Cost-plus contracts

Halliburton earns money from the government primarily through its "cost-plus" contracts. Under a cost-plus contract, a government contractor like Halliburton purchases all the necessary items to complete a job order and is subsequently reimbursed all those costs from the government -- and then paid a percentage of those costs (the plus) as a fee. A typical contractor earns a base fee of 1 percent of the estimated contract cost and an "incentive fee" of up to 9 percent of the cost estimate based on the contractor's performance in a number of areas, including cost control. The upshot: The contractor will never spend $1 million to do a job when it can spend $10 million and thereby earn a higher fee. So, contractors actually earn more money by wasting taxpayer money. The cost-plus method of accounting is the primary system today for determining how much government contractors are owed by the taxpayer. Congress and whistle blowers have criticized Halliburton and the Army Corp of Engineers for inflating costs via cost-plus contracts.

Halliburton's most lucrative contract is with the U.S. Army. It is officially known as "LOGCAP" (or Logistics Civil Augmentation Program). LOGCAP is a "cost plus" contract performed by Halliburton's KBR subsidiary. This is the contract that requires KBR to feed, house and transport troops around Iraq and the middle east.

The LOGCAP contract is the most lucrative contract being performed in Iraq today. Under the cost-plus provisions of LOGCAP, the U.S. government pays KBR 1 percent of every purchase KBR makes with the possibility of an additional 2 percent as an incentive bonus that is paid if the company is operating efficiently and honestly. When KBR buys food for the troops, it is paid 1 percent of the cost of that food. When KBR constructs a new military housing facility, it is paid 1 percent of the construction costs. When KBR houses its staff at hotels or purchases trucks and equipment to carryout its duties, it is paid 1 percent of those costs.

LOGCAP and other cost-plus contracts require the company to purchase items only from a vendor offering the lowest price if the amount of the purchase order exceeds $2,500. Thus, purchase orders exceeding $2,500 require KBR to search for competing vendors in order to find the lowest price available. But KBR often takes a purchase order exceeding $2,500 and breaks it down into its parts so that the order becomes more than one purchase order, each valued below $2,500. This allows the company to avoid searching for the lowest-priced vendor, which results in higher costs to the U.S. taxpayer. About 70 to 80 percent of KBR's purchase orders are below $2,500 - mainly because large-value purchases are broken down so they don't exceed $2,500.

A former employee of Halliburton said the company's motto is "Don't worry about price. It's cost-plus." Congressman Henry Waxman (D-CA) said "The higher Halliburton's costs are, the larger its profits will be." Of the firms for which Halliburton purchased items, Waxman said "Many of the preferred firms were unreliable or charged 'outrageous' prices. [Halliburton] Supervisors did not encourage buyers to identify alternative vendors and, in some cases, wanted to use a higher price vendor on the preferred list rather than a new, cheaper vendor."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Fk6qkHs0oM&

The New American Century (2009) FULL LENGTH MOVIE

http://youtu.be/fkhHK65nTJk

Congrats on your efforts in multiculturalism! You've succeeded (in ruining your country!!!)

Artful Dodger: We would not get away with it in their country.

Mousetrap: You are exactly right. And the fault lies with all of us for allowing multiculturalism and its lie that all cultures are equal, to prevail. We actually teach that slop to our kids. Do you think the powers in Islamic countries teach that Western culture is equivalent to Eastern (particularly their own)? Not only that, but Muslim countries fight with each other over who has the better values.

It's time to through out the idea that all cultural values are equal (because they are not) and it's time to deport those that refuse to assimilate. Stop allowing Muslims into your countries unless they agree to assimilate! And just for fun, send some of the progressives of the world to live in Muslim countries. Let's see just how they feel after a year under Islamic rule!

Artful Dodger: I agree! But they wont do it.

Mousetrap: Sadly no but you'd think they can see what's currently happening and what's necessary to turn it around.

Artful Dodger:

> Of course you can teach responsible gun ownership. Thousands do it all the time. And since we have the Constitutional right to own guns, that's the best you're gonna get. You won't get rid of guns with extreme examples of abuse. That happens in many siituations. You don't limit freedoms because of the abuse of a few.

The truth is that Americans love their guns. It is why the USA has one of the highest per capita rates of gun ownership in the world. 99.99 % of the population are responsible. There is the odd psychopath or sociopath that commits horrendous crimes.

Some day it will cause problems. If there is ever real austerity measures then there will be rioting, and violence will follow. Americans are not used to scarcity of resources or money any more.

To me it seems a big contradiction that some defenders of gun ownership claim to be good Christians. They seem to think that it is OK to hold a gun with one hand and a Bible with the other hand. Sarah Palin comes to mind, with the Christian rethoric and the NRA suppor It is a contradiction because Jesus never carried any weapons. He never condoned the use or possession of weapons. But then we as human beings are very good at contradicting ourselves.

I know it is stupid to suggest that children should learn gun use in schools. I say it because if we keep saying that learning to use guns will make children defenders of freedom in the future, then it would make perfect sense to formalize that training. Nobody would like to see that in schools and we somehow assume it is OK to do it at home. We assume all parents who own guns are equipped to teach their children properly.

In a perfect world there would be no guns, no violence, no crime, no wars, etc. We use the imperfect nature of the world to condone our own violence and to toss aside our most cherished values. It is why the contradiction between Christian values and gun use arises.

Eventually something will have to give because all those guns will become a problem if scarcity of resources or austerity measures put pressure on our social structure. We see signs of this in the rioting in Greece, Paris, London, the old LA riots, etc. The we will see our police moving in with lethal force against rioters armed to the teeth. It is a scary thought.

Is Bill O'Reilly and Fox that stupid... or is it they think their audience is?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKH5rLVhxK4&

...Can you spot how many times O'Reilly is busted on lying?

(V): The Young Turks??? If you went any further left you'd fall off the cliff!!!

Artful Dodger: What has that got to do with the price of chips? Bill lied and the Fox news channel lied... end of. It's documented.

.. The only other option is that the Fox news researchers couldn't research themselves out of a wet paper bag. Which makes them incompetent...... but I think it was Fox news just trying to lie and relying on it's watchers having a goldfish style memory.

Übergeek 바둑이: It depends on your point of view. In the would be thief or rapists "perfect world", he shouldn't expect to find himself staring down the barrel of a gun and being invited to re-examine his evaluation of my values somewhere else.

Whose 'perfect world' are you promoting here?

(V): Oh rubbish. There was nothing there. What a joke. All I saw was a dishonest man twisting things as the Turk guy does all day long. How about you articulate exactly what this "lie" is supposed to be. You know, in your own words.

replaced by Al Sharpton!!!

(V): Priceless, Cenk Uygur calls Brietbart a liar

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ris7kWRonW8

opps

Yeah Jules, that guy is SOOOOOOOoooOOooOoOoooooo credible. NOT!

Übergeek 바둑이: The so called contradiction between Christian values and gun use exists primarily in your own mind. During his ministry Jesus only had the clothes on his back. Are you suggesting all Christians give up everything but the clothes on their backs?

And can you show me where he exorted his followers to 'lay down thy staff and thy rod'? Those were the common weapons of choice in those days, for defense against wild animals and people who would attack them. You over simplify Christian values and beliefs, either intentionally or because of ignorance. I doubt you would claim ignorance, so should I assume it's intentional?

Iamon lyme: Have you ever listened to Cenk Uygur? He actually makes sense when he supports conservative ideas. But when he leans left, he falls on his fat face!

Artful Dodger: I don't know the name, is he on radio or tv? Or both?

Maybe he should stick to conservatism and leave the left leaning to someone else.. I was never a good liberal myself, I asked too many questions. I think I became a full fledged conservative shortly before my thirtieth birthday.

Iamon lyme: If one asks the right questions, they wouldn't be able to remain a liberal. But they don't ask those questions and they march only to one beat. They are like lemmings. (apologies to lemmings).

Artful Dodger: Well that's the problem, because asking the 'wrong' questions is what got me into trouble. I found myself on the outside looking in when I thought I was already in. I became less defensive when it became obvious the people who said question everything didn't mean that I could question them. My choice was to either change affiliations or shut up and not say anything.. heh heh heh heh heh heh

It was a tough decision to make.. NOT!

Iamon lyme: I was a die hard lib in my 20's. By the time I was thirty, I matured and whatdoyaknow? I saw through the lies. I was an asst VP in the CWA and that really opened my eyes.

Artful Dodger: The lie was plain and simply put in the link. Fox news were telling people that they would go to jail if they didn't take out health insurance...

.... it was very clearly stated in the video

And then Bill O'Reilly stated he and Fox news have never said such a thing.

...yet many video clips were collected showing that on Fox news it was said. Including one that shows Bill and Glenn together with Glenn saying it.

...On a stack of Bibles are you going to state that no such thing was present in the video? That would take "a dishonest man twisting things".

(V): I remember that "controversy" well and it didn't happen that way. Clever editing by the Turk tho.

Under the health care bill being considered in the Senate Finance Committee, Americans who fail to pay a penalty for not buying insurance could be charged up to $25,000 by the Internal Revenue Service or face up to a year in jail, according to congressional analysts.

That's just one of the concerns Republicans say the Democratic-run Congress is ignoring in the rush to pass legislation to overhaul the nation's health care system.

"The American people expect us to get this right and to do it in an open, honest and bipartisan debate. That's what they deserve," said Sen. Johnny Isakson, R-Ga., in his party's radio and Internet address Saturday. "But that's not what they're getting from the Democrats on Capitol Hill."


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/26/baucus-mandate-penalty-lead-prison-congressional-analysts-say/


http://swampland.time.com/2010/04/14/jail-time-for-insurance-evaders-yes-said-fox-news/


so explain why fox news stated people will go to jail. Or I'll treat your denial as utter rubbish. Is that to hard for you?

(V): So was Cenk Uygur lying when he called Brietbart a liar?

BTW, that's very OLD news and clearly you cherry picked that one just for me.

Unlike you, I watch Fox and get the full context of what's being said. Uygur is so slanted left he loves to take things out of context if he can make Fox look bad (even to the point of lying - which he does all the time).

Nice try tho Jules!

Artful Dodger: Nope... it just came up on my youtube recommendations.

No answer from you.. as usual.

"he loves to take things out of context"

As much as Fox news?

EOS!!

(V): We all know how you love Fox. Like the last time your brought this very subject up.

Iamon lyme:

> The so called contradiction between Christian values and gun use exists primarily in your own mind. During his ministry Jesus only had the clothes on his back. Are you suggesting all Christians give up everything but the clothes on their backs?

I suppose the Sermon on the Mount says nothing about being violent. I am sure Jesus walked around with a sword under his cloak. I suppose giving up a gun is the same as walking around destitute. Jesus never said to give up everything. He simply said to give up violence and selfishness. I suppose that part of his message escapes a lot of people.


> And can you show me where he exorted his followers to 'lay down thy staff and thy rod'? Those were the common weapons of choice in those days, for defense against wild animals and people who would attack them.

From Luke 6:27-31

27 “But to you who are listening I say: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28 bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. 29 If someone slaps you on one cheek, turn to them the other also. If someone takes your coat, do not withhold your shirt from them. 30 Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. 31 Do to others as you would have them do to you.

And when the Romans came to arrest Jesus, did he pick a sword and fight his way out of the jam or did he surrender to avoid killing?

There is a very good reason why Jesus carried no weapons. He did not believe in them. So my question is simplke: Should a Christian, somebody who claims to follow the example of Jesus, carry or own weapons?


> You over simplify Christian values and beliefs, either intentionally or because of ignorance. I doubt you would claim ignorance, so should I assume it's intentional?

Well then, show me an example in which Jesus says it is OK to own, use or carry weapons? Then explain how the use or ownership of weapons relates to Christian values. I am ignorant and in need of enlightenment.

Artful Dodger: Never brought up Healthcare and prisons as stated by Fox that I can see. IMHO .... it's all in your imagination.

Übergeek 바둑이: From what I remember when one of Christ's disciples cut off an ear with a sword he healed it...

The use of violence is totally against the teachings of Jesus.

This fear of Muslims is also against what Christ said...

"And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." (Matthew 10:28 KJV)

(V): Totally against the teaching of Jesus?

Personally, I do not subscribe to any organized religion, and see the Bible as nothing more than a book.

I looked around and found a few cases that seem to contradict your "Totally" comment. But again, one of the main faults of the "Bible" is that anyone can search for any quote that seems to support whatever thing they want to proclaim as the word of "God".

How about Luke 23:36?

And he [Jesus] said to them [His disciples], ‘But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along, likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one. For I tell you that this which is written must be fulfilled in Me, ‘And he was numbered with transgressors’; for that which refers to Me has its fulfillment.’ They said, ‘Lord, look, here are two swords.’ And He said to them, ‘It is enough.

That doesn't sound "Totally" to me.

I also read something about him creating a whip and whipping people. Of course you'll have to pardon my lack of the exact quote. Sure, it may have been "figurative", but it cracks me up that people pick and choose what parts are "figurative" and which parts are "literal"

Personally, it's all Hooey.

rod03801: Aye... He did, but that was so prophecy (Isaiah 53:9-12) could be fulfilled. 11 disciples and two swords were not exactly a challenge to those who were arresting him.

Taking things out of context don't work.

As to "what parts are "figurative" and which parts are "literal""

All at the same time and more...

as for the whip. He chased them with it is all I see, he drove the money changers out of the temple. Something that needs doing today seeing all those wearing bling that are paid for by donations to help fight the DeViL!!

Personally it's good to question, without that we'd still be ruled by the RCC.

Übergeek 바둑이: You are missing the point. Jesus recognised the reality of living "in the world." Paul talked about having to deal with wild animals and bandits, how far do you think he would have gotten if he didn't believe in defending himself?

Where do you see me promoting needless violence against anyone? If I manage to deter someones intended violence against me or my family, then I have successfully stopped violence from happening.

Where do you see virtue in allowing yourself to be a victim when that doesn't need to happen? Are you seriously suggesting I should allow someone to harm someone in my family when it's in my power to stop it? You seem intent on telling Christians what they should or should not do. What would you do if someone threatened to rape and or kill your wife and children? What makes you believe Christians should not protect themselves and the ones they love when it's obvious you would if it was in your power? Or perhaps this is not so obvious. What would you do?

Übergeek 바둑이: It's not my job to make you want enlightenment. And if you are really all that concerned about 'contradictions', then why am I being tutored in moral principles by someone whose own sense of morality is derived by eons of evolutionary development.. ???

According to you, the law of tooth and fang should not apply to me. If your own world view is correct, then why wouldn't the same evolutionary principles apply to me as well?

And please stop pretending you know anything about what I believe, you would have more luck if you pretended to be a Christian preacher..

Strike that last thought. We have enough phonies pretending to be just that. We don't need any more fakers trying to pull the wool over our eyes.

Iamon lyme:

> then why am I being tutored in moral principles by someone whose own sense of morality is derived by eons of evolutionary development.. ???

?? What does evolution have to do with any of this?

> We have enough phonies pretending to be just that. We don't need any more fakers trying to pull the wool over our eyes.

Sure I am a phony and a fake. You still haven't proved that there is no contradiction between possessing weapons and Christian ethics. Find me a Bilbical quote, or a sensible argument. Calling me names proves not your point, but your inability to make intelligent arguments.

Iamon lyme:

> You are missing the point. Jesus recognised the reality of living "in the world." Paul talked about having to deal with wild animals and bandits, how far do you think he would have gotten if he didn't believe in defending himself?

The answer is that Jesus set an example that few human beings can live up to. Jesus could have defended himself physically. He could have grabbed a sword, ask his disciples to arm themselves to the teeth, and then fought against the Romans who came to arrest him. Why would Jesus do that? He could have called on angels to come to his aid. He could have put the Romans and the Pharisees to the angel's sword. Why would Jesus not even be remotely tempted by a violent solution to his unjust incarceration and execution? The answer is that Jesus was giving us all a lesson. Violence among human beings is pointless. It is nothing but a sin in the eyes of God.

Of course, we are not enlightened like that. We make excuses for ourselves. We own weapons for "sport" and "entertainment". We say to ourselves that the guns are there to defend ourselves and our families. We justify ownership of weapons on legal grounds such as the Constitution. But deep inside (and this is where God looks) we know that something is wrong. We want peace, and it comes out of the barrel of a gun. So we contradict ourselves.

rod03801:

> How about Luke 23:36?

To correct the post, it is Luke 22:36. You quoted it out of context. However, this is the great lesson that Jesus taught to us all, and the one that Christians too often forget.

The passage occurs right during the Last Supper. Jesus has finished the Last Supper with the disciples, and he beings to make his predictions:

34 Jesus answered, “I tell you, Peter, before the rooster crows today, you will deny three times that you know me.”

35 Then Jesus asked them, “When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?”

“Nothing,” they answered.

36 He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. 37 It is written: ‘And he was numbered with the transgressors’[b]; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment.”

38 The disciples said, “See, Lord, here are two swords.”

“That’s enough!” he replied.

On the surface, it seems that Jesus has just ordered the disciples to buy swords. They come up with two.

Later in the passage, the mob comes to arrest Jesus:

47 While he was still speaking a crowd came up, and the man who was called Judas, one of the Twelve, was leading them. He approached Jesus to kiss him, 48 but Jesus asked him, “Judas, are you betraying the Son of Man with a kiss?”
49 When Jesus’ followers saw what was going to happen, they said, “Lord, should we strike with our swords?” 50 And one of them struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his right ear.

51 But Jesus answered, “No more of this!” And he touched the man’s ear and healed him.

52 Then Jesus said to the chief priests, the officers of the temple guard, and the elders, who had come for him, “Am I leading a rebellion, that you have come with swords and clubs? 53 Every day I was with you in the temple courts, and you did not lay a hand on me. But this is your hour—when darkness reigns.”


And therein lies the lesson. Jesus could have told the disciples to strike and kill as many as necessary to escape. Instead he stops them and performs a miracle. He heals the man's ear and surrenders peacefully to the mob.

Hardly an exhortation to violence. Rather, a lesson in peace and self-sacrifice.

Unfortunately, humanity is not enlightened like that.

Übergeek 바둑이:
Ever heard of typos?

And yes, most stuff out of that book is quoted out of context. It makes my point in a weird way, that anything in that book can be used for whatever someone wants it to be used for.

I personally couldn't care less if it's Christian or not Christian to own a gun. It's a constitutional right, and I stand behind it. I have TON more respect for THAT document, than the Bible.

Weiner's NY District elects Republican Turner in special election (updated)
Thomas Lifson

It is time for Democrats across the United States to panic, as a Congressional district that has not elected a Republican in almost 90 years handed an easy victory to the GOP candidate. The victor Bob Turner cast his effort as a referendum on President Obama, a chance to send a message to Washington. As the Washington Post put it, "President Obama suffered a sharp rebuke Tuesday when voters in New York elected a conservative Republican to represent a Democratic district that has not been in GOP hands since the 1920.

Übergeek 바둑이: ???

I wasn't calling you a phonie or a fake. If you are a 'Christian' preacher, then you would be. Are you?

It takes two to carry on an intelligent conversation. I've done my part, so I'll just have to wait for you to stop repeating yourself and actually address what I've said.

Übergeek 바둑이: "?? What does evolution have to do with any of this?"

It has to do with your own particular world view, and how perceptions are filtered through that view.

I've taken a leap of faith by assuming two things:
1. You don't believe in God, or if you do you don't believe he created life on earth
2. You believe we are all here because of evolution

If my assumptions are correct, and I admit they are only assumptions, then you are free to show me how you do not contradict yourself.

Übergeek 바둑이: Okay, I can see now why you might not understand my point. My bad.

If your own sense of morality doesn't come from God, it would have to come from something else. If there is no God and everything we have is owed to evolution, then it follows that whatever sense of morality we have would have neccessarily been derived from eons of evolutionary development.

I've sudied evolution, so I know what the forces are that enable simple organisms to change into increasingly complex ones, the primary one being whatever change that brings about an advantage to survival.

Morality does not play any part in this, as it implies a higher responsibily to a creator who, in the mind of the evolutionist, either does not exist or only exists in some far away place, and does not intervene in our affairs.

This is already getting too long, so I'll stop here and ask you why it even matters what people do or don't do, since survival of the fittest has nothing to do with right or wrong. The concept of right and wrong are MORAL precepts. Not evolutionary precepts. According to evolution, there is no such thing as right and wrong, only what works for you and what doesn't.

The condratiction in your argument, which I admit is based on an assumption of your own particular world view, is evident in how your own sense of morality finds it wrong that anyone should own a weapon for ANY reason.

If I'm wrong about what you believe (about God or about evolution) then I appologize for assuming too much. Of course, then you WOULD be a phonie and a fake for suggesting you actually care one way or the other about Christian principles.

I'm sure you will suggest that neither is right, and that there is some middle ground here.. can't wait to hear it.