Skip to main content

DOE moving away from for-profit lab management.

Image
By scooby
DOE has stated that they want to from from a for-profit model to a service model. The for profit model has failed at both labs. I you increase the fee you do not attract the best and brightest but the greediest and most corrupt. You also change the reason why someone would even want to manage the lab, is for money or the service to the nation. If it is for the money than how does that end, the manager will just see the lab as a way to make money and could care less about the country, it will act to maximize whatever money it can because it is managing the lab for money. If they could make big money selling the secrets to anyone who could pay and they if they could get away with it than of course they will do it, they want the money and that is why the want to mange the lab. The whole idea of a for-profit corrupts the whole culture and attracts exactly the wrong sort or characters. Norther New Mexico politicians only want the money and as much more as they can get and that is the only reason they want it to stay for profit at a high fee. I urge DOE to stand firm, the role of LANL is not to give money to Northern New Mexico, LANL serves the entire nation so do not endanger the entire nation just so some local politicians can get more money.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Who has sold more secrets in the past, people who happen to work for for-profit contractors or ideological nuts (like Socialists)?

This should not be a top-level post.
8/19/2017 5:45 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Plutonium Shots on NIF.

By scooby
Tri-Valley Cares needs to be on this if they aren't already. We need to make sure that NNSA and LLNL does not make good on promises to pursue such stupid ideas as doing Plutonium experiments on NIF. The stupidity arises from the fact that a huge population is placed at risk in the short and long term. Why do this kind of experiment in a heavily populated area? Only a moron would push that kind of imbecile area. Do it somewhere else in the god forsaken hills of Los Alamos. Why should the communities in the Bay Area be subjected to such increased risk just because the lab's NIF has failed twice and is trying the Hail Mary pass of doing an SNM experiment just to justify their existence? Those Laser EoS techniques and the people analyzing the raw data are all just BAD anyways. You know what comes next after they do the experiment. They'll figure out that they need larger samples. More risk for the local population. Stop this imbecilic pursuit. They wan...
155 comments
Read more

Trump is to gut the labs.

By scooby
The budget has a 20% decrease to DOE office of science, 20% cut to NIH. NASA also gets a cut. This will  have a huge negative effect on the lab. Crazy, juts crazy. He also wants to cut NEA and PBS, this may not seem like  a big deal but they get very little money and do great things.
124 comments
Read more

tcp1 looking good

By scooby
I just received my annual TCP-1 letter from LLNS and a summary of the LLNS Pension Plan. Looked in pretty good shape in 2013. About 35% overfunded (funding target attainment percentage = 134.92%). This was a decrease from 2012 where it was 51% overfunded (funding target attainment percentage = 151.59%). They did note that the 2012 change in the law on how liabilities are calculated using interest rates improved the plan's position. Without the change the funding target attainment percentages would have been 118% (2012) and 105% (2013). 2013 assets = $2,057,866,902 2013 liabilities = $1,525,162,784 vs 2012 assets = $1,844,924,947 2012 liabilities = $1,217,043,150 It was also noted that a slightly different calculation method ("fair market value") designed to show a clearer picture of the plan' status as December 31, 2013 had; Assets = $2,403,098,433 Liabilities = $2,068,984,256 Funding ratio = 116.15% Its a closed plan with 3,781 participants. Of that number, 3,151 wer...
105 comments
Read more