I just noticed some of Ron Paul’s biggest supporters are defense contractors
logicallypositive:
Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, Boeing… this is a great mystery…. why would defense contractors support a candidate who is going to make policy choices that are anathema to their profits??????
Defense contractors make more money out of war then they would during a war for the simple reason that war is complete destruction. Once the government go bankrupt, there won’t be anymore money for them to make any profits on.
Also, people keep assuming that defense contractors only deal with the war industry, which is not true. What they do is to built war machines and such, but those stuff are also VERY VERY useful outside of war (for example, for their extended security, stealth, speed, etc-think of how civilians would purchase a Hummer to be used on the road) and so, it is a lot more profitable to sell their products to the general population, not the government, since the government is a monopoly, and often times, various contractors have to bid against each other to supply the lowest price in order to win government contract. On top of that, during an official proclaimed war, these companies are further bound to the rules and regulation of the government since it is deemed a matter of national security. What this means is that even if these companies saw that there are other more profitable endeavor to partake in, they would not be allowed to do so since they are bounded by the contractual obligation they have to provide the national security needs for the war effort. For example, if Boeing invented a new supersonic speed plane through their defense department, the would first have to give dibs to the government even if it would be more profitable to open it for commercial usage.