|
Laranzu posted:It's not a dead end for Chevy dealerships and strippers. Junior enlisted paychecks go right back into the economy. yes the pay checks go back into the economy but their job itself does not contribute to the economy. Its a very inefficient wealth redistribution system that would be better spent paying people to build hospitals and schools instead of blowing up hospitals and schools.
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 13:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 01:16 |
|
|
the munitions and material losses from the forever war are poofed out of the economy
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 13:11
|
|
|
Woofer posted:Random question but is there a study or does anyone have any insights on how much of our ~$700bn defense funding could be cut without affecting our national defense? I know I saw a LOT of wasteful spending when I was in and I was just a lowly enlisted scum. I can’t imagine the waste at like... the G-level. https://www.gao.gov/mobile/products/GAO-20-440SP This is probably the best and the closest, but because GAO desires high confidence, its probably very conservative. You'd have to select which data and correct annually. As for contribution of the clearly destructive bits to the economy, that's always a bit fuzzy, because, like how the perception of value is what gives a currency any value, the ability of a country to keep the war elsewhere is what gives the Fed's creation of money any value. That we "print" only so much, (combined with that anything outside of that created for any purpose except control of interest is paired to investment bonds), is what gives the dollar its international staying power. This increases the value of the dollar I would think, and since its perception not just of near-peer threats, but of civilians of every country in the wlrld, burning cash to make the number bigger probably has some value. But any analysis, in this case, landing on a specific number will be greatly influenced by its assumptions. piL fucked around with this message at 21:57 on May 26, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 14:22
|
|
|
loving lol https://twitter.com/cass_sylvan/status/1264958895581212672?s=19
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 15:22
|
|
|
bloops posted:You know, for every 10 dudes doing this gun to the dick challenge with an unloaded weapon, there’s one guy who’s like “nah this gun ain’t gonna go off” and leaves a round chambered. Should post this in the idiots thread but it's relevant here. Like 15 years ago when one of my friends was finally old enough to purchase a handgun, he went out and bought some lovely 1911 from Rock Island Armory that I remember having really bad sights and was poorly machined. Anyways, he buys it new for like 600 dollars and to save money, proceeds to make a clip of dummy rounds by just removing the primer/gunpowder so he can have a clip of rounds to cycle through instead of spending 20-30 bucks on the rubber dummy rounds they sell for the same purpose. He makes no effort to clearly mark this clip either but he knows "which is which". I get a phone call like a week later from him in tears because his cousin came over and was venting about something stupid and decided for whatever reason, to pick up the gun, load the clip he thought contained dummy rounds, chambered one and fired it at the wall. I'm sure you can guess what happened. No one was hurt but it went through his wall and shattered the window on his jeep door behind it. His grandmother made him sell it to pay for the damage. I haven't spoken with him in like ten years but he was and probably still does check every box for being a terrible gun owner that gives everyone else a bad name. Open carrying at house parties, leaving loaded weapons hammered and cocked where kids can get it, etc.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 15:59
|
|
|
Oof
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 16:13
|
|
|
Alright. My brain is officially damaged beyond repair https://mobile.twitter.com/atrupar/status/1264996588834996226
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 16:25
|
|
|
Disgusting. But number good!
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 16:31
|
|
|
crazyivan45 posted:Alright. My brain is officially damaged beyond repair Every day of this administration it gets harder and harder to see them as anything even remotely resembling human beings. These people deserve to get loving wrecked.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 16:36
|
|
|
treating employees as inventory items predates the Trump administration
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 17:05
|
|
|
There were cars speeding way before you pulled me over, officer.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 17:06
|
|
|
LingcodKilla posted:Disgusting. 
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 17:30
|
|
|
more than 33 9/11s
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 17:35
|
|
|
Bigger is better! Why doesn't the media ever push that? Losers!
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 17:36
|
|
|
AAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH https://twitter.com/VPPressSec/status/1265315948594180096?s=19 STEPHEN MILLER IMPREGNATED A HUMAN WOMAN AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 17:44
|
|
|
PookBear posted:I know you're joking but throwing money at DoD is financially a dead end. Yes it 'creates jobs' but the product of those jobs is for the most part worthless in the economic sense. How do you like using that electronic miniaturized computer to post on the world wide webs? Or GPS? Etc. The DOD is probably the single largest investor in high tech R&D in the history of the planet. Yeah it starts for bombs but ends up in your pocket, or your operating room, or your car not too long after.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 17:45
|
|
|
Godholio posted:How do you like using that electronic miniaturized computer to post on the world wide webs? Or GPS? Etc. The DOD is probably the single largest investor in high tech R&D in the history of the planet. Yeah it starts for bombs but ends up in your pocket, or your operating room, or your car not too long after. you can do the R&D without blowing up bombs, its just easier to justify the cost if the initial product is for the military. Computers, GPS, internet etc would could have been developed far cheaper if we didn't test the initial GPS units by using them to throw bombs at stuff.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 17:47
|
|
|
PookBear posted:you can do the R&D without blowing up bombs, its just easier to justify the cost if the initial product is for the military. Computers, GPS, internet etc would could have been developed far cheaper if we didn't test the initial GPS units by using them to throw bombs at stuff. Necessity is the motherhood of invention. What company is going to invest stupid amounts of money into a satellite chain? You have two options: DOD or Musk. Nobody else is crazy enough to throw that money in the blender to see what comes out the other side. Nobody wants to invest in science, they want to adapt the results. This has been the case since science became A Thing, and it was the Christian Church doing the investing.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 17:50
|
|
|
The easiest example is nuclear technology: we destroyed two entire cities and their industrial capacity as part of our development of nuclear technology. Yes this resulted in a lot of other technologies, nuclear power plants etc but we didn't need to destroy two cities and their economic potential in order to do so. I think we're arguing past each other, all I'm saying is that we could have theoretically developed these technologies for cheaper if we weren't violent apes who can only progress if it results in cooler ways to kill other violent apes
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 17:51
|
|
|
The decision to destroy cities is different from the decision to develop nuclear science. I'm not justifying whatever war (which is generally not paid for through the annual defense budget), I'm justifying funding the DOD. Edit: While admitting there's an absurd amount of FWA in the system.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 17:52
|
|
|
Godholio posted:The decision to destroy cities is different from the decision to develop nuclear science. Destroying those cities was part of the chain of actions that went from bomb>power plant, we made two different versions to see which one was more efficient.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 17:53
|
|
|
Detonating the bombs in Nevada would've worked just as well for that, and is what would've happened if not for the separate decision to use them in the war.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 17:56
|
|
|
Look we're arguing past each other, you're saying the only way to justify expensive R&D to the public is through the DoD and I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying that when you make a grenade and blow it up the industrial capacity that went into making that grenade is essentially wasted. When taxes pay for roads, you 1) create jobs 2) create roads which increase the efficiency of the industries that use them. PookBear fucked around with this message at 18:00 on May 26, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 17:56
|
|
|
It is 100% not a given that developing a nuclear bomb was a required step along the way to exploiting nuclear power. A society not on a wartime footing might have gone straight to energy production/resiliency. Kind of like how renewable energy adoption might have gone a lot differently in the US if not for very non-technological reasons related to keeping the correct people rich. Tiny Timbs fucked around with this message at 18:02 on May 26, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 17:58
|
|
|
PookBear posted:Look we're arguing past each other, you're saying the only way to justify expensive R&D to the public is through the DoD and I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying that when you make a grenade and blow it up the industrial capacity that went into making that grenade is essentially wasted. Nothing lasts forever. How much industrial capacity is rotting away in junkyards, or old casinos and stadiums being imploded for the local news? It just happens drastically faster on certain things like explosives.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 18:00
|
|
|
Let me say it another way: making war materials is an inefficient use of resources. Yes everything gets abandoned eventually but with machinery you depreciate its value down to zero/salvage over its lifespan and its going to output more goods than was required to make it. If you make a car its going to allow someone to get to and from work and generally that car will allow a worker to contribute more to the economy than was required to make the car in the first place. If you make a bomb it just blows up without ever doing any work in the economic sense.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 18:06
|
|
|
I think an easier place to look for wasted money is somewhere like the LCS program, which is seeing well over $30 billion dollars spent that is not trickling down to civilian innovations like nuclear power and GPS, or providing adequate defense. poo poo, they're already awarding contracts to the next generation of frigates and planning to scrap the first four LCS because the program was so loving worthless. I'm sure the Army and Air Force have similar procurement boondoggles, I just don't know what they are.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 18:07
|
|
|
Army: Bradley Marines: that death chopper plane VA: Denver Aurora campus
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 18:13
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 18:14
|
|
|
PookBear posted:If you make a bomb it just blows up without ever doing any work in the economic sense. If we're going off the purely "human stock" view of things; Fat Man and Little Boy allowed potentially hundreds of thousands of American, British and Canadian men to return into their respective workforces to make value for capital instead of rotting on Japanese beaches.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 18:14
|
|
|
Government/university partnerships in basic research and civil applications are already a thing so it's not unimaginable to think of expanding the resources in those programs instead of funneling everything through the DoD (which also does university partnerships).
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 18:15
|
|
|
Godholio posted:How do you like using that electronic miniaturized computer to post on the world wide webs? Or GPS? Etc. The DOD is probably the single largest investor in high tech R&D in the history of the planet. Yeah it starts for bombs but ends up in your pocket, or your operating room, or your car not too long after. hi, i work in computers and webs and study their history. the DOD almost entirely stopped funding fruitful basic research in our field when ARPA became DARPA. it's good for governments to conduct research, and not good to manage the funding and evaluate the results of such research as part of "Defense." i also think it's pretty defeatist to think that say, we were only ever going to get nuclear power through nuclear warfare or national space programs as testbeds and PR campaigns for ICBM strategies, even if it's obvious that's what happened.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 18:16
|
|
|
PookBear posted:If you make a bomb it just blows up without ever doing any work in the economic sense. Someone had to rebuild those cities in Japan. You could say we stimulated local Japanese economies in Hiroshima and Nagasaki after the bombing with a construction boom.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 18:18
|
|
|
Giving away slingshots at the company picnic was the best ad campaign the window factory ever did
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 18:26
|
|
|
Doc Hawkins posted:hi, i work in computers and webs and study their history. the DOD almost entirely stopped funding fruitful basic research in our field when ARPA became DARPA. it's good for governments to conduct research, and not good to manage the funding and evaluate the results of such research as part of "Defense." It's not really defeatist it's like "this is how it happened therefore this is how it must happen" which is probably something on the massive list of cognitive biases. The balance of investment through the DoD is obviously something we can change in the future if we at least recognize that warfare is just a way to stimulate research, not the way. Tiny Timbs fucked around with this message at 18:33 on May 26, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 18:30
|
|
|
MA-Horus posted:If we're going off the purely "human stock" view of things; Dude the point is that war consumes raw resources that could be put to better use and that WW2 was a net drain on the global economy and not a benefit to it. There were some localized benefits in places like the US but the UK was on food rations for over a decade after the war.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 18:33
|
|
|
Everyone remembers how happy those Guernicans were when they got paid to rebuild their city
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 18:39
|
|
|
If you break a single window it's a tragedy, if you break a million windows all at once an economic stimulus
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 18:41
|
|
|
PookBear posted:Dude the point is that war consumes raw resources that could be put to better use and that WW2 was a net drain on the global economy and not a benefit to it. There were some localized benefits in places like the US but the UK was on food rations for over a decade after the war. Well loving obviously it was, I don't think you'll find anyone who'd call World War Goddamn Two a net positive for society unless you're a freak like Clausowitz or Hans Delbruck who think that peace is a net negative for mankind
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 18:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 01:16 |
|
|
The essential act of war is destruction, not necessarily of human lives, but of the products of human labour. War is a way of shattering to pieces, or pouring into the stratosphere, or sinking in the depths of the sea, materials which might otherwise be used to make the masses too comfortable, and hence, in the long run, too intelligent.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 18:52
|
|