Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthSky
The more I think about the GAO ruling on the tanker contract, the more I think it was somehow a backlash against buying a "European" plane although NG and Airbus would put the plant in AMERICA. This also includes Alabama's supposed "inability" to put pieces of metal together.
|
Go sift thru the articles on this anti-EADS site by Washington military complex advisors to see what and where the power lies (and the basis of my negative post that we wouldn't get the tanker a week before we didn't). This is all about the foreign nature of Airbus and the issues that surround it....
http://tankerblog.blogspot.com/
Now I'll admit they have some very valid points. For one, we probably wouldn't be in this situation of only one domestic company capable of delivery if not the giant ongoing EU government subsidies that built AirBus to what it is (and drove US manuf. workers out of business) in the first place. And the same thing is happening to our manufacturing on all fronts all over the world. Foreign governments are targeting US industries, already vulnerable to cheaper labor costs and less environmental restrictions abroad, and doubling the hurt by pouring billions into rendering the US choice completely uncompetitive.
So it is "neat" that we get back steel jobs in Mobile that were once in Allentown or Birmingham as an example. But we get them back at the loss of ownership of the billions in profits as a nation. That isn't something to scoff at. It is a weakening of control of the industry and influence on the world. The auto ordeal of the past 50 years isn't quite as hard to swallow for most folks because people can point "hands on" to the crap produced in Detroit for 30 years and the unbending unions that forced things to get to this point. But, in reality, we have given up control and are happy to just assemble someone else’s rise to power. Check my next Pensacola post (in a few minutes) for another hammer to fall in the wiping out of US manufacturing and ownership.
But as far as the tanker goes, I think the past is the past. There is no competition for Boeing on this scale in the US. That can't be undone. So we either decide that all contracts of that scale go to Boeing (while also further limiting our ability to buy outside the States in many critical areas that are simply gone...never to return) or we accept the reality and buy the best we can buy. There will not be new domestic textile mills springing up all over the South and in Monroeville again. It is gone until we are willing to work for $.40/day again (quickly getting there). There will not be new domestic steel, aerospace, computer manufacturing plants springing up across the nation unless some individual stumbles onto something truly revolutionary here. We've got to deal with it. Either tariff/excise tax/ban the world at this late date and further isolate this country or deal with it and try to redevelop the skills that made us a power in the first place. I think we have to deal with it as macro economics will force it to be.
If it becomes obvious that this tanker decision is based on protectionism, there will be many losers beyond the Mobile area. First will be Boeing (I bet they didn't think anyone would say that after a win). But, having full knowledge they run in a vacuum from this point forward with no real competition....they, by rule, will become even more fat, even more lazy, less efficient, less capable. In short, fully susceptible to being sold to foreign interests in 15 years. Second, the US military loses as they are forced to buy this crap over and over. Third, obviously the taxpayer loses as we fund buying this overpriced crap. Finally, the US citizen loses in general as our military could no longer be a safe bet to beat Canada.
In summary, we've made some bad decisions to lead to a situation that the best technology can be conceived, stolen, given away, built and financed by foreign companies. But it wasn't all in malice to the US citizen. Remember when we were trying to bring the rest of the world up to our standards to expand markets and also because we had morale dictate to share the wealth of capitalism with the far corners? Well, we've overdone it maybe. But we should be praised, not laughed at for it. A different philosophy could easily have kept a world groveling for the smallest scraps and under our foot. Even in our personal losses, I feel like we've done the morally right thing over the decades spreading this capability to the formerly least capable and most desperate people on the planet. Maybe I didn't envision all the pains that come along with it though. The environmental damage, the competition for limited resources. But especially the lack of appreciation. That sorta sucks. I guess if it ends tomorrow the US will be judged for all the negatives and not the unprecedented giving and sharing.
Our "solutions" in the next election bother me a bit. Stronger unions. More protectionism. In short, more guarantees that US companies will have to either dissolve or ship off for lack of competitive legs. Automaker-like pensions aren't going to help keep boat builders in the US (notice I say boat and not ship...most ship builders are already in China).
Prev
Linear Mode
