Hi, Shrewd!        Login  
Shrewd'm.com 
A merry & shrewd investing community
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd
Search
Shrewd'm.com Merry shrewd investors
Search
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd


The week's question
In March 2025, in the thread "Re: OT, out", Umm asked the members: "Do you think it is because America is made up of magical soil that makes businesses based in America magically profitable?" This week it is put to everyone again. The button below opens the small thread re-asking it - read what others have said so far, then give your own answer as an ordinary reply.
Answer this questionContinue to Shrewd'mThis note won't appear again
Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (42) |
Author: onepoorguy ⎊✺🐝  😊 😞
Number: of 86270 
Subject: Re: Of Course He’s Not a Fascist
Date: 11/13/24 11:58 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
No. of Recommendations: 11
When a major goal is to overhaul the moribund inefficient Pentagon procurement processes, necessary to rebuild our military, then the simpatico arrangement between the Generals and Defense contractors must be degraded. Breaking those bonds necessarily requires a degree of "out with the old".

Ignoring the fact that you jumped from DEI and COVID shots to procurement...wait...we can't ignore it, because it's a completely different topic.

If you want to talk procurement, and the MIC, that is a huge can of worms. I totally agree with you that generals shouldn't be able to join military contractors (in any capacity) once they retire. Purging the ranks will not stop that practice, nor address procurement in any way. In fact, it may just hasten some senior officers to take positions with military contractors earlier than they expected. And, without laws preventing it, the new batch of Pentagon officers will almost certainly perpetuate the same behaviors (you know the contractors will continue to provide the same inducements).

And pretty much all of those officers you want to purge rose to those ranks on merit, whether or not they ended up on boards of military contractors when they retired. So a purge is the completely wrong approach. Just pass a law that anyone involved with procurement can never work for a defense contractor in any role, nor accept payment from them for anything ("consultant", or "advisory", or whatever). THAT is how you address that problem.
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
Print the post
Members reply directly to onepoorguy here — and replies get answered. Reading is free; so is joining the conversation. Join Shrewd'm »
This community has written 86,214 posts about US Policy. The article-length ones it recommended most:
It's going to get worse · 33 recs · 2025
G’day Donny · 30 recs · 2026
Old Related Story · 28 recs · 2026
HCR is a national treasure · 27 recs · 2025
Fascism in America · 27 recs · 2025
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (42) |


Announcements
US Policy FAQ
Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

Best Of Politics | Best Of | Favourites & Replies | All Boards | Followed Shrewds | Open Questions | Moving a community