And what if that big company is doing the work overseas, where they hire workers with no benefits and pay taxes to other countries? What if it is a foreign company like Michelin, Bayer, Nestle, or Sony. This is what is happening. Government should favor American businesses over multinationals and foreign businesses.
Do we know it was Washington playing favorites, or was it the SBA failing to enforce its own rules over who was eligible for the money? I have no facts that point to either answer, but given the guvmint's proven talent for screwing up everything it touches, I'd bet the latter.
So how is the percentage an indication of bias? That number means nothing without context. What percentage of government contracts do small businesses bid on? Explain to me the speficic things in process that favors big companies over small ones.
I don't see how that matters. If the foreign or multi national company can do something better or cheaper then they should win the bid. If Nestle can provide cheaper choclate than Hershey's then why should the government favor Hersey's?
That is not why the government sources things out to contractors. Placing that kind of requirement may diminish the effectiveness of the contract. It seems like a really dumb requirement.
If you don't care about loss of of jobs overseas. The army black berets were originally won by a chinese contractor and the army changed it to a US supplier. State governments require in-state contractors to be hired all the time. Sure the government should get low bids, but not outsource overseas and hurt our own employment and economy. Other countries protect their own industries.
Of course I don't care about that. Why would I? Protectionism is stupid and hurts us more. Why not. The purpose of government contracts is not about domestic job maintenance or creation. I have read a crap ton of them, and I have never once seen one where the objective of the contract was to create jobs for the hired contractor.
