Hey, I agree with almost everything in that. About the *only* quibble I have is something they left out - and I don't think it's their fault. From what I can see, at least in the 'office jobs', the government is far more cost-efficient per employee than contractors in the military. But, then, we've all heard the examples of what 'private security consultants' get versus our soldiers for the same jobs in hot zones - both paid for with tax dollars - so I wouldn't be a bit surprised if this was something that was all throughout the military.