3 ms·

The military relies on goods and services supplied by private companies, selected through competitions based on performance and cost. This is a lot more capital

The military relies on goods and services supplied by private companies, selected through competitions based on performance and cost. This is a lot more capitalist than socialist. Even during WWII, wartime production still went through private companies, not central planning. Just because the government is the exclusive customer of a product (e.g. tanks, bombers) doesn't make an economy socialist when these products are still being built by private enterprises.

asdff 4y ago
I wonder when the contract system really emerged. WWII struck me more as the government coming into these centers of production, which at the time might be auto factories, and mandating that there would be no more fords during the war years and instead p51 mustangs, versus ford retooling as a business decision to serve this newfound customer. The government also rationed remaining cars to people depending on things like their occupation and its value having a car would be to the social system, and the state of their existing car. That's a little different than how it works today, and I often think that today its a bit inefficient too. For example, Lockheed and Raytheon could be competing for the exact same contract. I'd expect they aren't privy to share technological secrets between eachother's engineering teams, just for the sake of beating the other to the contract. In the end you have engineers working competitively instead of collaboratively, information gets siloed, and novel findings that might have been happen with more sharing of information never see the light of day. Maybe it's different though, and the government enforces a degree of collaboration, I hope.
- Manuel_D 4y ago
  Contract systems emerged well before WWII, before industrialized society, even. When some knight needed a new spear he hired a local blacksmith. Centrally operated foundries specifically producing arms were quite rare, usually a feature only in large empires with professional militaries. Rationing necessarily implies that there is a market economy to regulate: the whole reason why the government had to limit the production of civilian vehicles is because the wartime economy was still a market economy. Ford, GMC, etc. were still private companies at the end of the day, participating in a market economy. Rationing made it more attractive to cater to military acquisitions. Different companies working competitively has consistently proven to put outcompete and surpass centrally planned economies. Lockheed Martin and Raytheon continue to export way more arms than most other companies, competition may mean information gets siloed but evidently it gets results.

asdff 4y ago

I wonder when the contract system really emerged. WWII struck me more as the government coming into these centers of production, which at the time might be auto factories, and mandating that there would be no more fords during the war years and instead p51 mustangs, versus ford retooling as a business decision to serve this newfound customer. The government also rationed remaining cars to people depending on things like their occupation and its value having a car would be to the social system, and the state of their existing car. That's a little different than how it works today, and I often think that today its a bit inefficient too. For example, Lockheed and Raytheon could be competing for the exact same contract. I'd expect they aren't privy to share technological secrets between eachother's engineering teams, just for the sake of beating the other to the contract. In the end you have engineers working competitively instead of collaboratively, information gets siloed, and novel findings that might have been happen with more sharing of information never see the light of day. Maybe it's different though, and the government enforces a degree of collaboration, I hope.

Manuel_D 4y ago
Contract systems emerged well before WWII, before industrialized society, even. When some knight needed a new spear he hired a local blacksmith. Centrally operated foundries specifically producing arms were quite rare, usually a feature only in large empires with professional militaries. Rationing necessarily implies that there is a market economy to regulate: the whole reason why the government had to limit the production of civilian vehicles is because the wartime economy was still a market economy. Ford, GMC, etc. were still private companies at the end of the day, participating in a market economy. Rationing made it more attractive to cater to military acquisitions. Different companies working competitively has consistently proven to put outcompete and surpass centrally planned economies. Lockheed Martin and Raytheon continue to export way more arms than most other companies, competition may mean information gets siloed but evidently it gets results.