The graph at p. 3:
UK Economic Decline 1961- 2005 Annual Growth compounded and rebased to 100. I am surprised that the council are using economies that on average [world] have a fraction of the GDP per Capita of UK - and then go on to compare normalised growth rates.
I perceive this as a manipulation for the purpose of instilling a sense of urgency and alarm.
The agenda:
"Another reason that the budget is under such strain is the political constraint to buy British or European whenever possible – or even when it is not possible, and a whole new manufacturing base must be created first. Purchasing existing equipment from America is always seen as the least favourable option. This virtually guarantees that the MoD must buy products which will only be made in small quantities, causing unit costs to skyrocket and enhancing the difference in budgets. As a rough rule of thumb, the British expenditure in any given area will be a tenth of America's; and the items purchased often have unit costs ten times higher owing to a lack ofcompetition and economies of scale. Furthermore, British and European investment in science and technology research is much lower than in America, so the resulting equipment is typically less capable despite having cost far more. It is not unusual to find that the British forces have capabilities two or even three orders of magnitude worse than the US.
Even with the current efforts to focus most British spending in Europe, the unwillingness of European governments to spend significant percentages of GDP on defence mean that the UK/European defence industry is hugely less capable than that of the USA. It cannot make large military aeroplanes or helicopters; it struggles to make small ones. Stealth technology is effectively unknown. The list goes on.
Some would like to believe that Europe could become a military-industrial power base to rival the US. This would not be true even if it were a single, cohesive state with strong military ambitions.
The current loose, quarrelsome alliance of nations who mostly prefer to spend their money on welfare will never achieve conventional capability even close to that of the US. It is highly questionable whether the world needs another superpower in any case. Extra money spent on expensive European weaponry is mostly wasted. The only real yield is well-paid jobs, but even these are short-lived and quite few compared to the funds required. Weapons procurements are not a sensible way of pursuing social benefit.52"
To paraphrase:
Buy American, shut down the UK armaments industry plus related R&T and for God's sake don't buy anything from the Continent - it's a welfare scheme all around.
Welcome to the forum, btw.
