…That you are a complete idiot. Thanks for making that perfectly clear.
No interpretation required. :rolleyes:
So be precise. Under what conditions does a lowest-bid contract produce “shoddy work, defective product, inadequate staffing” and other negative features, and how might one mitigate those conditions short of awarding contracts without a bid process? (Feel free to discuss things that are done before accepting bids that you haven’t yet mentioned.)
You are clearly delusional. Even when shown plainly and clearly that you were in error, you continue to try and claim that you were not.
“Lowest point” indeed.
1.) My only concern is that the people who cared the most rushed up to sign the petitions ASAP. Hopefully this rate keeps up, though.
2.) Hilariously, the petitions on the Democratic Senators eligible for recall are all being sponsored by a group from Utah. (When initially filed, they hadn’t yet even been able to find a single person from each district to act as their front, as required.)
I haven’t seen much, personally. other than the quote from Pres. Obama’s campaign: “If American workers are being denied their right to organize and collectively bargain, when I’m in the White House, I’ll put on a comfortable pair of shoes myself. I’ll walk on that picket line with you as President of the United States because Americans deserve to know that somebody is standing in their corner.” No word yet on whether he’ll follow through.
There was initially some support but I’m not sure how substantive it’s been or continues to be. The Labor Secretary did express support a couple of weeks ago.
You’re off base on a hilarious number of levels here.
1.) We’re talking about bids to take something over, not contract for a project. That means that the state would be looking for the highest bidder, not the lowest.
2.) I have never expressed an opinion on lowest-bidder projects.
3.) Lowest-bidder is how the *private sector *often works. An organization sends out an RFP, potential vendors respond with bids, and when there is a substantive difference between fees (assuming all of the organization’s stated needs will be met) the organization selects the lowest bidder.
If you hand over the utilities to a private company with no bidding or oversight, that means that there’s a good chance it’s going to be handed to a political crony of the person making the appointment.
Did you notice that Koch Industries is already hiring for power plant managers in Wisconsin? (And didn’t I already link that here?) Gee, what a coincidence! It’s almost like they know they’re about to get paid back for the candidate they bought.
I have to wonder about posters like **Nadir **and may_be_ignorant. I find it hard to believe they’re anything but trolls who proudly wear the label on their foreheads, daring us to do anything about it.
I agree. Why strip judgement out of the process by being bound to the lowest absolute bid?
Though in WI, voters kind of stripped judgement out of the process by electing Walker and his buddies. What’s the latest recall update?
While it has been a fair number of years since I was involved in the government procurement racket, it is my recollection that in order to be the successful candidate to sell the government stuff the candidate must be the LOWEST RESPONSIVE AND RESPONSIBLE BIDDER. Just being the low bidder is not enough. The bidder must be offering to sell the government precisely what the government is buying on the terms the government proposed. The bidder must either have an established track record of delivering what they promise or be prepared to offer sureties or bond for their performance. All that other balderdash about the inadequacy of good and services procured on a low bid basis makes for nice rhetoric but doesn’t have much basis in fact.
There is an exception to all this. That is when the fix is in. That some corporate powers are already looking for plant managers suggests that just that may have happened in the Badger State.
All of this may be a bit off topic.
Completely on topic, Spavined G. (How you doing? Long time no see.) The vendor qualification process is what I was wanting to see if my old project manager friend Nadir was even aware of.
And yes, the exception is when the vendor’s known before hand (although in this case, it’s the buyer rather than the seller). Usually there’s a bit of kabuki, but that’s only when the crooked dealer has some shame or some expectation of accountability…
Go back, read the actual bill and get back to me, without the alarmist, rhetorical union butt-sucking media hype.
Selling, buying, privatizing, bidding - WTF are we actually trying to do here? Do you have a single clue at all, or do you just like waxing nostalgic about your project management accumen?
SFG, I already understand where you’re coming from, so that is a complete waste of ignorance fighting time - please disregard.
Sheesh. Fucking morons.
Hiring? Looks like another example of how your shoolgirlish logic interprets terminology to fit the preconceived conclusion.
My company presently has many job reqs for all sorts of things that don’t actually exist until contracts are in place. It’s called planning. It’s what successful people and companies do - something you’re ilk is obviously unfamiliar with. :rolleyes:
Yeah, i saw their signs the other day: “Now Hiring Asst. Mgr., McRib Exp. a Plus!”
Dear Old PM Friend **Nadir **- There’s one “c” in “acumen”. I’d reply at greater length, but there’s no “there” there to rebut.
…but I’m at work right now and was kinda hurriedly typing and ignoring the inline spell checker while simultaneously attending to other more pressing activities.
Just a coincidence we get the occasional flash of hyperactivity between long periods of inactivity. :o
For the comprehension impaired I am sneering at the lack of it.
Which is not at all uncommon in government contracting at all levels. Believing otherwise is naive, and otherwise known as bullshit.
Not really, no. The naive are usually the victims of bullshit, inflicted upon them by the cynical.
Well, consider me impaired I guess, because my first, second and (now) third reading of your complaint leaves me thinking you were suggesting that the cure for poor quality, defects, inadequate staffing, etc. was to avoid lowest-bid contracts, specifically by going to no-bid awards. Now, that was a non sequitur to the point regarding the privatization of power stations, but that’s clearly what you said.
Of course, Nadir fails to comprehend that a fairly significant number of us at the Dope have worked for government contractors, and know that he’s spouting bullshit.
It’s fairly safe to start any sentence with that, actually.
Translation: the line at the drive thru was really backed up and the burgers were burning.
No fries for you! No!
The things you seem to think you know about government contracting would not impress me in the least. <yawn>
Been there, done that, been on both customer and contractor sides, still doing it going on 30 years.
You and your “dopers” crowd appear to be with rare exception as I’ve noted in similar vein before, a bunch of more or less cluess whiners with too much time on your hands.