3 ms·
Because based upon WTO agreements and others, the US cannot force all contractors and suppliers to hire only or mostly within the US. The one exception is “nat
by momokoko 6y ago
Because based upon WTO agreements and others, the US cannot force all contractors and suppliers to hire only or mostly within the US.
The one exception is “national security”. So military spending is the most efficient to create jobs in the US because you can prevent hiring in other countries.
An example in the opposite direction is US subsidies for solar energy. These subsidies do create some jobs installing them, but the majority of jobs end up created overseas in other countries like China.
- arethuza 6y agoInteresting, one of the areas that the UK government and the EU are apparently arguing over is our apparently quite right wing government wants more freedom to support UK companies through state aid than the 'socialist' EU would like. If we were to be constrained by WTO rules (an organisation hardcore Leavers seem very fond of) perhaps we can expect an increase in UK arms spending, though this being the UK no doubt this won't mean any improvements for the people at the sharp end of things.
- pbhjpbhj 6y agoGovernment procurement is interesting, eh. We've recently spent something like £1Billion on masks - hundreds of millions to companies which seem all to have connections to Tory faithful ... and AFAICT none of which have provided useable masks. (Aside from corruption why would they pay if the product isn't useable??!). I dare say defence procurement will be similar. Here's to cutting all that contracting red-tape the EU had us wade through. /s