More signs of the times to come, large weapon manufacturers stock surge upon Trump's election

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by juanm, Nov 9, 2016.

  1. juanm macrumors 65816

    juanm

    Joined:
    May 1, 2006
    Location:
    Fury 161
    #1
    It's never a good sign when the markets think weapon manufacturers providing the US Armed Forces are going to thrive.

    [​IMG]
     
  2. satcomer macrumors 603

    satcomer

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Location:
    The Finger Lakes Region
    #2
    I know from experience that during the Obama Administration she put in a requirement that all Defense Cintracts have to be owned by a minority or a woman. That mean the means the traditional contrators like Northrop Grumman or Lockheed or DynCorp were out in the tech space!
     
  3. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    #3
    ...What?

    Seriously, wtf are you talking about?
     
  4. satcomer macrumors 603

    satcomer

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Location:
    The Finger Lakes Region
    #4
    During the 0's all DOD contracts were owned by the big three! It had been that way for years! The changed happen in the 3rd year of the Administration and it put many of us out the door!
     
  5. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    #5
    Source?

    I have a cousin who works at Northrup, they've not slowed down receiving DoD contracts. What are you talking about?
     
  6. satcomer macrumors 603

    satcomer

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Location:
    The Finger Lakes Region
    #6
    You don't understand Goverment Tech Security contracts!
     
  7. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    #7
    Oh so now its tech contracts, nice modifier.

    Again, such a policy (seeing as all contracts have to be reported outside the "black budget") would have to be public by law....source?

    For ****'s sake, the GAO itself reported that

    "Implementation of the Department of Defense's (DOD) Minority Business Enterprise Subcontracting Program (MBE) was reviewed; the review focused on the way DOD and four prime contractors implemented the program. The program calls for contracts over $500,000 to have a clause stipulating that contractors identify and solicit minority businesses to perform subcontracting.

    DOD implementation of MBE is inadequate in three respects: (1) the contract clause overlooks certain key aspects and requirements necessary to ensure program success; (2) the program is not adequately monitored and has inadequate standards to judge contractors' efforts; and (3) DOD contracting officers have not been given guidance on when the subcontracting clause should be inserted in prime contracts. Inadequate contract requirements and poorly planned programs are the primary reasons the subcontracting program is not effective. None of the prime contractors adequately complied with regulations for maintaining records related to minority business subcontracting. The contractors have not established a regular practice of soliciting bids from minority firms. About half of the minority businessess contacted were dissatisfied with the program."

    http://www.gao.gov/products/PSAD-77-76

    It wasn't even monitored closely for compliance and had loopholes big enough to shove a minuteman rocket through.

    Nice job parroting echo chamber ********.
     
  8. satcomer macrumors 603

    satcomer

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Location:
    The Finger Lakes Region
    #8
    I see your an expert!
     
  9. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    #9
    I see you have no source for your claims of exclusivity, I've provided the GAO analysis of the program you couldn't be bothered to source, and it directly states there are clauses that made the program essentially non-implemented.
     
  10. satcomer macrumors 603

    satcomer

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Location:
    The Finger Lakes Region
    #10
    http://www.acq.osd.mil/osbp/sb/dod.shtml
     
  11. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    #11
    I've supplied you with the GAO analysis of the program, which states that there are large loopholes for prime contracting, on top of the program not being monitored effectively.
     
  12. satcomer macrumors 603

    satcomer

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Location:
    The Finger Lakes Region
    #12
    Oh your really an expert! I'm done with your nerd game
     
  13. smallcoffee macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2014
    Location:
    North America
    #13
    This is stupid. The entire Dow Jones was up yesterday. If you want to infer that the rise of weapon manufacturer stocks means anything, then you also have to say that the rise in the total stock market is a sign of things to come (IE a better economy).
     
  14. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    #14
    Oh look he called me a nerd, I feel so hurt. :rolleyes:

    If I claimed to be an expert on this subject I would have posted my own analysis. Instead, being literate, I found the GAO's analysis (you know the GAO, the department your side loves to use to cherry pick data to make their points) on the exact program you claimed to be a victim of. You'd think you'd be intellectually curious enough to actually look at the damn thing, but no instead you want to pick up your ball and go home.
     
  15. satcomer macrumors 603

    satcomer

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Location:
    The Finger Lakes Region
    #15
    Oh you want the last word, how sweet!
     
  16. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    #16
    I thought you were done? Seeing as you're sticking around, can you outline how your claims hold up against the GAO analysis? That department is the official research arm that is used by Congress. As in, all of congress, for facts.
     
  17. thewitt macrumors 68020

    thewitt

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2011
    #17
    Clinton is a hawk. Trump is not in favor of war. Weapons manufacturers would have been much better off with a Clinton presidency. Liberal foreign policy always results in failure that leads to war. Always.

    Tump will address foreign policy i ways that the US has never done - as a businessman in a negotiation. The left won't like it, but it will be far more successful than their historical failures.
     
  18. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    #18
    ...The guy (whether to gin up his base or not) stated he would retaliate militarily against Iran for flicking off US military.
     
  19. aaronvan Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #19
    Obama recently signed-off on a $1 trillion program to develop an entirely new family of nuclear warheads and missiles.

    Never mind that Obama has us engaged in seven wars. The MIC does just fine under Democrats.
     
  20. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    #20
    Exactly, everyone is beholden to the military-industrial-congressional complex. That BS investment into the new "dial-a-nuke" weaponry is only making it more likely that we'll use nukes in conventional warfare when you can tune the damn thing down to kilotons if "need be".

    Not to mention the miniaturization efforts that are clearly designed to make sure that we weaponize space, what could go wrong!?
     

Share This Page