Date: 06 Jan 97 01:41:45 From: jfmezei <firstname.lastname@example.org> Organization: SPC References: 1 2 3 4 5
View raw article or MIME structure
John Clear wrote: > As usual, you dont see the differances in scale. A $3.5billion subsidy > for the A330/A340 development (mentioned in an earlier post in this > thread), plus whatever amounts they received earlier, is ALOT more then a > couple of $100mil grants. The european governments provided REPAYABLE loans for the RESEARCH portion of the various aircrafts, up to the A321 which was entirely funded internally (well, since it is a derivative of the 320, the costs are much less!). check out http://www.airbus.com , they have a whole section on this very question. What you should count as a subsidy is not the loan amount, but any difference in debt repayment interests. > As usual, you conviently forget that all the Airbus partners have some > degree of military/space/other civilian contracts, so saying only US > companies have that benefit is just plain not true. It would be interesting to compare the differences in scale of the US military industry, or to be fair, the USA government military/space spending, and that of their european counterparts. If the USA insists on bragging about having the world's biggest and strongest army/navy, it should also accept that it also is the one spending the most on such activities.