On Sep 15, 2006, at 4:56 AM, jdiebremse wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Gibson Jonathan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
That you can phrase the question as should a defense company be making
sub-standard profits - whatever that means in this realm - is amazing
to read. If you have any direct experience I'd like to hear about it.
They've always been astronomical
That's interesting. One way to prove this assertion, would be to
examine the profits of defense companies. Perhaps you some evidence
then that the stock value of publicly-traded defense companies has
historically exceeded those of other industries?
My point about sub-standard profits was directly related to the trend
in the early 90's when many defense contractors went out-of-business
during peacetime.
I agree with you, but lack any such study off-hand. I'm a little busy
just now, but will keep my eye open in the meantime.
I will note that the defense budget didn't dropped under Clinton - it
simply didn't grow as it had decade after decade.
The stories I recall were more about mergers than belly-ups due to the
high expectations these organizations set and the lower profits
management was unwilling to accept: hence lots of golden parachutes for
those who could no longer fit even as their beat marched onward.
By any thumbnail, off-the-cuff, first-person anecdotal definition I can
offer up the current model gets the heading "Wretched Excess."
One wonders what this minor Clinton adjustment to the budget, social
relaxation, economic stimulus & defense companies repurposing their
tech to commercial uses might do for us again... our society spends a
hug amount of mental energy alone on the topic of security.
Additionally, my point was expressly designed to focus the discussion
on
the quantifiable. The war is an emotional issue, and it is easy to
criticize businesses for "excessive profits." By asking what is the
difference between "excessive" and "standard profits", it helps to
focus
the discussion. The US military from the Continetal Army under George
Washington to the armed forces of today has *never* been
self-sufficient
- the military has always depended upon services provided by outsiders.
Presumably, those outsiders have provided those services as a profit.
Hence my questions.
JDG
And there I'd like to see the big picture of cost and roles and sheer
personnel numbers through the centuries. Somebody must have done such
a tooth-to-tail ratio. Anybody know of a Napoleon's 1812 Moscow
campaign style histograph of our own numbers?
http://www.edwardtufte.com/tufte/posters
- Jonathan -
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
