Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Probably a policy that directs funds, every year, to building ships and other critical things. Possibly to state owned construction conglomerates. Essentially what already happens with Boeing, Lockheed etc for military aircraft.


> Essentially what already happens with Boeing

You want to subsidize a failing company?

The deeper problem is that, while the war isn't happening, the war products are not critical. It doesn't matter whether they work or are delivered. Even the medium scale wars the US did maintain over the past couple of decades to keep the machine going showed that various areas were just fleecing them for inadequate products or regular grift (like the vanishing Afghan government). Much of the Pacific fleet's maintenance budget was being stolen by one guy named "Fat Leonard". This sort of thing doesn't go away until the war is actually critical rather than something you can escape by turning off the news.


Yes that's what "subsidize" means.

Fat Leaonard fleeced the Navy, but did provide services.


You're doing that either way by not having competitors to Boeing.


The US Navy builds a lot of ships and submarines in the US.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: