Social Engineering Trumps "Security"
Becky Akers posts at Lew Rockwell:
Recall, if you will, the TSA's constant claim that security is so overriding a concern its goons must molest you and your children while photographing everyone naked. So you might think it would merely hire the best, most rigorous teachers it could find.
Nope-ies!
Seems the Thieves and Sexual Assailants want "a company to conduct training for [their] Inter-Modal Security and Training Exercise Program (I-Step)." And they are "exclusively" recruiting said trainer from the "economically disadvantaged woman owned small business (EDWOSB [yep, no jargon is complete without an unwieldy acronym]) industry"; milady will "continuously improve the risk posture of the transportation systems serving the nation."...And why? Because bureaucracies "are required to set quotas for hiring EDWOSBs by the Small Business Act, which was enacted in January ... [and] sets government-wide goals that at least 23 percent of all contracts must be awarded to businesses owned by service-disabled veterans, 'socially and economically disadvantaged individuals,' and women."
Seems to me a business owner who's a white guy who grew up in a series of foster homes would trump a vagina carrier for disadvantage -- by far -- but hey, that's just me operating on a purely rational level.
Rational? Sorry, this is gubbmint work, rational thought is not allowed!
Jim Armstrong at December 23, 2013 4:50 AM
It's easy to create a company on paper that's owned by a minority or a woman. Rake in the government contracts, and cut the front-person in on a piece of the action.
That's in the best case that you have competent people who are gaming the system. The worst case is that the government agency is forced to issue contracts to an incompetent company, because there were no competent bidders of the required gender or ethnicity.
This is discrimination. It's illegal. It's what MLK and the rest fought against. It's your government at work.
a_random_guy at December 23, 2013 5:29 AM
"It's easy to create a company on paper that's owned by a minority or a woman. Rake in the government contracts, and cut the front-person in on a piece of the action."
I know of more than a few small government contractors that operate this way. The problem you run into is that you're paying a fair amount of money (probably low six figures) to someone who does little actual work, which in a small business really hurts your competitiveness.
On the other hand, a lot of these small businesses are owned by a married couple where they both do substantial work, but her name is the one on the door so that they can qualify for the disadvantaged status. This works well until and unless they decide to get divorced...
Cousin Dave at December 23, 2013 6:27 AM
You actually expect the government to be rational?
What drugs are you taking and where can I get some?
Jim P. at December 23, 2013 4:37 PM
Leave a comment