> On Tue, 26 Jun 2001, Chad Cooper wrote:
>
> > There are tremendous benefits that are gained in the
> private sector from
> > defense spending. I think someone already mentioned the
> technology related
> > to laser weapons. Laser weapons need a tremendous amount of
> power real fast.
> > This has spurned flywheel technology, more efficient
> lasers, probably a
> > number of other technologies I am unaware of. All of these
> we will all
> > benefit from.
>
> I don't disagree that defense research has been a catalyst for other
> useful technological & scientific developments. But those
> side benefits
> are the natural benefits of research as such, not of
> weapons-building as
> such. If we pump billions and billions into research we're going to
> discover lots of stuff.
I agree with this, and I would think that any accountant would agree as
well. However, for some reason, money is not spent this way. In an ideal
world, it would, but it is not. I suspect that there is a fundamental
cultural, or biological bias to spending money on defense over spending the
same money on quality of life improvements.
>
> The disadvantage of defense spending is that missiles and bullets and
> guns, (Oh my!) cannot be used in turn to make other things.
> They are not
> capital investments the way a Chevrolet factory is a capital
> investment.
>
> > How many of these innovations help the environment? How
> many of these save
> > lives? In my mind, you get two for one with defense
> spending. World Wars
> > must never happen again. Defense spending gets us closer to
> this goal.
>
> ?? I think that last point is very arguable, but it's an
> argument about
> human nature. Still, if you did the research and then built factories
> instead of bombs, you'd get a three-for-one return, if I follow your
> reasoning. :-)
Yes, and any accountant would agree with you... however there is that pesky
"People" issue that seems to get in the way of progressive ideals.
As I always say here at work, if I could just cut out the "people" part out
of my job , these computers would run just perfectly.
>
> > So the position that a missile defense system cannot be
> used in turn to
> > build or create anything would be unprecedented in history.
>
> No, a simple fact. You can't hire people to work in a
> missile to make GPS
> locators, say. But you *can* hire a people to work in a
> factory to make
> GPS locators. Or you can pump the missile money into further research.
>
> The trick of course is to convince people that the benefits purely
> civilian research would outweigh the benefits of making the research
> dependent on feeding and supporting the arms industry.
Alas, you do understand the issue. Feeding and supporting the arms industry
is required to benefit purely civilian research.
Hey, I did not make it that way and I don't like it either. Perhaps a
condition to being Uplifted by alien benefactors is our ability to reverse
the 10,000 year old trend of defending the home first, over making the world
a better place.
Nerd From Hell
>
>
> Marvin Long
> Austin, Texas
>
> Nuke the straight capitalist wildebeests for Buddha!
>
>
