If the military keep the contract there are a lot of costs people don’t seem to be mentioning.
They ‘d have to keep a whole inventory of stores, keep all the manuals up to date, have a project team, design repairs, keep ground equipment maintained, buy specialist tooling etc, etc.
All this costs money, and being the government/military and vastly inefficient, a lot more money that a tightly run civvy company can do it for.
It goes to show that if a civvy company can provide the same service for a lot less and still make a profit, just how inefficient the military is.
The glory days from the 1950’s to the 1980’s are gone. We’re in the middle of a global financial depression, and every defence budget has been slashed. At the moment the bottom line is cost.
Tightly run civvy company????
You realise that “civvy” companies are there to make a profit at all costs and really dont care about service do you?
In all cases when a private company has taken over from the government (here in aust) in providing a “service”, prices have gone up instantly, “service” becomes non-exsistant and people are sacked in great numbers.
If you think BAE provides a “good” service to the end user then your mistaken. Companies who get government contracts typically gouge as much money as possible from the government because they think the money is a bottomless pit. Plenty of military projects can be used as examples of where this occurs. Billions wasted on projects which dont work or are years behind and money is constantly pumped into them to keep it going all in the name of “jobs” (supposedly).
This myth that the private sector can do it better then the government may have been true in 20/30yrs ago, but total rubbish in todays climate of greed and profit at all costs.
Sign In
