U.S. Air Force outsources $40 billion contract

[Aerin]

http://murray.senate.gov/tankers/

On Friday, February 29, Senator Murray stood with the men and women of Boeing in Everett as the Air Force announced that it would be outsourcing a $40 billion contract to build aerial refueling tankers to the European company Airbus. Boeing workers were shocked, angry, and wanted answers.

Seriously? Why?

[aurik]

Because EADS offered a better deal to the USAF?

[Quicklet]

Don't succumb to the strong seductive voice of

http://www.losblogueros.net/mt-weblo...ou%20dobbs.jpg

Anyways, military spending is notoriously inefficient so it's either (a) business as usual or (b) an actually smart idea to try and not "waste" so much money. People need to get out of the military-industrial job-entitlement complex, we're not a primarily industrial nation anymore and it's a terribly backwards concept to think that these jobs/contracts must necessarily be contracted to American companies because "defense" is somehow any different from other industries.

(What Aurik said.)

[Charla]

Because about a year ago, Boeing tried to inflate their profits by overbidding and got caught. The Pentagon reopened bidding, and Airbus's design was much better. Now some people are getting bent out of shape that we're "sending jobs overseas", and only creating around 9k jobs in Mobile instead of 45k or something in Seattle and some other places (I don't remember the exact number).

NPR has been running this story for a week, so I get to hear about it on my overly long commute.

[Vail]

The Military puts up things it needs and companys bid to get them (lowest bid, not highest) so basicly like Aurik said: who ever can do the job to the standards the military wants for the lowest cost wins, welcome to Capitalism~

[finale23]

The Military puts up things it needs and companys bid to get them (lowest bid, not highest) so basicly like Aurik said: who ever can do the job to the standards the military wants for the lowest cost wins, welcome to Capitalism~

that's because airbus isn't a chinese company, otherwise it would be a different story. even capitalism in the US is subjected to conditions.

[archibaldcrane]

I feel that "total cost" should encompass some factors of the benefits of providing jobs to people who pay taxes in America at least, but if that hurdle can be overcome by a foreign company, more power to them.

[Beckwin]

This is overall a good thing. Foreign competition like this needs to exist in order to keep domestic industry honest when it comes to government contracts. However I'll say that in this instance, it's a tad troubling considering our current economic woes and concerns about outsourcing, especially when it's involving a government contract.

And $40 bil spent here is $40 bil we get to collect taxes on :D

[Norelco]

Ahem...I work for the company that got the EADS bid. The same weekend as the announcement they announced to all of us they are whittling away our pensions.

[Shuemue]

So effectively the French are building your planes.

Instead of auto-pilot, they come fitted with auto-surrender.

[Mulligan]

Boeing is just angry they cant overcharge for an inferior product anymore. They had a monopoly on alot of contracts and now that they have some competition that makes something better for cheaper they play the 'american' card. When you hear the arguements against airbus getting the contract you only hear that they are not an american company. You dont hear that Boeing failed to meet ANY of the five major requirements to get the contract.

[Charla]

That's actually exactly what I heard on NPR, although it was only at the tail end of the story and in response to a semi-related question about whether the decision might be overturned).