General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWell, here's an interesting chart showing who's really living off Federal subsidies!
http://www.contractormisconduct.org/ Fraud abounds. Must be cheaper to pay the penalties than it is to abide by our laws. I say make 'em all pee in a cup to prove their worthy of federal money.Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)The list gets even more interesting then..
Drugs in the top three and the next two are oil companies.
Indydem
(2,642 posts)Don't be ridiculous.
Scuba
(53,475 posts).... when they contract that work it subsidizes the firm that gets it.
dems_rightnow
(1,956 posts)They the government does have some specific powers, enumerated in the Constitution.
I agree that they could build fighter planes if they wanted. I see Dell on that list. I deny that the government could build computers.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)... and must privatize anything and everything that isn't explicitly allowed in the Constitution. I don't buy that.
dems_rightnow
(1,956 posts)Other things, they can't do. It really is that straight forward, purchased or not.
The Constitution isn't very explicit at all about what is included in those powers. The "necessary and proper" clause gives them plenty of leeway. Competing in the computer manufacturing industry.... well.... you'd have to really be grasping at straws to consider that a government function.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Tax and spend is a very broad authority.
And the authority to regulate commerce is even broader.
Might I add that the Founding Fathers lived in a mercantile economy. The crown of England -- the King -- authorized companies to do business just as our government authorizes corporations and other business entities to do business.
Capitalism is a fairly new concept. Businesses of any size needed the King's approval to exist.
I seriously doubt that the Founding Fathers would like what is going on with business today. The King was supposed to be replaced by the Will of the People, not the Will of the Corporations.
harmonicon
(12,008 posts)bluedigger
(17,086 posts)Drug companies are heavily subsidized both with R&D and Medicare/Medicaid, etc... Oil companies are another heavily regulated industry that also does much business with the government. Then there are the many, many companies that directly feed the war machine.
I worked for #14, URS - they provide consulting services and don't make anything. All their contracts could be internalized, if we were willing to grow the government workforce. They should be. D. Feinstein's husband is one of the owners.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)government:
The Post Office Research Station at Dollis Hill, London, was first established in 1921 and opened by Prime Minister Ramsay MacDonald in 1933. In 1943 the world's first programmable electronic computer, Colossus Mark 1 was built by Tommy Flowers and his team, followed in 1944 and 1945 by nine Colossus Mark 2s. These were used at Bletchley Park to break the Axis Lorenz cipher.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_Office_Research_Station
The US army financed ENIAC, built by research teams at the U of PA in 1945.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eniac
Much of the early work on computers/IT was publicly financed and done either in government research units or universities.
You mean government couldn't build computers for the mass market? Of course it could, if it chose to.
liberal N proud
(60,334 posts)Yea, it is a subsidy.
If the government bid jobs like private sectors do, many of these companies wouldn't get the jobs at the prices they do.
The subsidy would be the difference between what they get paid and what the true cost would be.
toddwv
(2,830 posts)but it can be a payoff.
So are all contracts subsidies? No. But if a company is allowed to defraud the US government out of billions of dollars and gets a slap on the wrist and a new contract, then, yes, it is a subsidy.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)(including paying for the cost of lavish fund-raising parties) and returns into the pockets of the politicians who pay the subsidies or the overruns in the first place.
Meanwhile we are told that people on Social Security are sucking at the teat of the government. Yeah, sure.
msongs
(67,395 posts)patrice
(47,992 posts)patrice
(47,992 posts)Gregorian
(23,867 posts)It's a bad habit. And we waste money on the war on drugs. The real threat to this country is the military spending.
I wait for the awakening of the human race. But I'm not holding my breath.
raouldukelives
(5,178 posts)Must be lots of little owners out there rejoicing at the good news. Besides it helps the super wealthy get away with fraud when mom & pop next door are aiding & abetting.
Oilwellian
(12,647 posts)Thanks for posting. Follow the links and see why we should stop blaming the poor for this country's financial woes. I recall Clinton signing a Bill that would end contracts with companies that continually committed fraud against US taxpayers. I remember Halliburton was on that chopping block...that is until Bush and Cheney became president and ignored the new law. And so it continues.
mahina
(17,646 posts)Yikes. K & R.
Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)And here WE are at our collective keyboards, carping and wishing for the good fairey to come along with her magic wand and fix it all.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)Festivito
(13,452 posts)Big Oil and Big Meds.