Please see the following post:

http://www.totse.com/community/showpost.php?p=10663728&postcount=17

Does anyone have any evidence or even more information on Blackwater that would support this idea? It just seems weird that we have a private organization that we are hiring to do work for us for apparently more money than regular infantry/MP's make , especially when the Blackwater crew's training comes primarily from our own military! We're pretty much just paying for the name Blackwater if you think about it!

From wiki:
The Center for Public Integrity reported that since 1994, the Defense Department entered into 3,601 contracts worth $300 billion with 12 U.S. based PMCs. Some view this as an inevitable cost cutting measure and responsible privatization of critical aspects of a military. However, many feel this is a troubling trend, since these private companies are not directly accountable to a legislative body and may cost more than providing the same functions within the military. Seventeen of the nation's leading private military firms have contributed $12.4 million in congressional and presidential campaigns since 1999.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_military_company#List_of_PMCs

Maybe the US is just fucking dumb?

Nevermind.

The US is just fucking dumb.

I think privately run companies will always be more efficient and effective than a government run one.

To Elaborate:

A. Profit-motivated. Who will be more motivated for profits? A CEO who actually gets the profits, and can see the global overview of his company's books and actions, or a government worker on a fixed income who has to slash through heaps of bureaucracy to even try and get an action approved?

B. Again, bureaucracy comes into play. Thanks to Democracy, decades of a skungy residue has been allowed to build up on the cogs of our government systems. You get new pointless procedures, people to deal with these new pointless procedures, people to make sure these new people doing pointless procedures are doing their pointless procedures, and conduct pointless procedures to confirm the pointless procedures are in fact in action. Inefficiency.

C. Risks. A CEO is probably more likely to take a risk than a government office. The risks could be financial, regarding public relations, etc. A CEO of a corporation has much more inaccessibility and doesn't have to comply with the same extent of government protocols. Media cooperation and public image, for example. They also have much more leeway for financial risks. A corporation can triple it's profits on something by taking a few risks. Conversely, a government office is more likely to do things 'by the book', and not go out on a limb.

As far as bottom-line numbers are concerned, it's probably cheaper in the long run to employ Blackwater.

PMC;

Basically mercenaries.

They are more flexible, can use more force, and generally do the job right