with me.

:toast:

[Johonny]

10. I think

The great illusion that for profit companies have lower overhead than the non-for profit government agency is finally fading in peoples minds.

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

14. Sometimes its true and sometimes its not

USACE dredging in the Buffalo Watershed is done far cheaper now (with contractors) than when they managed their own dredging fleet

[gorfle]

16. Not in my mind...

The great illusion that for profit companies have lower overhead than the non-for profit government agency is finally fading in peoples minds.

Businesses are motivated by profit. Thus they strive to keep overhead as low as possible so as to maximize profit. Government agencies are under no cost pressures, have no profit motivation, and thus have no incentive to be efficient.

I still strongly believe that capitalism is a good way to drive the efficient delivery of goods and services, even when providing them to the government.

The big illusion that is hopefully shattering is all the connections between people in power in government and people in power in industry, and all the corrupt back-scratching that goes on between them.

It's one thing to have a profit-motivated business efficiently provide goods or services to the government. It's another thing to pay off the government to start wars designed to drive expenditures that funnel money back to those businesses. Especially when the businesses in question are huge, global corporations that no longer have a vested interest in the welfare of the United States, and when the people driving those corporations can live anywhere in the world richly, and also have no vested interest in the Welfare of the United States.

It is the corruption that is the problem.

[Johonny]

17. keep overhead as low as possible so as to maximize profit.

for Government spending all profit is wasted overhead. Thus pay 100 $ to a private company that spends 90 $ on cost of service and 10 $ on profit does gain you any more than paying 100 $ on the cost of service in the government agency. It's also an illusion that there is no pressure on the government agency to keep costs low. Profit is not the only driver for efficient delivery of service. There are also some services you purchase that you don't want to be efficient on (an odd concept for many people to understand). I'll agree with the other responder to my statement. Sometimes the agency really does have lower overhead and hiring and outside for profit firm is a better use of tax payer dollars. There are a lot of factors involved.

[elehhhhna]

12. It is called self-dealing. Especially when you give the $ to Halliburton and Carlyle Group.

[gorfle]

15. My gut feeling

My gut feeling is that for most services and supplies the private sector can probably provide them, even with a profit, more efficiently and cost-effectively than the government could do it itself. Which is, good-old-boy back-scratching aside, one of the primary reasons why the government shops out some services and acquisitions.

Let's also not forget that most of these contractors are also providing jobs for regular Americans, and thus putting money back into our economy. It's not all a wealth transfer into the owners' pockets.

Let's also not forget that lots of people who are shareholders in these companies are regular middle-class Americans. Do you have a 401K plan? If so, then you are probably invested in many of these companies already.

[kineneb]

18. no-contest bidding, gov-corp cronisim, corruption

the US is now a corporatocracy: of, by, and for corporations and their profits. Oversight is needed, but that cuts into profits.