3 ms·
On the other hand, it's such a massive employer (directly or indirectly funded by tax dollars) so everyone says, why shouldn't we have a piece too?
by onetimemanytime 6y ago
On the other hand, it's such a massive employer (directly or indirectly funded by tax dollars) so everyone says, why shouldn't we have a piece too?
- adventured 6y agoIt also buys them into Airbus as customers & supporters, aligns commercial, technological & employment interests across European nations in numerous ways. If Airbus didn't already exist, they'd rationally want to create it rather than just leaving the market to the US and China. I'm sure the four million parts and 30 countries aspect adds a lot of complexity and bureaucracy, however it might be a reasonable price to pay for the benefits they derive natively in Europe from having an Airbus (as opposed to not) and so many nations being part of it.
- cancerSpreads 6y agoGovernment employment is not necessarily beneficial. It's not governed by economics. You can have completely useless roles exist for hundreds of years. Skilled or unskilled labor is better in the private sector for everyone's sake.
- som33 6y ago>It's not governed by economics. Except economics as you are taught it is bullshit, the rich have always taken state subsidies regardless of "economics". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHj2GaPuEhY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHj2GaPuEhY
- onetimemanytime 6y agoSay, Kentucky gets 1200 high paying jobs they never had due to their Senator's power (I'll veto the bill unless you build a factory there too...) . How is this bad for the state of KY?