Demobilization : $b our industrial and military demobilization after the armistice, 1918-1920Crowell, Benedict
History
Demobilization : $b our industrial and military demobilization after the armistice, 1918-1920
Crowell, Benedict
United States. Army. American Expeditionary Forces -- Demobilization; World War, 1914-1918 -- United States
These purely manufacturing considerations were enough in themselves
to explain the prevalence of the cost-plus contracts. Another element
was the time required to prepare specifications and advertise for
bids--time not to be spared in war. But there was still another reason
to account for the cost-plus contract, a reason in war finance,
even more cogent. The successful prosecution of the war meant that
practically the entire industrial equipment of the United States would
have to be devoted to the production of war supplies. Before the war
only large concerns with great financial resources were able to put
through great government projects in which the delivery dates were
far removed from the dates of starting the work. A war contract often
involved a tremendous preliminary expenditure of money in factory
expansion and in commitments for raw materials. The Government’s
practice was to pay for supplies only upon their delivery. Under such
conditions the small manufacturer could not work for the Government. In
normal times, perhaps, the possession of a government contract might
have enabled him to finance his operation through the banks in the
usual way, but with every manufacturer needing special financing, the
effect upon the banks was to make them less liberal in their commercial
loans. The banks had their own solvency to look out for first.
The cost-plus contract proved to be one of the solutions of this
problem. Most of the cost-plus contracts provided that the War
Department could pay the manufacturing costs as they accrued, in
installments. Thus, by securing partial advance payments from the
Government, the small producers, and the large, too, were able to
finance their projects and even to take advantage of the cash discounts
in their purchases of raw materials. Naturally, the War Department was
careful to make such arrangements only with contractors of recognized
probity, men who were deserving of confidence, but who often lacked
working capital to enable them to become successful producers of war
supplies.[6]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account