richardhutnik said:
Good luck translating work for a government defense contractor into any other sector out there. He is going to have a very hard time of it, if his specialization is into designing weapons systems and that work isn't available, due to budget cuts. His livelihood is dependent upon tax dollars. In regards to the use of the word "dole" in the original post, I was using the term as receiving of tax dollars in some form. The current definition is usually seen as different than that. Pardon my using a non-standard definition. If you were to go Libertarian, excess spending on weapons systems that is not needed, and pork brought back to districts would be seen as a form of dole. So, I want to focus on the main issue here. Is everyone in favor of the government employing people to do marginally important tasks, if doing such means an increase in number of government employees, so that such payments aren't see as unearned handouts? Is the issue that people don't actually work that is the problem, or is it one of redistribution of income by means of government bureaucrats to where they feel is necessary? And if the government is creating makeshift work for people, to get their money, does that then mean that the people receiving the money aren't dependent on it? Does dependency suddenly go away when people actually do something in exchange for the payout?
|
I really don't understand how anyone can view working for the government the same as receiving Welfare. Working for the government is no different than working for a private company. You clock in, do a job, get a check. Same as any job. If you think the government should employ less people, join the club. But the truth is that people working for the government are taxpaying contributors to society. Welfare slugs don't do anything but hold their hand out.
I'm a small government type of person. I work for county government, but I think the federal government is too big and takes too much control from local government. There is a HUGE difference between the monster that is federal government and accountable/transparent local government. There's waste in all government, but the feds make city and county government look flat out frugal. I don't want the government making up jobs just to get people work. I want the government to shrink. It's better that the government outsource to your brother's company. I'd rather the government build up defense to maintain security than take over health care.
Should the government pay for your brother's company's defense contract? I don't know. That's not really something I can assess. Maybe it's important and your brother's company can do it better, faster and cheaper than the government can. I do believe that defense and security are two of the primary purposes of the US Government.
If your brother lost his job I'm sure he could find another. It might not have anything to do with weapon systems, but there are a lot of jobs out there and technical skills are useful in most of them. But that doesn't really matter in this discussion. What matters is that the government, for whatever reason, decided to outsource and your brother's company is doing the work. It's cheaper for the government and it is better for the economy.
