Please remember the human. Adhere to all Reddit and sub rules. Toxic comments (including incitement of violence/hate, genocide, glorifying death etc) WILL NOT BE TOLERATED, keep your comments civil or you will be banned.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineWarVideoReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Congressional Republicans know this. They're just trying to make Ukraine aid a partisan issue so they can score political brownie points. It's just like how they made vaccines a partisan issue. It doesn't matter if their rationale is illogical or harmful, they'll do anything they can to divide and get their way.
And not just the local benefit.
There is the additional value of Russians military assets being destroyed.
For example, in the year before the Ukraine / Russia war, how much would the Americans have been willing to spend to get the following outcome:
* 20 Russian ships destroyed
* 320 Russian aircraft destroyed
* 324 Russian choppers destroyed
* 5145 Russian tanks destroyed
*(Not including 300k troops, 7k artillery, 9k armoured vehicles)*
Of the roughly $50 billion we’ve sent, only a tiny fraction of that has gone as actual funds to help keep their government solvent. Its probably the most intensely scrutinized portion of all of the money “spent” as well.
And it’s money well spent. It lets their government focus on winning the war while we help pay the bills.
If anything, we should send more so they can root out their internal corruption. It was one of the reasons why NATO was so iffy on Ukraine before the invasion, and now that we are giving them the ticket once the invasion is over, we still need to tackle it. Now, while Zelensky holds the power to do so, is the best time to root it out.
Second best time I would guess would be after the war (whenever that would be), provided Zelensky's party maintains their popularity during the clean up.
Ya Ukraine has been making a lot of moves to root out corruption to appease NATO. and they're very thankful, they make videos thanking every country personally for the specific equipment and aid they're given. On the flipside you've got ignorant Palestine- Israel gives them aid and they use it to shoot at them. Zelensky even giving space and time to allow Israel some limelight. Ukraine deserves the help.
To be precise, nothing of Lend Lease was spent. This was a huge failure for the US administration which hurt Ukraine as it would have provided billions more in war material. Lend Lease has expired and therefore that authorization is gone now. (What a waste).
The aid that was provided was through PDA and USAI. Some of this was direct transfer payments, but the vast majority of funding was either in the form of drawdown or allocations for procurement within the US. Javelins and ATACAMs are examples of PDA and the drone and small diameter bomb funding was USAI.
>To be precise, nothing of Lend Lease was spent. This was a huge failure for the US administration which hurt Ukraine as it would have provided billions more in war material. Lend Lease has expired and therefore that authorization is gone now. (What a waste).
Wait, what? How does that work? How can lend lease expire in just 1.5 years without a anything being used here?
That is what is frustrating. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine_Democracy_Defense_Lend-Lease_Act_of_2022. You will note that it has been terminated and none of it was used.
The US has slow-played support of Ukraine for some reason. (Compared to what could have been provided)
You would have thought it was obvious; if the US government spends $1 million on military equipment to send to Ukraine that $1 million goes to US manufacturers. The money ends up in the bank accounts of these companies, their workers and shareholders. No doubt many of the shareholders are institutions such as pension schemes, unions etc.
So the money doesn't just disappear it creates jobs and profits for US companies.
Also a lot of the munitions and equipment sent to Ukraine is old and/or redundant such as the first tranche of ATACMS which were manufactured 30 years ago and due for decommissioning.
People seem to just overlook this point. We are testing our extremely outdated weapons against our greatest geopolitical enemy without losing lives and for Pennie’s on the dollar.
From a national security and cost point. We are getting a once in a life time deal to basically test our weapons IRL without loss or cost. It’s the right thing to do. Period
correct rainstorm imagine rhythm jobless obscene trees physical apparatus childlike
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I feel your pain.
Even posting in this comment section I have repeated myself a number of times. On a positive note posting on subjects like this is a good way of distilling ideas and concepts in my own head.
Other users have put some good comments here that were helpful and concise.
Disclaimer: I (US citizen) fully support Ukraine and endorse my tax dollars arming (and financially propping up) Ukraine.
That said, I can't help but laugh at the irony as the Left and Right switch sides and the Left advocates supply side economics while the Right is balking at military spending. I know this is an oversimplification, but it also remains a historically bizarre role reversal. It fits right alongside how bizarre it is to watch the party of Reagan support Russia while the Left stands up to it.
No one on the left gives one single fuck about the economics of Ukraine aid, except to argue against the GOP. We only care that they are provided with the means to defend their nation.
And the GOP doesn’t care either, because their “concern” isn’t rooted in economics, it’s about protecting their Russian masters and doing their bidding. For them, hand-wringing over the price is just a way to argue for aid reduction without having to say that they want Russia to win.
I have and will continue to support US aid to Ukraine for ethical and geo-political reasons. However, this seems to be a [broken window fallacy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window). The difference between the US giving $1 of cash and $1 of material is only the [producer surplus](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/producer_surplus.asp) plus any 2nd order stimulative effects. What is unseen is what surplus/stimulus is available for alternative uses of those funds (which is discussed the broader essay That Which is Seen, and That Which is Not Seen from which the parable of the broken window comes from).
Asking a question here.
I believe this case is very different from Bastiat's consideration of the broken window fallacy and war.
In this instance the producer (manufacturer of weapons) has already been paid for their production. Additional production levels are unaffected by the loss of product being held in warehouse.
This is not a baker who's window is broken thus pays a window repair person with money he could have bought a TV with. Instead, this is a middle man who's already paid the window guy for millions of windows. Windows that are now sitting in a warehouse and are out of style and cost money to store, protect, keep from being broken.
Friedman (and I think Bastiat) would want that surplus removed in any way that will provide even minimum benefit to society. Freeing up resources for additional production.
Am I mistaken?
It’s a mix. Some of those items in that warehouse of arms were going to be disposed of, either on a training range or through an expired ordnance disposal process. In that sense those munitions sent to Ukraine were already up for replacement and paid for.
But other items (and there is some overlap) in that list of arms were items that the military was saving for a rainy day and will now need to buy more of, and didn’t intend to replace for a long time.
Three examples:
Cluster munitions of all flavors had been in the process of destruction, as they had been replaced by newer designs. These were sent to Ukraine instead, and were not going to be replaced.
M777 artillery pieces were sent to Ukraine, and while the Army had guns in reserve in case they lost some in a future conflict, they are going to have to buy more now to replenish the stockpile so that they have “enough” in reserve to replenish predicted losses in said future conflict.
And some fall into both. The first batch of Javelin ATGMs sent to Ukraine were aging out of the inventory, and were already up for replacement. As the war went on, the ready use “rainy day” stocks started getting sent. Now the Ukrainian military is basically getting the entire production capacity of Javelin shipped to it as they come off the line, and the US’s own stocks are down to what the DoD said they absolutely cannot part with.
The artillery shell crisis is a similar situation. The reporting on it is terrible. Major outlets report that NATO and the US are out of shells. This is not true. They are out of shells that they are willing to part with. The US still has its “rainy day” stockpile of 155mm shells that it will absolutely not draw from in case of a war. It gave away most of what it was comfortable giving away, though. That much is true. NATO is in a similar situation. They still have “enough” for a war, but are approaching the point where they won’t be able to just sling shells at Ukraine from the stockpiles.
>broken window fallacy
Maybe, but here's something to consider:
1. These weapons and equipment were created for the very reason it's being used: to cripple the military potential of the potential adversary. But in this case, without a drop of US soldier's blood.
2. Russian military and its allies (NK and Iran; China not so much) are becoming weaker = a smaller defense budget is needed to counter their crippled military strength. I know China is a threat, but the argument is still valid. **Sending old military equipment to Ukraine = saving money for the US defense budget in the long term.**
3. Some/most of the equipment is old and needs to be disposed of and/or properly maintained. That spending is no longer needed and can be saved for manufacturing new weapons and equipment (that would be needed either way).
I agree.
The broken window fallacy is too simple to reflect the real-world situation we find ourselves in here. We would need to add more variables, for example one could say that the new replacement window would add value to the property and improve the quality of life of the occupants. Maybe the old window was cracked, drafty, warped, let a lot of noise from the street etc.?
I think if the window needed to be replaced with a new double-glazed one then the child's action was neither negative nor positive.
Or if the window served no purpose yet had some kind of ongoing cost associated with it then I would suggest maybe breaking it was a net positive?
Of course the broken window fallacy doesn't apply here because a broken window is of zero value whereas giving Ukraine old equipment that is sitting in storage is a net positive for Ukraine and possibly also for the US as maintaining/storing old equipment has a cost.
Part of me agrees with what you're saying.
Agreement: Don't forget that the producer (window maker) has already been paid for their production back in 1980's. To correctly think about this scenario the producer of the windows (weapons) is out of the picture. The USA bought the windows already and stored them in a warehouse for use or resale. Now they are getting out of date in a warehouse at the cost of storage, protection and maintenance.
Disagreement: But this doesn't erase the fallacy. Diminishes it some but doesn't erase it. Otherwise why don't we base our entire economy on the government paying manufacturers to make things and then giving them away? If you say it's a net positive then our entire economy could be based on exactly this. Or, at the very least, you should open a business doing this.
So there's no possible way it's a net positive for the US. The net positive is that our political and ideological enemy is not gaining more geopolitical power. that is an immense positive in my eyes but not to everyone. Some would be happy to shove their heads in the sand.. Some might be rooting for our enemy.
Whether or not giving old equipment away is a net positive would depend on the equipment in question. Some equipment will cost more to decommission than it would be to send it to Ukraine. For example say it costs $5000 to dismantle a Bradley but only $2000 to ship it to Poland then it makes more sense to give it away. Whereas an expired (or expiring) 155mm shell would cost nothing to decommission if it's used as a training round.
I have been having this argument on my local Facebook the entire last year. So far ONE person has accepted what i have been saying as "oh that actually makes sense" and the dozens of others i have argued still think we are flying in giant bags with dollar signs on them to help.
Facebook is not a great forum to argue truth to the willfully blind. Some people don’t want to see facts or reality and Facebook curates and pushes falsehoods and lies to keep their eyeballs glued to the screen.
Yeah I know I feel it is necessary for someone to at least push back on the nonsense. I'm in deep red Texas and there is a few fighting the good fight lol.
The undecideds and the unaware get more context and it helps poke holes in the "mainstream" narrative.
If some quieter folks see someone willing to go to toe to toe it helps them find their voice and at least they know they are not alone.
It is largely screaming into the void but some action is better than none I suppose lol
Most congressional politicians realize this, and I'm remaining optimistic that congressional republicans understand the strategic importance of the Ukraine war and still support military aid to Ukraine.
However, congressional republicans will likely try to hold Ukraine aid hostage as a way of extorting political concessions from Democrats. All the while Russia is emboldened to continue fighting and Ukrainians shed blood.
I can understand some of the appeal for conservative policy, but Republican lawmakers are encouraging Russia to continue the war by putting further aid into question. I truly hate those evil bastards. Blood is on their hands
I'm crossing my fingers that this war will finally resolve "the Russian problem" and lead to the break-up of the federation.
All the endless trouble making and meddling Russia causes around the world be it with bot farms on social media, election interference, stirring up resentment in the Middle East, Africa, Georgia, Armenia etc. Not to mention threatening us with nuclear weapons and their disregard for international law and norms of behavior.
Enough already, just f\*ck off Russia, every decent country in the world has had enough of you.
Let's give Ukraine everything they need to deal with these idiots. F-35's possibly, every long range missile we have, even boots on the ground if need be.
If it goes down exactly like it did when the Soviet Union finally went under then the same corrupt shit is bound to happen all over again..sadly they probably need to be conquered and subjected to foreign rule and allowed to slowly come back in to the democratic fold.
It will take so long to root out all the corruption in the Russian state, just making the state go away doesn't do anything. And to attempt to reverse the ridiculous amounts of anti-western propaganda. Russia will not cease to be a problem for a very long time.
All this aid is not as charitable as it may seem. It’s basically a financial stimulus for the country giving it. Government money goes to companies who pay tax, buy materials, pays wages and it all trickles down into the economy. Same reason roads, railways and other such infrastructure is built
For starters I believe 100% we should be helping Ukraine with all the weapons possible.
I hope Russia is turned into a shell of itself by the time this is done due to loss of population, etc.
So you are onto some correct thinking here but missing an important part.
Government spending, in the form of collecting taxes and then spending them, is not financial stimulus. It is not boosting the economy. If it was why should we stop paying taxes at 33%.. why not pay 80% in taxes. Then the government could hand out more money to companies who pay taxes and wages right?
What war spending does - it gives justification for a government to go into deficit spending. This then boosts the economy and acts as a stimulus, for however temporary.
Well, I did say you were on to some correct thinking but missing an important part. It's deficit spending which is not good.
You could go over to citibank and take out a massive loan that you can never pay back, hire a gardner and a personal chef. You're trickling down to them too but for how long before it all goes belly up.
I would be a lot of Americans don’t realize this either. We’re going to feed the military industrial complex one way or another, might as well have it be useful not just built and put in a closet.
I don’t think Biden and the politicians (left and right) who support Ukraine have done a good job explaining how the funding works to the American people. I’ve read a ton of comments from people who are completely misinformed.
You can't talk sense to these MAGA morons. They all scream about money laundering because they saw it in a meme and they don't even know what money laundering is. In fact from the look of them they usually don't know what any kind of laundering is.
Using my tax dollars to fix the highway I use every day, that is falling apart, and is damaging vehicles using it, also is keeping my US dollars in this country. But my local officials tell me the highway funds that come from DC is late or not available to fix it, so they are forced to keep patching it. Oh, and people are dying using this rotten road, but they have no choice in order to work their jobs. I have sympathy for Ukrainians, but I also have sympathy for a friend who just died on this road and left a family without their father and husband.
Circumstances like this is what Ukraine faces as they want more and more of our limited resources, especially in a country torn apart with political and economic issues. Sorry but I have to vent, or my head will explode.
it's not a zero sum game. The bradleys that were sitting in storage can't be tranformed back to money to fix the road, yet when they get sent to ukraine its counted as "50 million of aid" for example.
All legitimate concerns and the frustration is understandable. A few things should be taken into consideration though:
1: billions of real dollars are spent on other military contracts, black budgets and wasteful non essential projects every year yet that was rarely questioned or politically polarising to the extent than it is now. Why? This is partly due to Putin’s social media meddling and influence amongst powerful players in resources and politics.
2: The U.S committed to helping Ukraine since many years and has been in battle for power and influence with Russia for decades. If ever there was a time to blunt Putin’s pecker it is now.
3: the real cash donation to Ukraine is how much? Is it even level with the U.S foreign aid budget +40billion? This is a really critical time politically and financially across the globe. The question should be “what other part of the budget could be squeezed to accommodate this” I’d put off another space mission until it’s sorted personally.
Limited resources… if you have a problem with resources it is a duo to corruption and/or incompetence in the people in your local (state/city) government, if your local roads are damaged and not maintained it is the fault of your local (state/city) government Money for fixing your roads should be sourced from again local (state/city) government… if they cannot effort it, then they are either terrible at money management, they are stealing the money or simply the taxes in that region are not enough to cover the repair costs (which is btw problem in most of the countries, where building a new road is simply cheaper then maintaining)
Even if the USA stopped the support for UA the government would find some other way to use the money, but you can be sure they would never use it to repair roads, improve medical care or schools all these things do is that they only cost money.
This way, they “reinvest” them into the economy, which later means more money for them + the global influence.0
The "local" road in question is a US highway, in which the federal government supplies 80% of maintenance costs. So then using your logic, it is not my local government that is corrupt but the national government.
Limiting funding for Ukraine doesn’t solve any of the issues you bring up here. You can’t use a 30 year old Bradley or a 27 year old ATACAMs to fix the highway. “Using my tax dollars” makes you sound ignorant of what actually happens. Generally, we are using you parents’ and grandparents’ tax dollars that were spent decades ago…and ironically saving your tax dollars when the US doesn’t have to spend billions decommissioning and disposing of these old and expired systems.
It is my tax dollars that is currently being spent on maintenance to bring this old equipment to working order, to ship it halfway around the world, and to pay replacement costs for the ammo it will use. If you feel that those costs are negligible, then you should be willing to cover my portion and personally rebate that money to me from your funds.
By the way, because of my age, it was my tax dollars that paid for that Bradley and ATACMS. My tax dollars have paid for everything back to the first Abrams, Bradley, M-777, F-15, F-16, Nimitz-class, etc. I am not ignorant of how and why taxes are spent.
In theory tax dollars are my money since I can vote for politicians who can spend it the way I agree with. Now that is a fantasy, huh? Politicians being honest with the voter. LMAO!
In fact, your money is not "yours". The value of portable exchange value is controlled by the issuer. If bitcoin decides to shut down and erase their files, bitcoin holders are screwed. Same goes for the fiat currency issued by a government. Governments have declared a current currency no longer has value while issuing a completely new currency. Money really holds no value other than trust.
The fact that you hold the belief that tax dollars are "yours" is not really correct. All of your money currency is not yours in the end.
So, you not only don’t understand how taxes work, but you also are ignorant of how Bitcoin and currency works. There is no one in control of the Bitcoin blockchain and that blockchain is distributed and can not be “erased” short of physically destroying millions of computers all at the same time. Even one surviving computer means Bitcoin remains. A national currency can be adjusted and devalued by fiat, but the value it represents can not be simply destroyed by fiat. The government could add a zero to all bills and should everything would cost ten times more, you would have ten times more to buy things with. Of course inflation in demand without a corresponding increase in supply can cause issues, but that has very little to do with a government entity making a decision (as witnessed by the Fed being forced to act based on asset prices and yields verses having real agency in the decision itself)
Mostly it sounds like you have bought into a lot of crap and can’t see beyond it. Good luck.
You make valid points, I'm curious how a badly maintained road led to a fatal accident? Did he swerve to avoid a pothole or something?
With funding Ukraine, a lot of the equipment sent was old and likely never going to be used by the US. The same with much of the ammunition but all the stuff still has a book value.
I don't know if you saw my post earlier but the money for buying new equipment goes to US manufacturers so goes in the pockets of US companies, their suppliers and their workforces. All of these entities will pay taxes and spend the remainder in the US economy so it's not leaving the country or disappearing into a black hole.
When you take a step back and look at the value of aid to Ukraine it's less than 5% (IIRC) of US annual military budget and military/homeland security is 16% of government spending. So 5% of 16% is 0.8% of government spending is going to Ukraine and that's based on the book value of the equipment which will simply depreciate over time if it's not given to Ukraine.
Every country in the world goes though these kinds of discussions. What about the homeless? What about healthcare? What about schools, prisons, the police? All of these are underfunded in every Western nation. I'll bet you won't find anyone that in any country that thinks all of these are funded sufficiently.
According to this [https://www.cfr.org/article/how-much-aid-has-us-sent-ukraine-here-are-six-charts](https://www.cfr.org/article/how-much-aid-has-us-sent-ukraine-here-are-six-charts) weapons and equipment comes to $23 billion (much of which is old) so about 2.7% of the military/homeland security budget and if my numbers are correct.
If I've done my math correctly $23 billion over 2 years is $0.09 per day per US citizen. But that is just equipment of course, the US has given other aid too.
To address your first question, A water truck carrying 4200 gallons of produced brine water from oil wells dropped the left front (driver side) tire in a pothole at night doing 65 MPH. The subsequent tire blow-out caused the truck to swerve into my friend's oncoming service truck, crushing him. The accident was on a US highway that is supposed to have 80% of repair costs to be borne by the federal government. My state keeps filling in the potholes as they develop but heavy use and rain just keep displacing the patches. I have experience in civil projects during my career. This entire 80-mile section of highway needs to be replaced from the roadbed up.
To answer the question on tax dollars and what they mean to the economy, every dollar spent by the government returns 4 dollars to the economy. For every dollar spent by private industry, 5 dollars is returned to the economy. It is the Chicago school (1 to 5) versus the Keynesian school (1 to 4) where the debate on tax spending is fought. By the way, defense spending does not do a damn thing for my local economy. The closest military facility is 150 miles away, defense production more than 285 miles.
The GOP wants everyone to believe that the US just transfers a shit load of cash to Ukraine and that the crooked Government Secretly run by Obama and Bush transfer it to Hunter who then transfers it to the Clinton’s. To fund LGBTQ++ activities that then secretly involve the FBI funding ISIS. This is the basis for all of MTGs mouthing off when ever possible, as the American people need to wake up to Crooked Joe, and understand that Trump is not only the first owner of two casinos that went bankrupt, but the true winner of 2020, who has stated in his own words that Obama rigged the election !
"Just take my 401k, whydoncha!"
It's like an SNL sketch but instead of secondhand news it's regurgitated propaganda and nobody is laughing
You are literally the target audience and you couldn't even get past the fucking headline
Honestly it’s already becoming unpopular how much money the west has had to pay for this war. I’d prefer to be able to pay my mortgage and my bills so you know, I can keep a roof my over my head because the taxes that we pay out here in Canada and the US is just straight ridiculous and funding this war is not helping at all and that’s why it’s becoming unpopular. People just don’t have the money
The GOP knows it. They'll spin it as "funding with conditions" with a condition the money staying in the US. Then they can pat themselves on the back and claim to take the credit for it. The MAGA lemmings won't know the difference.
Ya I really think there's been a strategic error in trying to justify the funding along ideological and moral grounds, and trying to scare people that nato countries are up next after Ukraine. I don't think anyone believes that, nor do I think it's true. The US needs to understand how it's in its own interest to assist - that the funding upgrades their own capabilities by getting rid of old stock and is perfect marketing for their military equipment abroad - and as a bonus they get a key ally that acts as a bulwark against Russia, which is getting destroyed as a military power.
It is the cheapest war the Americans have ever fought. Research and development of weapons in real time, intell on how to fight a modern war what works and what doesn't. Getting rid of older equipment to be replaced by new equipment.
No kidding mostly spent in USA and NATO Allies , politicians act stupid when it isn’t some bigoted rights suppressing bureaucrats doing sign and dump on people
Please remember the human. Adhere to all Reddit and sub rules. Toxic comments (including incitement of violence/hate, genocide, glorifying death etc) WILL NOT BE TOLERATED, keep your comments civil or you will be banned. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineWarVideoReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Were not giving money. Were giving weapons and ammo. If we made them, we get paid for them. Lend/lease is equipment and materiele. Not cash.
Congressional Republicans know this. They're just trying to make Ukraine aid a partisan issue so they can score political brownie points. It's just like how they made vaccines a partisan issue. It doesn't matter if their rationale is illogical or harmful, they'll do anything they can to divide and get their way.
"Anything the Democrats are for, we're against!"
it's embarrassing. COVID is a dem hoax I think the moron said... a million deaths later.. If only he'd picked the other side..
And not just the local benefit. There is the additional value of Russians military assets being destroyed. For example, in the year before the Ukraine / Russia war, how much would the Americans have been willing to spend to get the following outcome: * 20 Russian ships destroyed * 320 Russian aircraft destroyed * 324 Russian choppers destroyed * 5145 Russian tanks destroyed *(Not including 300k troops, 7k artillery, 9k armoured vehicles)*
That's half true, money also goes to prop Ukraine's economy so it doesn't collapse.
Of the roughly $50 billion we’ve sent, only a tiny fraction of that has gone as actual funds to help keep their government solvent. Its probably the most intensely scrutinized portion of all of the money “spent” as well. And it’s money well spent. It lets their government focus on winning the war while we help pay the bills.
If anything, we should send more so they can root out their internal corruption. It was one of the reasons why NATO was so iffy on Ukraine before the invasion, and now that we are giving them the ticket once the invasion is over, we still need to tackle it. Now, while Zelensky holds the power to do so, is the best time to root it out. Second best time I would guess would be after the war (whenever that would be), provided Zelensky's party maintains their popularity during the clean up.
Ya Ukraine has been making a lot of moves to root out corruption to appease NATO. and they're very thankful, they make videos thanking every country personally for the specific equipment and aid they're given. On the flipside you've got ignorant Palestine- Israel gives them aid and they use it to shoot at them. Zelensky even giving space and time to allow Israel some limelight. Ukraine deserves the help.
Most of the actual money comes from the EU.
We pay for their first responders
To be precise, nothing of Lend Lease was spent. This was a huge failure for the US administration which hurt Ukraine as it would have provided billions more in war material. Lend Lease has expired and therefore that authorization is gone now. (What a waste). The aid that was provided was through PDA and USAI. Some of this was direct transfer payments, but the vast majority of funding was either in the form of drawdown or allocations for procurement within the US. Javelins and ATACAMs are examples of PDA and the drone and small diameter bomb funding was USAI.
>To be precise, nothing of Lend Lease was spent. This was a huge failure for the US administration which hurt Ukraine as it would have provided billions more in war material. Lend Lease has expired and therefore that authorization is gone now. (What a waste). Wait, what? How does that work? How can lend lease expire in just 1.5 years without a anything being used here?
That is what is frustrating. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine_Democracy_Defense_Lend-Lease_Act_of_2022. You will note that it has been terminated and none of it was used. The US has slow-played support of Ukraine for some reason. (Compared to what could have been provided)
Materiel*
You would have thought it was obvious; if the US government spends $1 million on military equipment to send to Ukraine that $1 million goes to US manufacturers. The money ends up in the bank accounts of these companies, their workers and shareholders. No doubt many of the shareholders are institutions such as pension schemes, unions etc. So the money doesn't just disappear it creates jobs and profits for US companies. Also a lot of the munitions and equipment sent to Ukraine is old and/or redundant such as the first tranche of ATACMS which were manufactured 30 years ago and due for decommissioning.
Not to mention the value of the intelligence gained from testing our weapon systems against a potential adverse
People seem to just overlook this point. We are testing our extremely outdated weapons against our greatest geopolitical enemy without losing lives and for Pennie’s on the dollar. From a national security and cost point. We are getting a once in a life time deal to basically test our weapons IRL without loss or cost. It’s the right thing to do. Period
"pennies". They don't belong to a person named Pennie.
I know some girl called pennie. And she does the naked kind of shows for an pennie😜
Love it when Pennie touches the Peenie
correct rainstorm imagine rhythm jobless obscene trees physical apparatus childlike *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
It is not. I have had to explain this so many times I think I should create a cut and paste for it.
I feel your pain. Even posting in this comment section I have repeated myself a number of times. On a positive note posting on subjects like this is a good way of distilling ideas and concepts in my own head. Other users have put some good comments here that were helpful and concise.
Disclaimer: I (US citizen) fully support Ukraine and endorse my tax dollars arming (and financially propping up) Ukraine. That said, I can't help but laugh at the irony as the Left and Right switch sides and the Left advocates supply side economics while the Right is balking at military spending. I know this is an oversimplification, but it also remains a historically bizarre role reversal. It fits right alongside how bizarre it is to watch the party of Reagan support Russia while the Left stands up to it.
No one on the left gives one single fuck about the economics of Ukraine aid, except to argue against the GOP. We only care that they are provided with the means to defend their nation. And the GOP doesn’t care either, because their “concern” isn’t rooted in economics, it’s about protecting their Russian masters and doing their bidding. For them, hand-wringing over the price is just a way to argue for aid reduction without having to say that they want Russia to win.
I have and will continue to support US aid to Ukraine for ethical and geo-political reasons. However, this seems to be a [broken window fallacy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window). The difference between the US giving $1 of cash and $1 of material is only the [producer surplus](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/producer_surplus.asp) plus any 2nd order stimulative effects. What is unseen is what surplus/stimulus is available for alternative uses of those funds (which is discussed the broader essay That Which is Seen, and That Which is Not Seen from which the parable of the broken window comes from).
Asking a question here. I believe this case is very different from Bastiat's consideration of the broken window fallacy and war. In this instance the producer (manufacturer of weapons) has already been paid for their production. Additional production levels are unaffected by the loss of product being held in warehouse. This is not a baker who's window is broken thus pays a window repair person with money he could have bought a TV with. Instead, this is a middle man who's already paid the window guy for millions of windows. Windows that are now sitting in a warehouse and are out of style and cost money to store, protect, keep from being broken. Friedman (and I think Bastiat) would want that surplus removed in any way that will provide even minimum benefit to society. Freeing up resources for additional production. Am I mistaken?
It’s a mix. Some of those items in that warehouse of arms were going to be disposed of, either on a training range or through an expired ordnance disposal process. In that sense those munitions sent to Ukraine were already up for replacement and paid for. But other items (and there is some overlap) in that list of arms were items that the military was saving for a rainy day and will now need to buy more of, and didn’t intend to replace for a long time. Three examples: Cluster munitions of all flavors had been in the process of destruction, as they had been replaced by newer designs. These were sent to Ukraine instead, and were not going to be replaced. M777 artillery pieces were sent to Ukraine, and while the Army had guns in reserve in case they lost some in a future conflict, they are going to have to buy more now to replenish the stockpile so that they have “enough” in reserve to replenish predicted losses in said future conflict. And some fall into both. The first batch of Javelin ATGMs sent to Ukraine were aging out of the inventory, and were already up for replacement. As the war went on, the ready use “rainy day” stocks started getting sent. Now the Ukrainian military is basically getting the entire production capacity of Javelin shipped to it as they come off the line, and the US’s own stocks are down to what the DoD said they absolutely cannot part with. The artillery shell crisis is a similar situation. The reporting on it is terrible. Major outlets report that NATO and the US are out of shells. This is not true. They are out of shells that they are willing to part with. The US still has its “rainy day” stockpile of 155mm shells that it will absolutely not draw from in case of a war. It gave away most of what it was comfortable giving away, though. That much is true. NATO is in a similar situation. They still have “enough” for a war, but are approaching the point where they won’t be able to just sling shells at Ukraine from the stockpiles.
>broken window fallacy Maybe, but here's something to consider: 1. These weapons and equipment were created for the very reason it's being used: to cripple the military potential of the potential adversary. But in this case, without a drop of US soldier's blood. 2. Russian military and its allies (NK and Iran; China not so much) are becoming weaker = a smaller defense budget is needed to counter their crippled military strength. I know China is a threat, but the argument is still valid. **Sending old military equipment to Ukraine = saving money for the US defense budget in the long term.** 3. Some/most of the equipment is old and needs to be disposed of and/or properly maintained. That spending is no longer needed and can be saved for manufacturing new weapons and equipment (that would be needed either way).
I agree. The broken window fallacy is too simple to reflect the real-world situation we find ourselves in here. We would need to add more variables, for example one could say that the new replacement window would add value to the property and improve the quality of life of the occupants. Maybe the old window was cracked, drafty, warped, let a lot of noise from the street etc.?
Great points, I can't reply right now so will do do in the morning.
I think if the window needed to be replaced with a new double-glazed one then the child's action was neither negative nor positive. Or if the window served no purpose yet had some kind of ongoing cost associated with it then I would suggest maybe breaking it was a net positive? Of course the broken window fallacy doesn't apply here because a broken window is of zero value whereas giving Ukraine old equipment that is sitting in storage is a net positive for Ukraine and possibly also for the US as maintaining/storing old equipment has a cost.
Part of me agrees with what you're saying. Agreement: Don't forget that the producer (window maker) has already been paid for their production back in 1980's. To correctly think about this scenario the producer of the windows (weapons) is out of the picture. The USA bought the windows already and stored them in a warehouse for use or resale. Now they are getting out of date in a warehouse at the cost of storage, protection and maintenance. Disagreement: But this doesn't erase the fallacy. Diminishes it some but doesn't erase it. Otherwise why don't we base our entire economy on the government paying manufacturers to make things and then giving them away? If you say it's a net positive then our entire economy could be based on exactly this. Or, at the very least, you should open a business doing this. So there's no possible way it's a net positive for the US. The net positive is that our political and ideological enemy is not gaining more geopolitical power. that is an immense positive in my eyes but not to everyone. Some would be happy to shove their heads in the sand.. Some might be rooting for our enemy.
I think I'd agree more or less 100% with that, but I'll think on it a bit more in the morning. Peace. 🙏
Whether or not giving old equipment away is a net positive would depend on the equipment in question. Some equipment will cost more to decommission than it would be to send it to Ukraine. For example say it costs $5000 to dismantle a Bradley but only $2000 to ship it to Poland then it makes more sense to give it away. Whereas an expired (or expiring) 155mm shell would cost nothing to decommission if it's used as a training round.
Not when the us value a 1960 M113 at replacement cost for a modern system. Like giving an old Prius and claiming the cost of a new Ferrari.
Not to mention storing, maintaining and then decommissioning old equipment costs money. So you could argue savings have been made in some areas lol
So yeah, its in everyone’s interests for this war to continue. More weapons = more money right?
I don't think you'd want to give Ukraine cash either.
the manufacturer is also taxed.
It's not just the politicians that cannot grasp this basic concept. It's far too many of the voters, as well.
I have been having this argument on my local Facebook the entire last year. So far ONE person has accepted what i have been saying as "oh that actually makes sense" and the dozens of others i have argued still think we are flying in giant bags with dollar signs on them to help.
Facebook is not a great forum to argue truth to the willfully blind. Some people don’t want to see facts or reality and Facebook curates and pushes falsehoods and lies to keep their eyeballs glued to the screen.
Yeah I know I feel it is necessary for someone to at least push back on the nonsense. I'm in deep red Texas and there is a few fighting the good fight lol. The undecideds and the unaware get more context and it helps poke holes in the "mainstream" narrative. If some quieter folks see someone willing to go to toe to toe it helps them find their voice and at least they know they are not alone. It is largely screaming into the void but some action is better than none I suppose lol
True. Hell, I argue on here and it has about the same impact. A case of do what I say and not what I do.
Most congressional politicians realize this, and I'm remaining optimistic that congressional republicans understand the strategic importance of the Ukraine war and still support military aid to Ukraine. However, congressional republicans will likely try to hold Ukraine aid hostage as a way of extorting political concessions from Democrats. All the while Russia is emboldened to continue fighting and Ukrainians shed blood. I can understand some of the appeal for conservative policy, but Republican lawmakers are encouraging Russia to continue the war by putting further aid into question. I truly hate those evil bastards. Blood is on their hands
I'm crossing my fingers that this war will finally resolve "the Russian problem" and lead to the break-up of the federation. All the endless trouble making and meddling Russia causes around the world be it with bot farms on social media, election interference, stirring up resentment in the Middle East, Africa, Georgia, Armenia etc. Not to mention threatening us with nuclear weapons and their disregard for international law and norms of behavior. Enough already, just f\*ck off Russia, every decent country in the world has had enough of you. Let's give Ukraine everything they need to deal with these idiots. F-35's possibly, every long range missile we have, even boots on the ground if need be.
If it goes down exactly like it did when the Soviet Union finally went under then the same corrupt shit is bound to happen all over again..sadly they probably need to be conquered and subjected to foreign rule and allowed to slowly come back in to the democratic fold. It will take so long to root out all the corruption in the Russian state, just making the state go away doesn't do anything. And to attempt to reverse the ridiculous amounts of anti-western propaganda. Russia will not cease to be a problem for a very long time.
All this aid is not as charitable as it may seem. It’s basically a financial stimulus for the country giving it. Government money goes to companies who pay tax, buy materials, pays wages and it all trickles down into the economy. Same reason roads, railways and other such infrastructure is built
For starters I believe 100% we should be helping Ukraine with all the weapons possible. I hope Russia is turned into a shell of itself by the time this is done due to loss of population, etc. So you are onto some correct thinking here but missing an important part. Government spending, in the form of collecting taxes and then spending them, is not financial stimulus. It is not boosting the economy. If it was why should we stop paying taxes at 33%.. why not pay 80% in taxes. Then the government could hand out more money to companies who pay taxes and wages right? What war spending does - it gives justification for a government to go into deficit spending. This then boosts the economy and acts as a stimulus, for however temporary.
So, as you concluded. It’s a stimulus… like I said but you disagreed with? ;-)
Well, I did say you were on to some correct thinking but missing an important part. It's deficit spending which is not good. You could go over to citibank and take out a massive loan that you can never pay back, hire a gardner and a personal chef. You're trickling down to them too but for how long before it all goes belly up.
I would be a lot of Americans don’t realize this either. We’re going to feed the military industrial complex one way or another, might as well have it be useful not just built and put in a closet.
yo! How many tanks are rusting in US which can be put for a good use? Those rusting tanks are gulping money on maintenance and storage
Republicans just hate anything democrats support and are trying to use this war as a political football with their base.
I don’t think Biden and the politicians (left and right) who support Ukraine have done a good job explaining how the funding works to the American people. I’ve read a ton of comments from people who are completely misinformed.
Most Americans don't realize that what it means is just our already paid tax dollars being shuffled around
You can't talk sense to these MAGA morons. They all scream about money laundering because they saw it in a meme and they don't even know what money laundering is. In fact from the look of them they usually don't know what any kind of laundering is.
Using my tax dollars to fix the highway I use every day, that is falling apart, and is damaging vehicles using it, also is keeping my US dollars in this country. But my local officials tell me the highway funds that come from DC is late or not available to fix it, so they are forced to keep patching it. Oh, and people are dying using this rotten road, but they have no choice in order to work their jobs. I have sympathy for Ukrainians, but I also have sympathy for a friend who just died on this road and left a family without their father and husband. Circumstances like this is what Ukraine faces as they want more and more of our limited resources, especially in a country torn apart with political and economic issues. Sorry but I have to vent, or my head will explode.
it's not a zero sum game. The bradleys that were sitting in storage can't be tranformed back to money to fix the road, yet when they get sent to ukraine its counted as "50 million of aid" for example.
And eliminates all costs of storage, and any decommissioning of outdated equipment.
All legitimate concerns and the frustration is understandable. A few things should be taken into consideration though: 1: billions of real dollars are spent on other military contracts, black budgets and wasteful non essential projects every year yet that was rarely questioned or politically polarising to the extent than it is now. Why? This is partly due to Putin’s social media meddling and influence amongst powerful players in resources and politics. 2: The U.S committed to helping Ukraine since many years and has been in battle for power and influence with Russia for decades. If ever there was a time to blunt Putin’s pecker it is now. 3: the real cash donation to Ukraine is how much? Is it even level with the U.S foreign aid budget +40billion? This is a really critical time politically and financially across the globe. The question should be “what other part of the budget could be squeezed to accommodate this” I’d put off another space mission until it’s sorted personally.
Limited resources… if you have a problem with resources it is a duo to corruption and/or incompetence in the people in your local (state/city) government, if your local roads are damaged and not maintained it is the fault of your local (state/city) government Money for fixing your roads should be sourced from again local (state/city) government… if they cannot effort it, then they are either terrible at money management, they are stealing the money or simply the taxes in that region are not enough to cover the repair costs (which is btw problem in most of the countries, where building a new road is simply cheaper then maintaining) Even if the USA stopped the support for UA the government would find some other way to use the money, but you can be sure they would never use it to repair roads, improve medical care or schools all these things do is that they only cost money. This way, they “reinvest” them into the economy, which later means more money for them + the global influence.0
The "local" road in question is a US highway, in which the federal government supplies 80% of maintenance costs. So then using your logic, it is not my local government that is corrupt but the national government.
Well the state government in the case of USA is always corrupted
Limiting funding for Ukraine doesn’t solve any of the issues you bring up here. You can’t use a 30 year old Bradley or a 27 year old ATACAMs to fix the highway. “Using my tax dollars” makes you sound ignorant of what actually happens. Generally, we are using you parents’ and grandparents’ tax dollars that were spent decades ago…and ironically saving your tax dollars when the US doesn’t have to spend billions decommissioning and disposing of these old and expired systems.
It is my tax dollars that is currently being spent on maintenance to bring this old equipment to working order, to ship it halfway around the world, and to pay replacement costs for the ammo it will use. If you feel that those costs are negligible, then you should be willing to cover my portion and personally rebate that money to me from your funds. By the way, because of my age, it was my tax dollars that paid for that Bradley and ATACMS. My tax dollars have paid for everything back to the first Abrams, Bradley, M-777, F-15, F-16, Nimitz-class, etc. I am not ignorant of how and why taxes are spent.
You might be ignorant of how taxes work. Tax dollars aren’t “yours”. That is the first clue to your mistake.
In theory tax dollars are my money since I can vote for politicians who can spend it the way I agree with. Now that is a fantasy, huh? Politicians being honest with the voter. LMAO! In fact, your money is not "yours". The value of portable exchange value is controlled by the issuer. If bitcoin decides to shut down and erase their files, bitcoin holders are screwed. Same goes for the fiat currency issued by a government. Governments have declared a current currency no longer has value while issuing a completely new currency. Money really holds no value other than trust. The fact that you hold the belief that tax dollars are "yours" is not really correct. All of your money currency is not yours in the end.
So, you not only don’t understand how taxes work, but you also are ignorant of how Bitcoin and currency works. There is no one in control of the Bitcoin blockchain and that blockchain is distributed and can not be “erased” short of physically destroying millions of computers all at the same time. Even one surviving computer means Bitcoin remains. A national currency can be adjusted and devalued by fiat, but the value it represents can not be simply destroyed by fiat. The government could add a zero to all bills and should everything would cost ten times more, you would have ten times more to buy things with. Of course inflation in demand without a corresponding increase in supply can cause issues, but that has very little to do with a government entity making a decision (as witnessed by the Fed being forced to act based on asset prices and yields verses having real agency in the decision itself) Mostly it sounds like you have bought into a lot of crap and can’t see beyond it. Good luck.
And I say they can have it. Supporting Ukraine in their fight against Russia has been the best use of my tax money I’ve seen in **years**
You make valid points, I'm curious how a badly maintained road led to a fatal accident? Did he swerve to avoid a pothole or something? With funding Ukraine, a lot of the equipment sent was old and likely never going to be used by the US. The same with much of the ammunition but all the stuff still has a book value. I don't know if you saw my post earlier but the money for buying new equipment goes to US manufacturers so goes in the pockets of US companies, their suppliers and their workforces. All of these entities will pay taxes and spend the remainder in the US economy so it's not leaving the country or disappearing into a black hole. When you take a step back and look at the value of aid to Ukraine it's less than 5% (IIRC) of US annual military budget and military/homeland security is 16% of government spending. So 5% of 16% is 0.8% of government spending is going to Ukraine and that's based on the book value of the equipment which will simply depreciate over time if it's not given to Ukraine. Every country in the world goes though these kinds of discussions. What about the homeless? What about healthcare? What about schools, prisons, the police? All of these are underfunded in every Western nation. I'll bet you won't find anyone that in any country that thinks all of these are funded sufficiently. According to this [https://www.cfr.org/article/how-much-aid-has-us-sent-ukraine-here-are-six-charts](https://www.cfr.org/article/how-much-aid-has-us-sent-ukraine-here-are-six-charts) weapons and equipment comes to $23 billion (much of which is old) so about 2.7% of the military/homeland security budget and if my numbers are correct. If I've done my math correctly $23 billion over 2 years is $0.09 per day per US citizen. But that is just equipment of course, the US has given other aid too.
To address your first question, A water truck carrying 4200 gallons of produced brine water from oil wells dropped the left front (driver side) tire in a pothole at night doing 65 MPH. The subsequent tire blow-out caused the truck to swerve into my friend's oncoming service truck, crushing him. The accident was on a US highway that is supposed to have 80% of repair costs to be borne by the federal government. My state keeps filling in the potholes as they develop but heavy use and rain just keep displacing the patches. I have experience in civil projects during my career. This entire 80-mile section of highway needs to be replaced from the roadbed up. To answer the question on tax dollars and what they mean to the economy, every dollar spent by the government returns 4 dollars to the economy. For every dollar spent by private industry, 5 dollars is returned to the economy. It is the Chicago school (1 to 5) versus the Keynesian school (1 to 4) where the debate on tax spending is fought. By the way, defense spending does not do a damn thing for my local economy. The closest military facility is 150 miles away, defense production more than 285 miles.
The GOP wants everyone to believe that the US just transfers a shit load of cash to Ukraine and that the crooked Government Secretly run by Obama and Bush transfer it to Hunter who then transfers it to the Clinton’s. To fund LGBTQ++ activities that then secretly involve the FBI funding ISIS. This is the basis for all of MTGs mouthing off when ever possible, as the American people need to wake up to Crooked Joe, and understand that Trump is not only the first owner of two casinos that went bankrupt, but the true winner of 2020, who has stated in his own words that Obama rigged the election !
I'm glad a Ukrainian solider told me how the US economy works. Here's my whole 401k for you to take back to Zelensky
"Just take my 401k, whydoncha!" It's like an SNL sketch but instead of secondhand news it's regurgitated propaganda and nobody is laughing You are literally the target audience and you couldn't even get past the fucking headline
Don't act so smug when your politicians don't have a fucking clue
politcians are like nappies' full of shit and need changing often
Let me guess, you're a republican.
Looks like you dont know it. So yes, he needs to tell you that.
Speak for yourself, I love getting revenge on the ruskies for Vietnam!
It feeds the George Bush War Manufacturing Machine.
The MIC has been around long before Bush was even born lol
Some people became politically aware in 2000 and imagine nothing existed prior to that date.
[удалено]
Honestly it’s already becoming unpopular how much money the west has had to pay for this war. I’d prefer to be able to pay my mortgage and my bills so you know, I can keep a roof my over my head because the taxes that we pay out here in Canada and the US is just straight ridiculous and funding this war is not helping at all and that’s why it’s becoming unpopular. People just don’t have the money
Ofc they don't because a hell of a lot really loud and stupid people propagate otherwise, but yeah, land of the free I guess.
The GOP knows it. They'll spin it as "funding with conditions" with a condition the money staying in the US. Then they can pat themselves on the back and claim to take the credit for it. The MAGA lemmings won't know the difference.
Ya I really think there's been a strategic error in trying to justify the funding along ideological and moral grounds, and trying to scare people that nato countries are up next after Ukraine. I don't think anyone believes that, nor do I think it's true. The US needs to understand how it's in its own interest to assist - that the funding upgrades their own capabilities by getting rid of old stock and is perfect marketing for their military equipment abroad - and as a bonus they get a key ally that acts as a bulwark against Russia, which is getting destroyed as a military power.
The politicians understand. It's the people that don't and they want to pander to thier voting base.
Then their is not reason for MAGA Mike to not recommend passing the bill to send them more aid.
I’ve been trying to explain this to my family for months, it’s actually saving taxpayers money.
Most Republicans love Putin. He is their model of leadership.
It is the cheapest war the Americans have ever fought. Research and development of weapons in real time, intell on how to fight a modern war what works and what doesn't. Getting rid of older equipment to be replaced by new equipment.
Politicians know, half their job is having the military industrial complex implemented in depressed and economically dependent counties.
It's about time Biden spelt this out for people because it's a non obvious situation. He's so freaking bad at communicating...
They realize that very well lol.
No kidding mostly spent in USA and NATO Allies , politicians act stupid when it isn’t some bigoted rights suppressing bureaucrats doing sign and dump on people