3 ms·

As a European, I view this as preserving our strategic independence and wish we'd do more in more domains.

by rtsil 2y ago

s1artibartfast 2y ago
That's more or less what I suspected. I think it is fascinating to see the cultural differences on these topics. In the US, both parties of voters are extremely critical of such partnerships, claiming either corruption or waste. Why do you think this is? Are the EU voters less price critical to spending? Are they simply more trusting?
- pie420 2y ago
  what are you talking about? this is happening all the time in the US with Spacex+USGOV, Boeing+USGOV, etc.
  - s1artibartfast 2y ago
    The US government often takes the role of purchasing services and contracts, whereas the EU seems to favor more direct funding of corporate projects, like the one this article mentions, or the Airbus 380. That said, I was talking about the sentiment around these activities, where much of the US is fairly hostile to the idea.
    - panick21_ 2y ago
      The EU needs to directly fund these project because otherwise they just don't happen. When the US produces many of these things just happen. Starlink basically just fell from the clear blue sky into DoD lap. Leapfroging their own plans by about 4 generations. This is because the US has more dynamic companies, a bigger internal market, that can access far greater level of funding, all the way from startup to grand investments. > where much of the US is fairly hostile to the idea. I'm not sure this is universally true. When it comes to military its the opposite. The US has broad support for the militarily, and in the military budget financed projects like GPS, like F22, F35 and so on. The Us military right now is planning multiple constellations in addition to extending Starshield. In the US many of these things just happen out of the public view, internal to the govenrment. When in the EU this is all negotiated as part of bilateral agreements that are far more public.
- rtsil 2y ago
  I think it's related to our respective view of the State. As a French, I expect the State to do things for me and despite the State's too many failings, I have far more trust in the State than in corporations, so a States-led project in a strategic domain is a good thing. I don't wish the government (in its American meaning) to do less, I wish it to do better. It seems most people in the US view the State as a necessary evil and the worst entity to entrust their taxes with. Of course, things are more complicated and nuanced, but that's my bird's eye view.
  - s1artibartfast 2y ago
    It sounds like a big part of it is that despite the state handing huge sums of money to corporations, their is a belief in appropriate oversight.

As a European, I view this as preserving our strategic independence and wish we'd do more in more domains.

by rtsil 2y ago

As a European, I view this as preserving our strategic independence and wish we'd do more in more domains.

That's more or less what I suspected. I think it is fascinating to see the cultural differences on these topics. In the US, both parties of voters are extremely critical of such partnerships, claiming either corruption or waste. Why do you think this is? Are the EU voters less price critical to spending? Are they simply more trusting?

pie420 2y ago
what are you talking about? this is happening all the time in the US with Spacex+USGOV, Boeing+USGOV, etc.
- s1artibartfast 2y ago
  The US government often takes the role of purchasing services and contracts, whereas the EU seems to favor more direct funding of corporate projects, like the one this article mentions, or the Airbus 380. That said, I was talking about the sentiment around these activities, where much of the US is fairly hostile to the idea.
  - panick21_ 2y ago
    The EU needs to directly fund these project because otherwise they just don't happen. When the US produces many of these things just happen. Starlink basically just fell from the clear blue sky into DoD lap. Leapfroging their own plans by about 4 generations. This is because the US has more dynamic companies, a bigger internal market, that can access far greater level of funding, all the way from startup to grand investments. > where much of the US is fairly hostile to the idea. I'm not sure this is universally true. When it comes to military its the opposite. The US has broad support for the militarily, and in the military budget financed projects like GPS, like F22, F35 and so on. The Us military right now is planning multiple constellations in addition to extending Starshield. In the US many of these things just happen out of the public view, internal to the govenrment. When in the EU this is all negotiated as part of bilateral agreements that are far more public.
rtsil 2y ago
I think it's related to our respective view of the State. As a French, I expect the State to do things for me and despite the State's too many failings, I have far more trust in the State than in corporations, so a States-led project in a strategic domain is a good thing. I don't wish the government (in its American meaning) to do less, I wish it to do better. It seems most people in the US view the State as a necessary evil and the worst entity to entrust their taxes with. Of course, things are more complicated and nuanced, but that's my bird's eye view.
- s1artibartfast 2y ago
  It sounds like a big part of it is that despite the state handing huge sums of money to corporations, their is a belief in appropriate oversight.