4 ms·

When it comes to defense spending this is abnormal Most of the time they want to put the supply chain across as many congressional districts as possible to mak

When it comes to defense spending this is abnormal Most of the time they want to put the supply chain across as many congressional districts as possible to make it politically hard to close any program as it would "cut jobs" in more districts much hard to cut spending if 10,000 jobs across 250 districts are impacted, then if 10,000 job across 5 districts are impacted

wmf 4y ago
This factory isn't the supply chain; it's one small part. It's probably in Louisiana in the first place to satisfy that district's rep.
- Chrontius 4y ago
  From the article, they moved to Louisiana for the humid climate, which prevents static electricity buildup and reduces the risk of the whole plant blowing itself sky-high.
brightball 4y ago
That has always been my understanding as well. The DoD would insist production be spread across multiple companies. Additionally, why in the world is this even public knowledge?
- phpisthebest 4y ago
  >>Additionally, why in the world is this even public knowledge? Why would it not be. Government Secrecy should be opposed by anyone that wants a free society You can not have a "Government for the people by the people" if the government is allowed to keep secrets from the people. Nor can voters properly select and hold representatives accountable if those people do not know what the government is doing We have a MASSIVE problem with government secrecy right now, too much of what the government does, especially in military and "intelligence" is deemed to be "secret" for "national security". We need to be clawing back the power to hid things, and making more and more activity transparent, not hiding more
  - brightball 4y ago
    I’d suggest that strategic military secrets are warranted and beneficial for national defense.
  - scottyah 4y ago
    You can't have a free society without secrets, unless it's composed of creatures that act nothing like humans today.
  - heywoodlh 4y ago
    Not that I disagree, but I'm curious, what benefit to the public is provided by this information being known? It seems to me like this information being public does not really lend to (or take away from) a free society. > Why would it not be [public knowledge]? I can think of multiple ways in which this information could be useful in the hands of enemies of the United States. An example: this publicizes weaknesses in the US military's supply chain. Is there a reason this particular piece of information (a Louisiana factory blew up and is causing supply chain issues for the US Military) should be public -- or was this more of a general commentary on more transparency?
    - phpisthebest 4y ago
      Both.. First and foremost it shows the incompetence of leadership, and misaligned priorities when it comes to public finance. Why was there only one factory, were funds not allocated properly to ensure a more robust supply chain? where political favors exchanged for the monopoly? As a result of the monopoly was the military paying more per unit of product since there was no competition? That is just off the top of my head for questions from the story. Hiding things like this ensures corruption will follow
- 0zemp2c 4y ago
  > The DoD would insist production be spread across multiple companies. rarely typically it is a bid/bake-off process and the winner gets a production contract even for firearms...Sig won the handgun contract and the new rifle contract...they'll be the sole producer of both

wmf 4y ago

This factory isn't the supply chain; it's one small part. It's probably in Louisiana in the first place to satisfy that district's rep.

Chrontius 4y ago
From the article, they moved to Louisiana for the humid climate, which prevents static electricity buildup and reduces the risk of the whole plant blowing itself sky-high.

brightball 4y ago

That has always been my understanding as well. The DoD would insist production be spread across multiple companies. Additionally, why in the world is this even public knowledge?

phpisthebest 4y ago
>>Additionally, why in the world is this even public knowledge? Why would it not be. Government Secrecy should be opposed by anyone that wants a free society You can not have a "Government for the people by the people" if the government is allowed to keep secrets from the people. Nor can voters properly select and hold representatives accountable if those people do not know what the government is doing We have a MASSIVE problem with government secrecy right now, too much of what the government does, especially in military and "intelligence" is deemed to be "secret" for "national security". We need to be clawing back the power to hid things, and making more and more activity transparent, not hiding more
- brightball 4y ago
  I’d suggest that strategic military secrets are warranted and beneficial for national defense.
- scottyah 4y ago
  You can't have a free society without secrets, unless it's composed of creatures that act nothing like humans today.
- heywoodlh 4y ago
  Not that I disagree, but I'm curious, what benefit to the public is provided by this information being known? It seems to me like this information being public does not really lend to (or take away from) a free society. > Why would it not be [public knowledge]? I can think of multiple ways in which this information could be useful in the hands of enemies of the United States. An example: this publicizes weaknesses in the US military's supply chain. Is there a reason this particular piece of information (a Louisiana factory blew up and is causing supply chain issues for the US Military) should be public -- or was this more of a general commentary on more transparency?
  - phpisthebest 4y ago
    Both.. First and foremost it shows the incompetence of leadership, and misaligned priorities when it comes to public finance. Why was there only one factory, were funds not allocated properly to ensure a more robust supply chain? where political favors exchanged for the monopoly? As a result of the monopoly was the military paying more per unit of product since there was no competition? That is just off the top of my head for questions from the story. Hiding things like this ensures corruption will follow
0zemp2c 4y ago
> The DoD would insist production be spread across multiple companies. rarely typically it is a bid/bake-off process and the winner gets a production contract even for firearms...Sig won the handgun contract and the new rifle contract...they'll be the sole producer of both