Yes, yes it is. If someone offers you exorbitant compensation from public funds and imposes no consequences for failure to deliver, it is unethical to persist once you realize what's going on since you're basically stealing from the public. Both sides of the deal are in the wrong. If the donor were a private entity, then there's no problem.

Isn't it unethical to accept way too much public money over a decade and produce no tangible results, regardless of how stupid or corrupt anyone else might be?

If the government had done it, it would have cost even more. I am sure the free market will punish these consultants accordingly.

Companies which submit false information will be driven out of business by the natural splendor of the free market.

I've been posting lots of melodramatic stuff online about Obama being a usurper and how he's going to throw conservatives in gulags, but now I see how good I've actually got it. Wow.

It's your smugness that's offensive, not your stupid beliefs. Get over yourself.

So when you pay taxes for police to protect other people's property, that's slavery. When you pay taxes and we build roads so you can conduct commerce, that's slavery. I think you can think of a few more examples. Maybe you can go to the library and do some research. Oh, the library is slavery too.

Smug fucker aren't we? Eat shit much?

An American accusing a European of being trash and having no culture. Cute.

As in "I wish there were fewer illiterate retards on Slashdot."

Lotta people seem to be having trouble reading my post. Here is the key term: default behavior.

At least we agree that without the ability to put criminals and terrorists to death, the state can never provide justice to its shareholders.

What if I was talking about the default behavior and even opened my post with that term? Hmmmmmmmmmmm