From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Jean-Francois Mezei) Organization: DECUServe Date: 21 Mar 96 02:38:02 References: 1 2 3 Followups: 1 2
View raw article or MIME structure
In article <airliners.1996.329@ohare.Chicago.COM>, Ray Carini <email@example.com> writes: > Boeing used it's own money to develop and build the > Dash 80. Three weeks AFTER it's first flight, the > Air Force ordered 29 tanker versions designated as > the KC-135 It is a lot easier to go to your bankers and investors to ask for development money when the widget you are to develop will have military applications and you know that the military will need such a widget. So, while american companies may develop their products with private funds, I am sure that the potential military contracts are often big carrots that made the investors rush to invest. Notice the past tense in "made". If someone denies that companies that existed during the second world war, or duing some of the US wars (Vietnam, Korea or even Kuwait) did not receive nice plump gifts from the government (in the form of lucrative contracts to build missiles, maintain aircrafts etc) then the person will obviously deny that military spending is a form of subsidy. When the SCUD missile became a "star" in the Desert Storm war, why then did the stock of the company that makes it go up on Wall Street ? Because investors knew that a lot of SCUDS would be used in desert storm and that its high visibility might result in sales to other countries, hence more profits to the private company which result in higher dividends to the investors. In essence, the US government spent tax money which ended up partly to Wall Street investors.