4 ms·

Boeing subsists primarily on defense production. Do we want every American industry to end up like them? Seriously, the faulty airplanes were all built in the

Boeing subsists primarily on defense production. Do we want every American industry to end up like them? Seriously, the faulty airplanes were all built in the US by a company with some of the closest government ties in our economy. It is indeed an example of what fruits use of the defense production act might bear.

toomuchtodo 3y ago
Based on where we're at today, we can only go up. Boeing is an easy fix; nationalize them and fix it. To not do so (and allow incompetent management to remain) is a choice. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38981921 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38981921 ("HN: It's Time to Nationalize and Then Break Up Boeing")
- whatshisface 3y ago
  Breaking up Boeing is, in a sense, the opposite of nationalizing it. Furthermore nationalizing Boeing would mean buying it from the shareholders, who already have the right to change its management, if they want to. Why don't they want to fire its management? I'd say it's because Boeing is a creature well-adapted to its environment - an environment created by protectionism and defense production contracts.
  - toomuchtodo 3y ago
    You can and would zero out shareholders if needed. The law grants broad authority, and you can tie up folks in court for years if needed. https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-supreme-court-rejects-investor-suits-over-fannie-mae-freddie-mac-2023-01-09/ https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-supreme-court-rejects-inves... https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/government-sheds-lawsuit-by-fannie-mae-freddie-mac-shareholders https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/government-sheds-la...
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
    - perihelions 3y ago
      It's unconstitutional to nationalize a company without compensating shareholders at market rate. Your own link (Reuters) explains this in depth—you should first read that article which I think you've misunderstood.
      - toomuchtodo 3y ago
        What is the value of an enterprise that cannot sell airplanes due to buyer sentiment and regulatory refusal? I argue it is closer to $0 than you might think. Determine a desired outcome, and then engineer it within constraints (hard vs mutable limits, and where interpretation provides latitude). Edit: Book value is reasonable compensation to nationalize. "Closer to $0", not $0.
        deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
        deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
        jcranmer 3y ago
        > What is the value of an enterprise that cannot sell airplanes due to buyer sentiment and regulatory refusal? I argue it is closer to $0 than you might think. There is a lot of residual value in the physical plant of the enterprise--the real estate it owns, the machines it owns, the resources it has in inventory. Actually, there's a name for this value: book value.
antisthenes 3y ago
Why single out Boeing? What about Lockheed, NG, GD, Leidos, Booz Allen, Hamilton, etc.? Are all these companies "victims" of "planned economy"? Do you have any evidence that they are experiencing the same multitude and severity of issues as Boeing? > It is indeed an example of what fruits use of the defense production act might bear. What fruits are those, exactly? Are these fruits worse or better than an already bloated military-industrial complex? Please, elaborate.
- whatshisface 3y ago
  The fruits are the bloated military-industrial complex - and yes, I don't think Boeing is different; I was just replying to a comment discussing it.

toomuchtodo 3y ago

Based on where we're at today, we can only go up. Boeing is an easy fix; nationalize them and fix it. To not do so (and allow incompetent management to remain) is a choice. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38981921 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38981921 ("HN: It's Time to Nationalize and Then Break Up Boeing")

whatshisface 3y ago
Breaking up Boeing is, in a sense, the opposite of nationalizing it. Furthermore nationalizing Boeing would mean buying it from the shareholders, who already have the right to change its management, if they want to. Why don't they want to fire its management? I'd say it's because Boeing is a creature well-adapted to its environment - an environment created by protectionism and defense production contracts.
- toomuchtodo 3y ago
  You can and would zero out shareholders if needed. The law grants broad authority, and you can tie up folks in court for years if needed. https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-supreme-court-rejects-investor-suits-over-fannie-mae-freddie-mac-2023-01-09/ https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-supreme-court-rejects-inves... https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/government-sheds-lawsuit-by-fannie-mae-freddie-mac-shareholders https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/government-sheds-la...
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  - perihelions 3y ago
    It's unconstitutional to nationalize a company without compensating shareholders at market rate. Your own link (Reuters) explains this in depth—you should first read that article which I think you've misunderstood.
    - toomuchtodo 3y ago
      What is the value of an enterprise that cannot sell airplanes due to buyer sentiment and regulatory refusal? I argue it is closer to $0 than you might think. Determine a desired outcome, and then engineer it within constraints (hard vs mutable limits, and where interpretation provides latitude). Edit: Book value is reasonable compensation to nationalize. "Closer to $0", not $0.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - jcranmer 3y ago
        > What is the value of an enterprise that cannot sell airplanes due to buyer sentiment and regulatory refusal? I argue it is closer to $0 than you might think. There is a lot of residual value in the physical plant of the enterprise--the real estate it owns, the machines it owns, the resources it has in inventory. Actually, there's a name for this value: book value.

antisthenes 3y ago

Why single out Boeing? What about Lockheed, NG, GD, Leidos, Booz Allen, Hamilton, etc.? Are all these companies "victims" of "planned economy"? Do you have any evidence that they are experiencing the same multitude and severity of issues as Boeing? > It is indeed an example of what fruits use of the defense production act might bear. What fruits are those, exactly? Are these fruits worse or better than an already bloated military-industrial complex? Please, elaborate.

whatshisface 3y ago
The fruits are the bloated military-industrial complex - and yes, I don't think Boeing is different; I was just replying to a comment discussing it.