Don't outsource our aerospace industry PATTY MURRY

   http://aiss.enews.senate.gov/t/38836/... Murray asks good questions about tanker” – Everett Herald

 

---

You and Murray have got to be really naive, or spreading disinformation, to think that if Boeing got the contract they wouldn't be "outsourcing" much of the work.  What aerospace companies are doing is they are having many components manufactured by small companies throughout the US, but particularly in CA, because they can cut costs.  How?  Because these companies use illegal aliens to lower their manufacturing costs.  To think that you are unaware of this stretches the credulity of any even dimly aware persons. 

But, of course, those jobs filled by illegal aliens now create the ability of the military to more easily attract recruits.

Nice try to make us think that outsourcing would end if Boeing got the contract, but outsourcing by "stealth" is still outsourcing.

---

Murray has skin in the game.  Boeing is big in her state.  If Boeing and the air force are being screwed by AirBus, then heads should roll.  I think judgment should be reserved until we hear the other side of the story.  One thing, I have heard, for instance, is that Boeing has had a poor track record fulfilling recent contracts on time and within budget.

---

 Employers, Employers... :

You and Murray have got to be really naive, or spreading disinformation, to think that if Boeing got the contract they wouldn't be "outsourcing" much of the work.  What aerospace companies are doing is they are having many components manufactured by small companies throughout the US, but particularly in CA, because they can cut costs.  How?  Because these companies use illegal aliens to lower their manufacturing costs.  To think that you are unaware of this stretches the credulity of any even dimly aware persons. 

But, of course, those jobs filled by illegal aliens now create the ability of the military to more easily attract recruits.

Nice try to make us think that outsourcing would end if Boeing got the contract, but outsourcing by "stealth" is still outsourcing. What aerospace companies are doing is they are having many components manufactured by small companies throughout the US,(AT LEAST THEY ARE IN THE USA AND BOEING IS IN THE USA!)

 FeedFwd :Murray has skin in the game. Of course she has skin in game, she is fighting for the peope in the state of Washington. Too bad other politicans don't fight for WE THE PEOPLE!!

It's ok if you think I am that naive, fine. I worked in the auto industry for 30 years and I know how outsourcing works. belive me!!!

1. How Can We Justify Outsourcing our Military Capabilities?

For one – how – while we are at war across the globe – can we justify putting a contract that involves military security into the hands of a foreign government?  Mr. President, outsourcing a key piece of our American military capabilities to any foreign company is a national security risk.

And Airbus and its parent company EADS have already given us plenty of reason to worry about how hard they will work to protect our security interests.  In 2005, EADS was caught trying to sell military helicopters to Iran, despite our concern about Iran’s support of terrorists in Iraq – and their efforts to develop nuclear weapons.  When confronted, Mr. President, EADS answered that “as a European company” they were “not supposed to take into account embargoes from the U.S.”

But that isn’t the only example.  

In 2006, EADS tried to sell C-295 and CN-235 transport and patrol planes to Venezuela – a circumvention of U.S. law.  Mr. President, we prohibit foreign countries from selling military products containing U.S.-made military technology to third countries without U.S. approval.  And part of the reason is because we want to keep our weapons from falling into the hands of countries like Venezuela, which have threatened U.S. security and mean us harm.  We can’t trust a foreign company to keep our military’s best interests in mind – especially one that has a history of trying to sell weapons and military technology to unfriendly countries.

But I think this raises a bigger question, too.  What happens if France – or Russia, which is pushing to increase its stake in EADS – decides it wants to slow down our military capacity because it doesn’t like our policies?  Do we want another country to have that kind of control?  I think that’s one of the questions we need to decide the answer to now.

---

p hunt,

Don't get me wrong.  I'm not criticizing the article.  I'm not criticising the idea of questioning the decision to go with Airbus.  In fact, it is good to assess such an important and large purchase to make sure the best decision was made and that following fulfillment of the contract, the vendor satisfaction criteria is updated with actual hard data.  I'm only suggesting there may be another side to the decision and I don't know what it may be.  Those guys with all the stars and scrambled eggs are paid the big bucks to make important decisions like this and important decisions on the battlefield based on the decisions they made procuring equipment.  I'd like to believe they aren't all corrupted and/or treacherous.

---

sorry, double-click, double entry.

---

This was a big stink in March.  Murray isn't the only Congressperson  who got involved.   And, yes Boeing is big in Washington State.  But their headquarters moved to Illinois or Kansas a number of years ago.

One thing I remember, is that the specs got changed I think after the bidding...another, is that EADS is being challenged by the US for using government subsidized funding or something.  There is much more than the article p.hunt put up.  You can fnd more by googling I am sure.  I have a dial-up so takes me forever to research much to give you more info.

I have to chuckle at the comment about the brass, eggs, and big bucks though.  I am sure that the "peter principle" is still going strong, especially in any kind of government position.  Too hard to get rid of em, so just move em up that ladder. 

First, let me say that Patty Murray is the sleaziest senator out there practically, and I know there are dozens of them, so she is in good company. I can remember about 18 months ago they found like 22 chinese being smuggled into the country via container ship at the port of seattle and she just went APE about it, "they could have had nukes, they could have been terrorists, we could have had a 9-11 event here in seattle, we HAVE TO PROTECT OUR PORTS!!!!!!!"  she was yapping on the TV news, yet, her record on illegal aliens crossing the border by the thousands EVERY DAY--grade F minus!! Her record on amnesty--grade F minus, her record on securing those borders--grade F minus!!! She wants her cake and to gorge on it too, she wants TONS of illegals here for the farmers and bill gates microsoft, so, the border is a non-entity, yet, she is SCREAMING BLOODY MURDER about securing the ports, where MAYBE 200 chinese sneak in a year after spending weeks at sea in some closed up container ship and they arrive more dead than alive.  Yet, she doesn't care about the approx 15,000 illegals who cross our other borders every day!  Guess she doesn't think terrorists would arrive via mexico or canada---oppps, wrong, we had one come across the border from canada with a car full of bomb making stuff heading for los angeles!!

Second, I worked for boeing for 22 years, and I would NEVER trust boeing, they have gotten rid of most of their manufacturing jobs by offshoring them to places like china, japan, italy, australia, england, etc, they are basically just a assembly plant now, ie huge sections of the airplane arrive from foreign countries and are just put together in a "final assembly" situation now, THOUSANDS of American jobs have already left boeing for foreign countries. 

I do however believe that our military should NOT be getting their products from foreign owners or builders, because as we lose those jobs and capabilities, if we had to ramp up to protect ourselves, we would not be able to do it with our manufacturing gone overseas.  One of the reasons rome eventually fell is that it no longer did anything for itself, it depended on other countries for it's food and labor and basically just about everything, and I can see us heading in that same direction.

---

Hay, guys China just launched their own 2.7 billion operation to make big jets, and why shouldn't they we gave them the expertise, thanks to outsourcing. If you work in the Aerospace Industry I would start job hunting, or as John McCain suggests get retrained as a WalMart Greeter.

 

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/boeingaerospace/2004407493_chinajets12.html

algebra said:

Hay, guys China just launched their own 2.7 billion operation to make big jets, and why shouldn't they we gave them the expertise, thanks to outsourcing. If you work in the Aerospace Industry I would start job hunting, or as John McCain suggests get retrained as a WalMart Greeter.

 

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/boeingaerospace/2004407493_chinajets12.html

 

Yep not a big surprise, altho I think most would have bet on japan starting their own manufacturing of big jets before china, but, not a surprise at all.  I just hope that my retirement is safe--when I was working hard and long hours, it was never suggested that companies might squander the employees retirement and we would be left high and dry with nothing after dozens of years of employment!

---

VeeBee, Makes one wonder who is making that 2.7 billion investment in China. Obviously the fact that China is a Communist Government does not seem to bother investors. This fact should produce attention from those scolars who taught us the ills of Communism. One would have to ask the question can Capitalism and Communism co-exist in the same country at the same time, if so shouldn't we re-define communism.