The Ship Model Forum

chuck wrote:To confound those who are too idiotic to qualify their statements before proclaiming the superiority of private industry, in the naval field, whenever there is demand for large war-time expansion, it is usually the private yards and contractors that were the most corrupt and inefficient, and it is usually the naval yards that were the best organized, efficient and clean. One see this again and again from Napoleonic war, to the Civil war, to now.

Actually, I believe the Navy Yard construction contracts were let to provide an "honest comparison" to see how bad private industry was abusing the contractor relationship at the very beginning of our Navy.

One of the darkest chapters of the "New Navy" of the 1880s is the construction and modernization of the leftover ships of the old Navy. Like other areas today, several shipyards seem to have been arranged to take as much money as possible. Delivery of anything was incidental to the graft. Some of the designs were so poor as to be dangerous simply floating, or made of grossly defective or overweight materials.

While it might not be necessary to reopen Philadelphia and Brooklyn Navy Yards to provide a reference of efficiency, the average voter can see he is not getting fair value for his tax dollar. Perhaps it is time to permit overseas yards and suppliers to participate in the process.

One of the great improvements of the late 20th Century was the adoption of commercial off the shelf parts. While this was a great idea, the immense inertia of military programs means that when the ship is ready for these parts, in many cases they are no longer available at reasonable prices. One of the major components of NASA spacecraft, for example, is the Intel i80386-20 CPU, which was a satisfactory PC processor in the mid to late 1980s, but hopelessly obsolete in the day of the AMD-64 and it's Intel competitor. Situations like this abound through the military, and require an immense streamlining process of procurement and assembly to solve.

To confound those who are too idiotic to qualify their statements before proclaiming the superiority of private industry, in the naval field, whenever there is demand for large war-time expansion, it is usually the private yards and contractors that were the most corrupt and inefficient, and it is usually the naval yards that were the best organized, efficient and clean. One see this again and again from Napoleonic war, to the Civil war, to now.

The general lesson seems to be private industry does seem to have some native superiority in motivation. But the motivation can only be successfully tapped to serve the public good when the overall system is stable, and there have been a long time for well developed public oversight to evolve so the private industry can be astutely and comprehensively regulated. When all means of cheating and corruption are choked off, I have no doubt private enterprise possesses a competitive advantage in the avenues that remain.

But when situation is in flux, and no time has been available to develop well thought out system of regulating private enterprise and choking off avenues of corruption, the private enterprise, uncoerced, or insufficiently coerced by the state, is usually animated more by quick profit through cheating the public, rather than to serve the public. Furthermore, such corruption, if allowed to fester, does not eventually self-regulated, and required external governmental and regulational interference to stabilize.

While it is true that over-regulation makes the industry more unresponsive, it is also true that de-regulation is often only accomplished through the generosities of unsavory allies. Many, if not most, of those in the government and policy circles arguing for deregulation are really motivated primarily by the desired to receive kickbacks from private industry dying to exploit avenues of corruption that would be unchoked by deregulation rather than by any well-informed and enlightened desire to provide avenues for increased competition and responsiveness. Industry will not self-regulate with the goal to serve the public good. What is more is private industry, at least American form of publicly traded, share holder driven private industry, will not even self-regulate with the goal of serving the long-term good of the industry itself, and would be content to corrupt itself to the maximum degree possible at the first opportunity, and thereby prompting the maximum response, instead of corrupting itself a little less, so as to be able to remain corrupt longer before there is a response. Witness how the energy industry manage to railroad itself into re-regulation through its to-hell-with-tomorrow style of corruption when first deregulated. To argue that they would is to not understand exact why private industry does in fact work when they are regulated from outside.

When one keeps in mind the behavior and the motivation of private industry, and look at the conditions and restraints under which their talents can be tapped for the public good, one shudders at the thought that the state would relinquish its role as the dominant purveyors of violence and coercion in a nation to any private contractor.

Jack Ray wrote:There is no question that the US Military has relied on the private sector for its materiel needs since the beginning. From there to contracting flight training is a very long stretch. To me this business is analagous to contracting out marching training to the Nike shoe company.

Jack

Jack
Who writes the Technical Orders for new equipment? Answer�the contractors. Who must be consulted before a change is made to a Technical Order? Yep you guessed it the contractor. The people who design and build systems have the expertise to develop new hardware or in some cases software when the need arises.
What happens when you pay a contractor for services, the money is taxed as income, and returned to the local economy as GNP revenue. In other words the money is recycled to the local community helping those businesses in an indirect way.
I know there are times when contractors have abused the system. I know that funds have been spent in unethical and sometimes unlawful ways. And for that reason, for one contractor having all the major contracts is not conducive to good business practices. Just like awarding non-bidding contracts to favored companies if not unlawful at least is unethical. Having a single source is just like having one branch of Government, no checks, no balances and no restraints. BAD for everyone.

Maybe the reverse analog of nationalizing the health care industry?

There is no question that the US Military has relied on the private sector for its materiel needs since the beginning. From there to contracting flight training is a very long stretch. To me this business is analagous to contracting out marching training to the Nike shoe company.

Jack

Humm
well I was talking about today in the second paragraph, I guess you missed the break.

Now to your question.
And the finial answer is .....drum roll.......SPRINGFIELD ARMORY 1777-1968

"Springfield" was established to manufacture cartridges and gun carriages for the American Revolution."
"With the destruction of Harper's Ferry during the Civil War, the Springfield Armory became the only federal manufacturing point for small arms until the 20th century."
"For almost two centuries the hilltop overlooking the Connecticut River had been an important place for the development and manufacture of arms for the American soldier. The facility evolved from a place where skilled craftsmen built, piece by piece, one musket at a time, into a center pioneering in mass-production techniques, and finally into an institute famous for its research and development."

Lockheed was aiding the US government before the revolution?


Name on real company that's been helping the government since the Revolution - and the name of a shipyard doesn't count.

PS - I'm not arguing with you about subcontracting, just arguing about the companies!

All ships built for the US Navy are contracted out to private firms. Here is one example.
"On 27 March 1794, the United States Congress passed the Naval Act of 1794, which provided for building the US Navy its first new ships: the frigates Chesapeake, Congress, Constellation, Constitution, President, and United States. Constellation was the first to be commissioned.
Constellation was built at Harris Creek Shipyard in Baltimore's Fells Point according to a design by Joshua Humphreys and launched on 7 September 1797, just as the United States entered the Quasi-War with France."

Even today GD Electric Boat Division continues to build submarines. And getting back on topic Lockheed, one of the few contractors left building jets, now working on the F-22, F-35 and some of the parts for other types. These are but a few of the major players that have supported the US Government from the days before the Revolution till now. Many smaller firms and even individuals have provided contracting services for over 200 years.

Well, there was nothing wrong with hiring Von Steuben. The Constitution hadn't been written at the time.

von Steuben the first military training contractor for George Wahington.....
"von Steuben tried employment in several foreign armies including Austria, Baden and France. He discovered that Benjmin Franklin was in Paris and that possibly, he could find work with the Continental Army in America."
"Steuben was introduced to General Washington by means of a letter from Franklin as a "Lieutenant General in the King of Prussia's service," a certain exaggeration of his actual credentials. He was advanced travel funds and left Europe from Marseilles."

Historic Valley Forge
Who Served Here?

I am opposed to privatizing military endeavers on Constitutional grounds. National Defense is one of the few roles specifically reserved to the Federal Government in the Constitution.

If the Federal Government would get out of the things they are not allowed to be involved in the first place, and concentrate on the few things they are, I would be happier. That is a true conservative position.

The Romans subcontracted their military to the Barbarians. The British hired the Germans to fight us. Neither worked out well.

Jack Ray wrote:

Werner wrote:I was not referring to the contractors, but the government workers and teachers! I'm sure most contractors are NOT union members.

The largest unions in the USA, accounting for the vast number of union workers, are government employee, municipal worker and teacher unions.

The reason private contractors get hired is between employee costs and benefits (the cost of which the union employee might not be aware of or see) and the massive bloat and overhead in management compared to a private business.

I see how fund based accounting works. If my department buys a one-million dollar computer this year, they'll find a way to spend a million every year after that or it'll be very difficult to get large sums in the future.

I am a non-union contractor for DOD. I get paid about 70% of what my fed counterpart makes. Despite these facts, it costs my client more to hire me than a civil servant. I get a fraction of his vacation and no sick leave. Oh, and by the way, I do better work than most of my civil servant peers. It is the corporation that makes the profits, not the conntractor. As soon as possible, I am getting a civil service job.

Things are not always as rosy as they may appear from the outside. If you�re looking at a wage grade job then you need to look at the retirement plan carefully. Another thing to consider you will not receive any social security checks at retirement. All social security you pay into the system will be put into a general fund but you will not see any of it. The Government will not send two checks to the same person. So you get what retirement they offer (TSP) and FERS and that�s it. Another down side is advancement is limited; I have known people who held the same job for years, never moving.
For me the flexibility of retirement plans, the chance for advancement and better working conditions were key factors for leaving CS. I was CS for 15 years before making the jump back to private sector; (contractor) and I have not regretted it. But each will have to find the own way so look careful before you leap.
You always have the option to change to another contracting job if you are not happy with your current employer. If things are so bad now then start filling out resumes and stay on top of them, patients and perseverance will pay off in the end.

If you think of government agencies, administrations, corporations, unions and contractors like living entities, especially parasites, I think you can come to a fairly quick understanding of their behavior and it's predictability. Contractors and unions will continue to charge more for less until either they are thrown out or they kill the host animal. Taxpayers are the ultimate host and we have hundreds and thousands of infections and infestations siphoning off our life at every opportunity. Congress was meant to be an immune system, but I'm afraid it has generated an autoimmune response like arthritis and is killing us as surely as the other infestations.

Until the Bush I administration, entities were discouraged from consolidating a monopoly share of any market. Since the "peace dividend", it appears that both Democrats and Republicans have discarded this notion, allowing both shipbuilding and aircraft cartels which would have made Teddy Roosevelt red with rage, and simple monopolies like Microsoft which are both bad for the consumer and innovation.

Since our government masters have found a way to benefit from monopolistic activities we should expect no relief on April 15 or the gas pump.

Down with monopolies and hurray for Teddy Roosevelt. TR had a combination of brains and guts that is almost unknown in public life today.

Yucca Mountain waste repository license:

The Keating Five were five United States Senators accused of corruption in 1989, igniting a major political scandal as part of the larger Savings and Loan crisis of the late 1980s and early 1990s. The five senators, Alan Cranston (D-CA), Dennis DeConcini (D-AZ), John Glenn (D-OH), John McCain (R-AZ), Donald W. Riegle (D-MI), were accused of improperly aiding Charles H. Keating, Jr., chairman of the failed Lincoln Savings and Loan Association, which was the target of an investigation by the Federal Home Loan Bank Board.

The evidence against McCain was really circumstantial, but the Ethics Committee included him so those accused wouldn't be only Democrats.

nope...

Until the Bush I administration, entities were discouraged from consolidating a monopoly share of any market. Since the "peace dividend", it appears that both Democrats and Republicans have discarded this notion, allowing both shipbuilding and aircraft cartels which would have made Teddy Roosevelt red with rage, and simple monopolies like Microsoft which are both bad for the consumer and innovation.

Since our government masters have found a way to benefit from monopolistic activities we should expect no relief on April 15 or the gas pump.

Perhaps they discovered from the S&L crisis that they could benefit both from the bribes which greased the malfeasance and the consulting fees attendent to the reorganization that followed the failure.

Remember the "Keating Five"?

Werner wrote:

Jack Ray wrote: I am a non-union contractor for DOD. I get paid about 70% of what my fed counterpart makes. Despite these facts, it costs my client more to hire me than a civil servant. I get a fraction of his vacation and no sick leave. Oh, and by the way, I do better work than most of my civil servant peers. It is the corporation that makes the profits, not the conntractor. As soon as possible, I am getting a civil service job.

Than you agree that from a taxpayer standpoint a contractor saves tax dollars, and would save more if the corporations were forced to compete for contracts with the government instead of being a price-controlled cartel.

No. Government contractors cost more per worker than civil servants. However, you are correct in saying that programs are not rewarded by saving money:

Aha! Having saved 1 Million dollars, you will receive $1M less next year.

This procedure scares program managers and Department Heads (rice bowl) and they tend to avoid it.

Jack Ray wrote: I am a non-union contractor for DOD. I get paid about 70% of what my fed counterpart makes. Despite these facts, it costs my client more to hire me than a civil servant. I get a fraction of his vacation and no sick leave. Oh, and by the way, I do better work than most of my civil servant peers. It is the corporation that makes the profits, not the conntractor. As soon as possible, I am getting a civil service job.

Than you agree that from a taxpayer standpoint a contractor saves tax dollars, and would save more if the corporations were forced to compete for contracts with the government instead of being a price-controlled cartel.