We are experiencing the same
effect that killed the Soviet Union, as military spending crowded out
domestic. In our case, though, it is not
a technologically superior foreign enemy driving the excess, but simply the
need for quarter-over-quarter increases in profit for the military-industrial
complex.
The advantages provided by the
F-35 could have been gained with a much lower investment, but for a number of
factors. The arcane rules that require
different specifications for the various service branches added incredible
complexity and cost to place on a single platform. Obviously the revolving door between the
senior ranks of the military and the executive ranks of the contractors who
serve them provide a powerful disincentive to those who would do anything to
risk profitability. Combine these with
the Keynesian benefits to a local economy of the engine provided by a sealed
military contract—and the strategic way in which savvy military contractors
target the Congressional districts in which they locate development and
production—and you have an irresistible recipe for an intentionally expensive
military budget.
Once built, these weapons can’t
just sit in warehouses and hangars, so—as with the boy and his new hammer, to
whom everything looks like a nail—we seem to find ourselves irresistibly drawn
into a steady stream of conflicts.
No comments:
Post a Comment