Home | Community | Message Board


RVF Garden Supply
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1
OfflineAncalagon
AgnosticLibertarian

Registered: 07/30/02
Posts: 1,364
Last seen: 8 years, 3 months
Government Contractors versus Real Business
    #3224149 - 10/06/04 08:32 PM (12 years, 7 months ago)

Government Contractors versus Real Business
By Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.

If socialists of old resented Pravda for giving them a bad name, free enterprisers ought to feel the same about the Wall Street Journal's editorial page. Its defenses of profit, capitalism, and privatization often cry out for correction, if only to save the good name of free markets from being invoked to protect capitalists from careful moral scrutiny.


For here we have the editorial page coming to the defense of Halliburton against attacks by Democrats. The page claims that the Kerry-Edwards ticket is criticizing this mega-well-connected, warfare state pillager as a proxy for all of American business. True or not, the Journal is guilty of something far worse: defending Halliburton on grounds that this parasite embodies the very heart of free enterprise.


The Journal says:

    Senator Kerry tried to back away from his primary-season labelling of companies that send jobs abroad as "Benedict Arnolds." Now he's back attacking Halliburton for doing business overseas. All of this marks a striking return to the Old Democrat distrust of all private enterprise, which held that if it moves, tax it, if it keeps moving, regulate it, and when it stops moving, subsidize it. The idea of anyone making a dime of profit by taking over a government function and doing it better is anathema on the Kerry ticket, and the idea of that person then going into public service even worse.

If that's all you knew about the company, you might think that this was Federal Express or a cell-phone company that picked up the pieces after the government failed, instead of the largest corporate welfare client in the history of the world. For the two years following September 11, the company enjoyed at least $2.2 billion in military subsidies. Overall, it enjoys $18 billion in government contracts to support its offices in 70 countries.

To look at the details (there are hundreds of sites and organizations that track its activities) is to see into the heart of the modern state run amok. The history of Halliburton makes the food-stamp program look like good government.


Halliburton makes a mockery of the term private enterprise. The profits are private, to be sure, but the risk is socialized. It has very little to sell you and me or any other member of the consumer class. It has vast amounts of stuff to sell the state, and what it produces it does with that goal in mind.

Call it the leading industry in the military-industrial complex. Regard it as the prime player in the great government-business partnership. View it as illustrative of the reality that the real scandals in government are not what is illegal but what is considered wholly legitimate. But whatever you do, don't call it private enterprise.


Murray Rothbard asked the burning question in his 1974 book For a New Liberty: "how can the rightist favor a free market while seeing nothing amiss in the vast subsidies, distortions, and unproductive inefficiencies involved in the military-industrial complex?" If you have doubts that these people do just that, consider a speech that Richard Cheney gave during his interval between government jobs and as head of Halliburton. He defended what he considered free enterprise but it amounted to little more than a defense of his company's right to live off government largesse.


For the Republicans to claim that it is perfectly wonderful for the former CEO of the largest federal contractor to be the vice president, to continue to receive checks from the company far larger than most people's annual salaries, and that there is nothing at all unseemly going on, is to take us all for fools. It is the equivalent of Clinton's denials, except with consequences that reach into every American bank account and affect the entire globe. The connection between the Bush administration and Halliburton has to be the most open conspiracy in the entire sorry history of American government-business partnerships, in which both sides get rich at our expense.


For the Wall Street Journal to defend this as free enterprise represents a very low form of ideological agitation. To review, free enterprise means offering a good or service to the public which its individual members are free to buy or refrain from buying. To profit then becomes a signal that the company has served people well. But there is always and everywhere a risk: the revenue stream could end tomorrow based on the exercise of free will by the customer. This is true from the largest company (even Microsoft) to the smallest company (think of a local restaurant that never knows day to day whether anyone will set foot into its front door).


A federal contractor is something entirely different. The service to be provided is decided upon by legislators or bureaucrats. The revenue is therefore not by virtue of consumers' decisions but by political allocations. The services provided are not subject to a profit and loss test. The money is there regardless.


The contractors themselves become masters at doing what they do best, which is not serving society but serving the state. To be sure, modern war would be impossible without private enterprise. As incompetent as you think the military is, imagine if it had to make its own airplanes, bombs, bullets, and provide all its own services. Mises was correct that militarily victorious states owe it all to production by privately held firms.

This obviously presents certain moral hazards for the free market. The Iraq War has been an amazing bonanza for Republican-connected corporate clients of the federal government. In fact, the contracting out of the war is a major reason why there are so few critics of this war on the right. Many of them have been bought off by the promise or the reality of a well-placed paycheck.


Jack Kemp, for example, used to be a severe critic of the Iraq war (sample 1: "The obsession of some members of the press and the political establishment to attack Iraq right now is disturbing"). Then he became an advocate of the privatization of Iraqi oil (sample 2: "The privatization of Iraq's oil should be done immediately"). Then he finally turned to congratulating President Bush for his wonderful wartime leadership (sample 3: "President Bush has played his cards well on Iraq"; sample 4: "a vision of the future recognizing the importance of national security including the reconstruction of Iraq").


Might his transformation be due to his dinner with Richard Cheney and the founding of a government contractor in Iraq called Free Market Global based in Iraq, with General Tommy Franks on the board? One wonders how many other voices have been similarly silenced or compromised by the well-placed consulting fee and government contract.


Privatization is a wonderful idea if it means that functions that belong to the market economy are turned over to the market economy and subjected to the competitive marketplace and the test of profit and loss. It is not a good idea if it merely means that private parties get the loot for projects that would otherwise serve no purpose in a market. It is not privatization to contract out the collection of taxes, for example. Nor it is an example of genuine commerce to create and sustain corporations that do nothing but live off the state.


Contracting out is indeed more efficient than government provision. And for some services, such as garbage collection or even public schools, the public might welcome the change. It might save tax money. It will surely improve the delivery of services. But this process goes way too far when the entire warfare state comes to be contracted out. There are some government services (killing, taxing, regulating, etc.) that should not be delivered efficiently. The biggest problem here is not that this corrupts government (as the good-government crowd might say) but rather that it corrupts free enterprise.


Indeed, to call such companies as Halliburton great examples of capitalist success is a sure-fire way to discredit free enterprise. For the right to do this is nothing short of a gift to the socialist left, which wants to characterize all business and market exchange as an expression of a power relation. This is why socialists have focused so heavily on the role of corporations in assisting the warfare state in its dirty business. It is also why so many socialists have written passionately against the "merchants of death." Let us rephrase a point Mises often made: the problem isn't the merchant part of the phrase; it is the death part.

If Halliburton were cut off the government payroll, I have no doubt that many of its intellectual and physical resources could be profitably employed in a genuine market setting. Let's forget about privatizing the warfare state and privatize Halliburton instead. Let it, and all its far-flung clients the world over, sink or swim in a genuine free-market economy. At that point, we'll raise a glass to its profitability. Until then, it deserves all the disdain ever heaped on any able-bodied welfare cheat.


--------------------
?When Alexander the Great visted the philosopher Diogenes and asked whether he could do anything for him, Diogenes is said to have replied: 'Yes, stand a little less between me and the sun.' It is what every citizen is entitled to ask of his government.?
-Henry Hazlitt in 'Economics in One Lesson'


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineJesusChrist
Son Of God
Registered: 02/19/04
Posts: 1,459
Last seen: 4 years, 8 months
Re: Government Contractors versus Real Business [Re: Ancalagon]
    #3224863 - 10/06/04 11:22 PM (12 years, 7 months ago)

Can you still have the #1 military in the world without the military industrial complex? Don't some concessions have to be made?

You can argue that our military is too big, but I am not entertaining that argument. If you assume that we want to keep the same capabilities that we have today, what is the best way to attain that using the private market?

Would we have been better off in Iraq picking a company other than Halliburton?

Can you work Dick Nixon into your answer? I like Dick Nixon.


--------------------
Tastes just like chicken


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblesilversoul7
Chill the FuckOut!
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/10/02
Posts: 27,301
Loc: mndfreeze's puppet army
Re: Government Contractors versus Real Business [Re: JesusChrist]
    #3224980 - 10/06/04 11:40 PM (12 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

JesusChrist said:
I like Dick



Sorry man. It was too good to resist.


--------------------


"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: Government Contractors versus Real Business [Re: JesusChrist]
    #3225090 - 10/06/04 11:56 PM (12 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

JesusChrist said:
Can you still have the #1 military in the world without the military industrial complex?



This begs the question of what is the purpose of the military in a supposedly free society, conquest or defense? For purposes of defense, it is not necessary to have a military that can conquer and hold another country, but only that it protect the sovereignty of the nation. Being number 1 in the world may be a by product of this goal, but being number 1 should not be the goal. Switzerland (as an example) has followed this martial philosophy for more centuries than the United States has been in existence and has done quite well.

Quote:

You can argue that our military is too big, but I am not entertaining that argument.



Too bad, because that is a very important, actually an essential point that needs to be addressed.

Quote:

Would we have been better off in Iraq picking a company other than Halliburton?



We would be better off if we would have no entangling or permanent alliances, and restrict ourselves militarily to defending the United States. Notice I did not say, 'defending the interests of the United States' because this is a rhetorical fig leaf to cover the true meaning, 'promoting the interests of certain well connected people and firms who hold sway over U.S. government officials.'


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineLearyfan
It's the psychedelic movement!
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/20/01
Posts: 30,046
Loc: High pride!
Last seen: 9 hours, 37 minutes
Re: Government Contractors versus Real Business [Re: JesusChrist]
    #3225813 - 10/07/04 02:04 AM (12 years, 7 months ago)

Our military sure would be stronger if we weren't in Iraq.

:sad:






--------------------
--------------------------------


Mp3 of the month: Park Avenue Playground - The Trip



Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleVvellum
Stranger

Registered: 05/24/04
Posts: 10,920
Re: Government Contractors versus Real Business [Re: Learyfan]
    #3225831 - 10/07/04 02:08 AM (12 years, 7 months ago)

who's that chick?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineLearyfan
It's the psychedelic movement!
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/20/01
Posts: 30,046
Loc: High pride!
Last seen: 9 hours, 37 minutes
Re: Government Contractors versus Real Business [Re: Vvellum]
    #3225887 - 10/07/04 02:33 AM (12 years, 7 months ago)

No idea. I haven't made it past the shirt yet.  :loveeyes:








--------------------
--------------------------------


Mp3 of the month: Park Avenue Playground - The Trip



Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlined33p
Welcome to Violence

Registered: 07/12/03
Posts: 5,381
Loc: the shores of Tripoli
Last seen: 4 years, 12 days
Re: Government Contractors versus Real Business [Re: silversoul7]
    #3229049 - 10/07/04 06:36 PM (12 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

silversoul7 said:
Quote:

JesusChrist said:
I like Dick



Sorry man.  It was too good to resist.




Cmon SS7 you know you are setting youself up as well  :tongue:

I kid, i kid.

And also i believe that is a picture of natalie portman. The chick who hooks up with anakin in star wars.


--------------------
I'm a nihilist. Lets be friends.

bang bang


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineJesusChrist
Son Of God
Registered: 02/19/04
Posts: 1,459
Last seen: 4 years, 8 months
Re: Government Contractors versus Real Business [Re: Evolving]
    #3231002 - 10/08/04 12:17 AM (12 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Evolving said:
Quote:

JesusChrist said:
Can you still have the #1 military in the world without the military industrial complex?



This begs the question of what is the purpose of the military in a supposedly free society, conquest or defense? For purposes of defense, it is not necessary to have a military that can conquer and hold another country, but only that it protect the sovereignty of the nation. Being number 1 in the world may be a by product of this goal, but being number 1 should not be the goal. Switzerland (as an example) has followed this martial philosophy for more centuries than the United States has been in existence and has done quite well.

Quote:

You can argue that our military is too big, but I am not entertaining that argument.



Too bad, because that is a very important, actually an essential point that needs to be addressed.

Quote:

Would we have been better off in Iraq picking a company other than Halliburton?



We would be better off if we would have no entangling or permanent alliances, and restrict ourselves militarily to defending the United States. Notice I did not say, 'defending the interests of the United States' because this is a rhetorical fig leaf to cover the true meaning, 'promoting the interests of certain well connected people and firms who hold sway over U.S. government officials.'




You make great points and valid arguments. I think that we could pursue a differnt policy and that perhaps we should. But if we are to have this large and powerful force, can it be done in a different way without the Halliburtons? I am not so sure that is the case.

Part of the theory behind our massive military is to project power and act as a deterent. We may have well avoided many bloody conflicts because we are so large nobody would dare fuck with America and her allies. You can never calculate the cost of wars that never happened, or the lives that were spared in the process.

I don't know all of the answers, but I do think that if we are going to have a large military pressence we will always have some form of the dreaded "military industrial complex". And as the article notes, the complex has served us well in gaining a tacticle advantage. We beat people with technology and not just raw numbers of bodies. That is a very good thing for us. We just took over a couple of countries that probably have a population of 50 million people. While the individual deaths to our side are tragic, the number of them has been so small that statistically it isn't even significant to our population. While that may sound cold blooded, it is the analytical truth.


--------------------
Tastes just like chicken


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: Government Contractors versus Real Business [Re: JesusChrist]
    #3231204 - 10/08/04 12:46 AM (12 years, 7 months ago)

What's better, never having to fight a war because you mind your own business (like Switzerland) or to get into conflicts year after year, always creating new enemies, having the corrupting influence on politicians of endless business dealings with the military industrial complex, the cost of human lives and billions of tax dollars, the diversion of capital and human resources from productive pursuits towards the destruction of others and an ever increasing debt? Our country is headed for economic disaster, our military spending is no small part of this. Add up the IOUs to Social Security and add the unfunded liability of Medicare to the national debt and ask yourself what happens when foreigners stop funding our ever increasing spending... our arms will not help us, our friends will be even fewer still when we fall on hard times.

"For over a thousand years Roman conquerors returning from the wars enjoyed the honor of triumph, a tumultuous parade. In the procession came trumpeteers, musicians and strange animals from conquered territories, together with carts laden with treasure and captured armaments. The conquerors rode in a triumphal chariot, the dazed prisoners walking in chains before him. Sometimes his children robed in white stood with him in the chariot or rode the trace horses. A slave stood behind the conqueror holding a golden crown and whispering in his ear a warning: that all glory is fleeting."
- Patton


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineJesusChrist
Son Of God
Registered: 02/19/04
Posts: 1,459
Last seen: 4 years, 8 months
Re: Government Contractors versus Real Business [Re: Evolving]
    #3232154 - 10/08/04 10:03 AM (12 years, 7 months ago)

Our country is headed for disaster, I will agree with you about that. I want to read that new book "Rome wasn't burnt in a day" just because I love the title.

I don't know the answers. What do you do about the Sudan? What do you do when you are attacked like 9/11? Places like the Sudan are particularly heart wrenching. The cold fact is that if the United States doesn't do anything about that Genocide, nobody else will either. We are the only people that can do anything about it. If we do go after them to stop the massacre, the world will probably be up in arms. If we don't, we will have to live with those deaths. We are the only people that can stop it. I don't like either proposition.

I wish it was as easy as just being Swiss. Those fuckers have it pretty easy. They even befriended Hitler. I guess they don't lose sleep about anything.


--------------------
Tastes just like chicken


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Fire the government (important information for Americans) Jive turkey 1,390 13 09/01/07 12:34 PM
by zappaisgod
* Another halliburton conspiracy theory. FrankieJustTrypt 562 2 02/10/05 12:57 PM
by FrankieJustTrypt
* Halliburton scores big off Iraq RonoS 582 4 08/28/03 10:35 PM
by afoaf
* Truths behind Halliburton retread 624 5 10/07/04 07:53 PM
by trendal
* Economics for Real People(Full Book Posting): Cover, Acknowledgements, Contents, Introduction Mr.Al 1,691 14 11/22/08 11:48 PM
by Mr.Al
* The Halliburton Smear Phred 448 1 09/20/03 08:25 PM
by shakta
* Iranian Intelligence meddling in Iraq caught. (proof that iraqi government complicent) The_Red_Crayon 1,223 7 12/29/06 07:01 PM
by The_Red_Crayon
* How Big is Bush's Big Government? Skeptikos 655 7 04/19/06 09:12 PM
by zappaisgod

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil
1,276 topic views. 1 members, 1 guests and 3 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:
Marijuana Demystified
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2017 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.043 seconds spending 0.006 seconds on 18 queries.