>Nukes are cheap. The great cost in the military
>budget is non-nuclear procurement and labor. By
>making nukes less feasible, JFK could have had
>the effect of raising the budget, not lowering it.
Yer thinking too much like a macroeconomist here, MBS. On the absolute dollar cost of the military budget, you may be right. But nobody's going to get rich selling uniforms and soup cans to the Army -- too low margin. If you're in the "military industrial complex" game, you're in it to build big-ticket, high-margin, non-commoditised miilitary capital goods. Which at the time, meant nukes.
I have no horse in this race, having vowed never to see another film with Kevin Costner in it fairly early on in his career.
>It was either that or "cancer man."
This one went over my head -- Americanism, I assume?
dd
___________________________________________________________________________
_____
---------------------------------------------------------
This email is confidential to the ordinary user of the
e-mail address to which it was addressed. If you are not
the intended recipient, please notify the sender
immediately on (44) 171 638 5858 and delete the message
from all locations in your computer. You should not copy
this email or use it for any purpose, or disclose its
contents to any person : to do so may be unlawful.
Email is an informal method of communication and is
subject to possible data corruption, either accidentally
or on purpose. Flemings is unable to exercise control
over the content of information contained in
transmissions made via the Internet. For these reasons
it will normally be inappropriate to rely on information
contained on email without obtaining written confirmation
of it.
----------------------------------------------------------