The US Air Force

The forum for ranting, raving, complaining and praising
TimeForGuinness
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 20007
Joined: April 18 06, 7:38 pm

Re: The US Air Force

Post by TimeForGuinness »

Popeye_Card wrote:
G. Keenan wrote:
Popeye_Card wrote:
Hungary Jack wrote:In this age of global capitalism where a company domiciled in one nation is like owned by individual and institutional investors from everywhere else, the nationality of the company winning the contract matters a lot less to me than the quality of the product and where the work is done.
Since it would have brought a decent amount of money and jobs to the St. Louis area, it would have been nice if Boeing got the contract. But that's me being selfish for St. Louis.
Would it? I thought it would primarily have benefited Washington State and Kansas. In any event, it isn't hurting the factory in Washington that builds 767s because they have a big backlog of commercial orders for the 767.

And Airbus is building a new factory in Alabama to build these tankers and future commercial A330s. I'm sure Alabama can dearly use such job creation.
I'm just going by what little bit I've heard on the radio. I'll admit to not paying very good attention to it.
St. Louis would have seen some of the work...and the 767 line will be shut down most likely.

User avatar
G. Keenan
Sucking on the Rally Nipple
Posts: 23718
Joined: April 16 06, 6:03 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: The US Air Force

Post by G. Keenan »

TimeForGuinness wrote:
Popeye_Card wrote:
G. Keenan wrote:
Popeye_Card wrote:
Hungary Jack wrote:In this age of global capitalism where a company domiciled in one nation is like owned by individual and institutional investors from everywhere else, the nationality of the company winning the contract matters a lot less to me than the quality of the product and where the work is done.
Since it would have brought a decent amount of money and jobs to the St. Louis area, it would have been nice if Boeing got the contract. But that's me being selfish for St. Louis.
Would it? I thought it would primarily have benefited Washington State and Kansas. In any event, it isn't hurting the factory in Washington that builds 767s because they have a big backlog of commercial orders for the 767.

And Airbus is building a new factory in Alabama to build these tankers and future commercial A330s. I'm sure Alabama can dearly use such job creation.
I'm just going by what little bit I've heard on the radio. I'll admit to not paying very good attention to it.
St. Louis would have seen some of the work...and the 767 line will be shut down most likely.
Not until at least 2012 which is how long it will take to get through it's current backlog of 767 orders.

TimeForGuinness
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 20007
Joined: April 18 06, 7:38 pm

Re: The US Air Force

Post by TimeForGuinness »

G. Keenan wrote:
TimeForGuinness wrote:
Popeye_Card wrote:
G. Keenan wrote:
Popeye_Card wrote:
Hungary Jack wrote:In this age of global capitalism where a company domiciled in one nation is like owned by individual and institutional investors from everywhere else, the nationality of the company winning the contract matters a lot less to me than the quality of the product and where the work is done.
Since it would have brought a decent amount of money and jobs to the St. Louis area, it would have been nice if Boeing got the contract. But that's me being selfish for St. Louis.
Would it? I thought it would primarily have benefited Washington State and Kansas. In any event, it isn't hurting the factory in Washington that builds 767s because they have a big backlog of commercial orders for the 767.

And Airbus is building a new factory in Alabama to build these tankers and future commercial A330s. I'm sure Alabama can dearly use such job creation.
I'm just going by what little bit I've heard on the radio. I'll admit to not paying very good attention to it.
St. Louis would have seen some of the work...and the 767 line will be shut down most likely.
Not until at least 2012 which is how long it will take to get through it's current backlog of 767 orders.
2012 isn't a long way away...career-wise. Granted many will be shifted to the 787 line...but this contract probably would have kept that line open for another 20 years.

User avatar
New Pagodi
Perennial All-Star
Posts: 4219
Joined: April 18 06, 11:30 pm
Location: St. Louis
Contact:

Re: The US Air Force

Post by New Pagodi »

It looks like they're going to redo the bidding process.

User avatar
Leroy
a bad penny always turns up
Posts: 25228
Joined: April 17 06, 12:27 pm
Location: Hanging out with my redneck, white socks and Blue Ribbon beer.
Contact:

Re: The US Air Force

Post by Leroy »

Are any of you in the Air Force?

User avatar
sighyoung
Mayor of GRB
Posts: 38643
Joined: April 17 06, 7:42 pm
Location: Louisville

Re: The US Air Force

Post by sighyoung »

I'm not in the Air Force, but I can force air.

User avatar
jimedmondsfan
Veteran Player
Posts: 782
Joined: August 24 06, 11:38 am
Location: Out of my mind
Contact:

Re: The US Air Force

Post by jimedmondsfan »

Frankly, I am more upset about the Chrysler Building being 75% owned by Saudi Arabia.....

User avatar
sighyoung
Mayor of GRB
Posts: 38643
Joined: April 17 06, 7:42 pm
Location: Louisville

Re: The US Air Force

Post by sighyoung »

jimedmondsfan wrote:Frankly, I am more upset about the Chrysler Building being 75% owned by Saudi Arabia.....
I don't know. Japanese investors lost their shirts buying Rockefeller Center several years ago.

Post Reply