Sir Richard Branson's new submersible, dubbed the Necker Nymph, received widespread media attention. The sleek watercraft is made by Hawkes Ocean Technologies. Image source: Hawkes Ocean Technologies

I know it’s easy to call for innovation to drive economic growth at any point in history.

And the context of the times can always be sticky. If the United States was flush with venture capital or excess dollars in 2010, it would make the answers and next steps so much easier.

Of course, we are all familiar with the economic times.

The Economist, the august, market-oriented publication, recently reminded readers in the United States of words that always merit attention: Jobless recovery.

That said, innovation is continuing in this country – albeit not at the pace that many would like to see – as evidenced by Sir Richard Branson’s new, sleek submersible watercraft, the Necker Nymph.

Media outlets covered the news and talked about its maker, Hawkes Ocean Technologies, which also calls it the Deep Flight Merlin.

You can read about the craft’s technology and specifications on the company’s Web site.

Will expensive pieces of technology that only wealthy buyers can afford be enough to push through economic progress in the United States?

Of course not.

And other submersible designs from Hawkes Ocean Technologies are impressive.

The Wet Flight from Hawkes Ocean Technologies is a one-person submersible that is ideal for underwater filming. It launched in the late 1990s. Image source: Hawkes Ocean Technologies.

The Deep Flight II also was an idea from Hawkes Ocean Technologies. Image source: Hawkes Ocean Technologies

But are there are other uses for this technology – say by government, independent or academic researchers – that can be incorporated into other long-term projects?

Yes.

I say all of this because we’ve seen how technology, investments, willingness and capability have eroded barriers – in communications, for example – that now enable scores of more people to participate in the U.S. and global economy.

In many ways, that is good.

People can speak their voices easily and frequently on Facebook, Twitter and on blogs – even if you believe the latest Pew study that older people are sticking with this medium as compared to teens and young adults.

But with more people entering different markets because of technology, that only prompts people who are in various industries – say mainstream media – to push harder to find new paths to further market advantages.

If participants in the global marketplace can provide a service for less money and at reasonably good quality, say computer or x-ray analysis or accounting, then the incentive to hire someone in your own city to do the same job becomes, well, less.

We’ve seen this trend unfold in recent years.

That adage of maximizing profits has a nice ring to it – especially in corporate meetings or at business schools. But it can have a devastating impact if large amounts of capital pick up and leave one region for another – and those who lost that investment and money were unprepared.

As we know, people are willing to pay for and invest in market advantages.

So, the maker of Branson’s submersible might not be ready to enter the market to make these sleek, underwater planes affordable to most people in the United States. A mass market might not even be part of the company’s plan.

But by experimenting with design and concept, Hawkes Ocean Technologies is taking a calculated risk – as well as following a passion for the water – that might yield beneficial results in the long term.

The mainstream media, for instance, became caught in how online technologies eroded the traditional advertising base for the print model.

Late last year, super investor Warren Buffet, the Oracle of Omaha, invested a staggering $34 billion in the BNSF railroad.

That should send a signal to all of us that the movement of cross-country commerce and agricultural goods remains crucial.

On its Web site, BNSF boasts of the fuel-efficiency of moving cargo and other goods via freight train.

But here’s a question: Who is designing the next generation of fuel-efficient, environmentally-friendly long-distance train engines for the United States and the world?

Wallenius Wilhelmsen has toyed around with the design of the planet’s future cargo ship – one that would rely on solar and wind power, among other sources.

Hawkes Ocean Technologies is in the underwater market. Honda and Toyota (despite its recent safety problems with its cars) have entered the robotic world, as well as the experimental and personal vehicle markets.

Apple is pushing the technological curve out with its iPad.

I don’t have any knowledge of the inner workings of Microsoft. But I still believe that the technology giant has numerous brilliant, capable employees.

Its technology remains crucial to companies and ordinary people worldwide.

But a former Microsoft executive took the Redmond, Wash.-based company to task for something that can stop efficiency and progress at any company or institution – humans.

When I covered biotechnology in the Seattle area, I met many brilliant executives and researchers.

Certainly, they wanted to use their brilliance and insight to accomplish things, such as, say, extending a person’s life.

Yes, some projects – such as the Aerocar – never, well, successfully left the ground. But people have used human power to pedal across bodies of water and in indoor stadiums.

I stress that persistence is important – even when the U.S. economic outlook, at least in terms of full employment, is murky.

Why?

There are people around the world who also are tinkering, changing, making progress and getting ready to enter the market.

They’re hungry for success, just as you are.

It is easy to overlook that competition is the central tenet to a market economy.

Cooperation is ideal and needed in many arenas. But market advantage, especially in a comparative sense, is always lurking out there.

The next step, certainly, for innovators in the United States is to locate new capital, tap it and use it to the best of their ability to truly push the productivity curve so loved by so many economists to new levels.

Like I said at the beginning of this post: This is all easier said than done.

It’s worth a shot, though.

Keep in mind that famous Fleetwood Mac song, which is at the bottom of this post.