• zed_proclaimer [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s not only about money, it’s about productive and logistical limits which have been reached. All the money in the world isn’t going to make more 152 mm Soviet artillery shells appear from thin air for Ukraine, who needs millions per month to keep up with Russia.

      There’s a finite limit to the amount of war production the US can do in the short term, and it has heavily deindustrialized domestically so supply lines rely on imports from China and other countries

      • EmmaGoldman [she/her, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        While this is true, I fully expect them to just keep throwing money at the “problem” in the hopes that will fix it. Just another quick 200 billion, no biggie. Oh wait, here’s another 70 billion! And so on, forever, even if not a single artillery shell gets built with that money, gotta prop up the MIC!

  • barrbaric [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is just the MIC asking for more money, as per usual. If they were actually running out of money, they wouldn’t be giving press conferences.

  • it would be funny if we funded puppet governments like we do public goods like childcare assistance programs, nutrition assistance , social workers in public achools, etc. like instead of giving any money to either, the feds create a block grant program and all our little client states have to submit a proposal with budget and timeline of deliverables to compete for those funds.

    a committee decides what groups receive funds that are only released quarterly contingent as reports are submitted and reviewed. and everything is always hanging by a thread, so much effort is spent looking for new grants and submitting glowing reports, instead of… you know… doing the thing.