3 ms·

Amazon wants Trump to testify in battle over $10B Pentagon contract

bediger4000 7y ago
This actually seems very fair. We have an adversarial legal system: checks and balances in it are based on people zealously defending their rights and privileges. Trump has at least given the appearance of anti-Bezos bias in his tweets about the Washington Post. If a President, any president, wants to appear to favor (or disfavor) some entity, that president needs to be able to at least articulate what they were thinking at the time of the announcement of favoritism (or disfavoritism). Otherwise the USA will end up with a merchantilist system, which is inefficient economically.
- Supermancho 7y ago
  > Otherwise the USA will end up with a merchantilist system, which is inefficient economically. At the largest level, organizationally, it's rare (to put it mildly) for a corporation or government to be economically efficient. Mercantilism is what the US has had for over 100 years via the Fed. This doesn't mean that the entire US system is managed that way, nor will it be.
  - bediger4000 7y ago
    So we should write off possibly blatant high-level interference in DoD acquisitions because our firms are already inefficient and we have de facto mercantilism already? Great. I'm all in. When do we publicly acknowledge that mercantilism? The first consequence of acknowledging mercantilism is that middle school economics learning changes to reflect that, so the voting public isn't deluded about monopolies, why large corporations are large, and why we buy from corporations with our tax money.
    - Supermancho 7y ago
      > So we should write off possibly blatant high-level interference in DoD acquisitions because our firms are already inefficient and we have de facto mercantilism already? Claiming that there is an upcoming decision (or crisis) point when the status quo is being observed, comes off as sensationalist. It's misguided concern. > When do we publicly acknowledge that mercantilism? The context is already embedded in history. The internal (very public) challenges to the Fed have led to some scary outcomes. Putting the conspiracy talk aside, it's not like there aren't jokes in the media (from movies like Spies Like Us to Men In Black) acknowledging the known waste - https://www.city-journal.org/html/americas-missing-money-15725.html https://www.city-journal.org/html/americas-missing-money-157... Not sure what more can be done. It's like the marijuana ban or racism. It will take a few generations to sort it out or it will never be sorted fully. Either way, awareness is not the problem.

This actually seems very fair. We have an adversarial legal system: checks and balances in it are based on people zealously defending their rights and privileges. Trump has at least given the appearance of anti-Bezos bias in his tweets about the Washington Post. If a President, any president, wants to appear to favor (or disfavor) some entity, that president needs to be able to at least articulate what they were thinking at the time of the announcement of favoritism (or disfavoritism). Otherwise the USA will end up with a merchantilist system, which is inefficient economically.

Supermancho 7y ago
> Otherwise the USA will end up with a merchantilist system, which is inefficient economically. At the largest level, organizationally, it's rare (to put it mildly) for a corporation or government to be economically efficient. Mercantilism is what the US has had for over 100 years via the Fed. This doesn't mean that the entire US system is managed that way, nor will it be.
- bediger4000 7y ago
  So we should write off possibly blatant high-level interference in DoD acquisitions because our firms are already inefficient and we have de facto mercantilism already? Great. I'm all in. When do we publicly acknowledge that mercantilism? The first consequence of acknowledging mercantilism is that middle school economics learning changes to reflect that, so the voting public isn't deluded about monopolies, why large corporations are large, and why we buy from corporations with our tax money.
  - Supermancho 7y ago
    > So we should write off possibly blatant high-level interference in DoD acquisitions because our firms are already inefficient and we have de facto mercantilism already? Claiming that there is an upcoming decision (or crisis) point when the status quo is being observed, comes off as sensationalist. It's misguided concern. > When do we publicly acknowledge that mercantilism? The context is already embedded in history. The internal (very public) challenges to the Fed have led to some scary outcomes. Putting the conspiracy talk aside, it's not like there aren't jokes in the media (from movies like Spies Like Us to Men In Black) acknowledging the known waste - https://www.city-journal.org/html/americas-missing-money-15725.html https://www.city-journal.org/html/americas-missing-money-157... Not sure what more can be done. It's like the marijuana ban or racism. It will take a few generations to sort it out or it will never be sorted fully. Either way, awareness is not the problem.