- Joined
- Jan 10, 2009
- Messages
- 42,744
- Reaction score
- 22,569
- Location
- Bonners Ferry ID USA
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
So the no-bid contract opportunities for Koch Brother owned companies and massive tax breaks for large businesses need to be in place? What do you think those are costing them (or in the case of the no-bid contract, what it's going to cost them)?
Bold part: I'm of two minds about no-bid contracts. Also it would depend on what the contract was for I would imagine. If it is for something that could bring in more buisnesses then it could generate more money. So in the long run it may be good. Even if at the outset it costs a bit more money. If not then it should be gotten rid of imo. Granted it would have taken less money if there were bidable contracts. However the old axiom of "you pay for what you get" applies here. If you award a contract to the lowest bidder then you could quite possibly end up with crappy work done. Which would drive potential buisnesses away thereby losing money in the long run. Which was one reason why the government started using no-bid contracts. The thing about having bidable contracts for government work is that the government generally cannot pick and choose, they have to pick the lowest bid for fairness/equality reasons.
Underlined part: Yes those should be in place as it will draw buisnesses into the area. Which means more money coming in. On a local area level this is a good thing.