[ExI] Transhumanism and Politics

[J. Andrew Rogers]

On Jan 26, 2008, at 6:08 PM, Stefano Vaj wrote:
> I do not know on what basis a comparison would be possible.  
> Consumers, or for that matter businesses, rarely purchases complex,  
> expensive weaponry anyway, so that governments are the *only*  
> customers in that market.


The governments have made themselves the sole customer by law -- not  
"governments" but "one government"; it used to be a much richer market  
with a great many more potential buyers that made investment in the  
sector by a small new competitor worthwhile.  Today, it is the US  
government or no one in many cases.  The US arms manufacturers used to  
sell around the world with relatively few restrictions, and competed  
for contracts with the US government for business; if they did not  
sell a weapon system to the government, they sold it overseas instead,  
and the competitive environment saved the US government money too.

The private sector may not buy weapon systems too often, but they  
certainly buy systems of comparable complexity.  A Boeing 747 makes  
the shiny new F-22 Raptor -- a state-of-the-art weapon system -- look  
inexpensive, and companies buy fleets of 747s.  The difference is that  
Boeing gets to amortize its costs and spread its risks across many  
different airlines and buyers.  The US government had to pay two  
contractors to produce competing prototypes to get an F-22 because it  
is not exportable, but Boeing invested in the development of the much  
pricier 747 on its own with no guarantee of a sale.


It is not so much that governments are the only organizations that  
commonly buy large weapon systems these days (though by no means the  
only ones), but that the rules and regulations have been set up such  
that you can frequently only sell to *one* government, and not in a  
marketplace of different governments and suppliers.  There is nothing  
novel about the situation, the government has regulated a once  
thriving free market until it has withered away to its current  
inefficient state.

J. Andrew Rogers