Weaponizing Wealth: The High Price of the F-47 Fighter Deal
The Pentagon’s recent decision to award Boeing a $50 billion contract to produce the next-generation F-47 fighter jet has stunned both defense analysts and the public—and rightly so. At a time when Americans are facing urgent needs at home, funneling tens of billions of dollars into yet another military aircraft program is a profound misstep.
This F-47 deal is not just a vote of confidence in Boeing—it’s a bailout for a corporation that has repeatedly failed to meet expectations, both in civilian aviation and defense. From safety scandals surrounding its 737 MAX jets to delays on military aircraft programs like the T-7 trainer and the new Air Force One, Boeing’s recent track record raises serious questions about its capacity to deliver on such a high-stakes contract.
Meanwhile, the costs of this decision ripple far beyond Boeing’s balance sheet. That $50 billion could instead fund climate resilience projects, green job creation, affordable housing, universal childcare, or life-saving healthcare programs. But instead, the Pentagon is choosing to subsidize weapons development with a “cost-plus” contract that guarantees Boeing profit—regardless of whether the company delivers on time or over budget.
Boeing has no recent experience producing stealth aircraft independently. It has not developed a successful new military jet in over a decade. The F-47 will require advanced stealth capabilities and integration with autonomous systems—technologies Boeing has little to no proven experience handling alone. Experts are right to be concerned. So should we all.
Even more troubling is the broader context: the F-47 is being marketed as part of a strategy to counter China militarily. This fuels a dangerous narrative of perpetual great power conflict and positions the U.S. economy—and public tax dollars—around preparation for war, rather than investment in peace and diplomacy. It deepens our nation’s role as the largest arms exporter in the world, making us complicit in fueling global militarization.
Peace Economy Project’s Perspective:
We believe military manufacturing should not define Missouri’s—or America’s—future. The $2 billion Boeing has already invested in expanding its St. Louis facilities for the F-47 could have gone toward building high-speed rail, developing clean energy infrastructure, or manufacturing life-saving medical technologies. Instead of anchoring our economy in the production of increasingly lethal weapons, we should be building a peace economy—one that meets human needs and prioritizes sustainable, equitable growth.
It’s time to question the assumptions behind military-industrial growth. The F-47 is not just a plane—it’s a symbol of misplaced priorities. When hospitals are underfunded, roads are crumbling, and families are struggling to make ends meet, we must ask: do we really need another warplane?
Missouri—and the nation—deserves better.
