The U.S. has opportunities to innovate and sell off its older equipment as new technology becomes available for military enhancement and defense. Economic development and military development can work together through shared technology lines. The war in Ukraine has taught us that value of high technology and mobility on the ground and that requires equipment that is much more mobile and effective than our enemies.
When such new equipment is matched with good old fashion small nation warfare the combination could be very effective as we have seen in Ukraine. There has been some strategic changes in the U.S. by focusing on developing troops to be more mobile with versatile systems that can form up anywhere they are needed quickly. That all comes from research, training and cutting edge equipment development.
This is what I suggest based on my understand. The U.S. develop defensive equipment for our troops and to sell/lease to other nations when needed/beneficial. That will develop a defensive industry and proceeds can be used in clusters to continue to develop our own offensive and defensive equipment. Defensive equipment is always in need and can be a deterrent for cross nation aggression.
To keep feeding industry innovation (i.e. outdoor equipment, new metals, space tech., wearable industrial tech, education, pooled research, etc.), military development (Great Lakes ships building, new weaponry, etc.) and infrastructure (ports, rails, semiconductors, etc. i.e. Delta County transactional cluster prototype model) we can spur butterfly innovations in industries through new developments/research that impacts other products (keeping our economy strong through non military products) as well as infrastructure (improving the underpinnings of the economy that reduce transaction costs.)
If manufacturing improvements and military development earn more revenue some of that money can go back and feed the cluster to spur new research and development. Excess revenue can be used for other budgeting purposes such as DOD, infrastructure, education, healthcare, or whatever. Maybe even a large investment fund like a national endowment could be considered for excess revenue earned from new products (military and non-military products/services).
To me the latest and greatest should always be kept in house and proprietary to the U.S. until it no longer has major advantages. Defensive weapons can be more liberally sold because they have passive and peaceful purposes.
These are just a couple of ideas that aren't completely thought out but I would think in terms of creating sustainable systems that grow and reduce our dependency on debt and taxes.
No comments:
Post a Comment