The attached was on my desk today. A quick glance on my part suggests it is worth reading. It may also suggest resources for
further analytical work.
That report ought, in the main, to be unclassified. May I get a sanitized copy here?
Defense procurement is so important to the national economy that I am not sure that reducing dollar cost to the DoD on a given
item ought to be the sole aim. Else we're sure to pay again for bailouts (Rolls Royce, Lockheed, Chrysler) or, if not,
in other social costs.
[END PAGE ONE]
[BEGIN PAGE TWO]
Would there be some merit in calling a workshop of leading economists to work over the macroeconomies of defense procurement
policy? Ask John Sawhill or Charlie Hitch to take a look?
My own view is that we design and pay for systems supposed to last forever; and the environment changes more quickly. Lowest
unit cost may end up depriving us of the particular unit we most urgently need at a given time.