• IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Exactly … national aid means helping billionaires and share holders of major corporations

      There is always debates, discussions, arguments and special committees when it comes to talking about helping people who actually need help to stay alive or even lead decent lives in their own country.

      Giving money to billionaires? It’s never a question of ‘if’ … it’s always a question of ‘how much’.

  • 2pt_perversion@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    A lot of people assume the US is just giving money mostly like cash too when a majority is really military equipment/training. It’s kind of a win for the US because it supports their political goals in the region, gives them a chance to test weapon systems in real conditions, replace these weapons with more modern and advanced versions for the US military, and the money “paid” for these systems also mostly stays in the US economy anyway.

    • FoxBat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is definitely not talked about enough. Most of this money is going to US companys to buy replacement equipment and ammo. There have been a lot of jobs create to fulfill the enormous orders.

      • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is termed the “broken window fallacy” in economics.

        And sure increasing spending on military production creates jobs. But spending that money on improving infrastructure also creates jobs and you end up with a nice bridge you can use afterwards. Opportunity costs are a bitch, choices have to be made, and choosing military spending does equate to fewer resources for other things.

        Don’t get me wrong, I’m 100% in support of giving military aid to Ukraine. And ending the war sooner will have economic benefits by fixing the grain supply problems which is driving up food prices around the world. That’s a good economic argument for it. “Broken window” fallacies aren’t a good argument for it.

        Also the general instability caused by this war leads to a lot of economic problems.

        But yeah the main economic benefit it ending the war sooner. Ukraine is going to win this, it’s just a matter of how long it will take. More support for Ukraine means the war ends sooner which less economic costs from the disruption in trade caused by the war.

    • BastingChemina@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yes, the US is not sending billion in Ukraine. The US government is sending billion to the US military industry for them to make more weapon to send in Ukraine.

      This is billions of dollars invested to increase the size of the US military industry.

    • Redex@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, and a really important part is that many of the things being sent are things that would never be used again by the US and would just be thrown away, in which case it’s literally effectively free.

      E.g. old shells, M113, a bunch of other stuff

      The US isn’t sending stuff fresh off of the assembly line.

    • Notyou@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Thank you! I have to explain this to too many people. Not only all those benefits, but the huge amount of invaluable data on a more modern warfare. The whole OEF/OIF was more occupy and try to build up. This type of fighting can really help with how new technologies mix with war fighting tactics. We also learn what not to do, or at least get a good reminder on what not to do. OPSEC and all.

    • Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Also isn’t a lot of the aid just loans that need to be paid back eventually? Or in return for deals on other things that we need like grain and whatnot?

  • JohnDClay
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think getting shot or blown up is just as bad as starving, so I vote we do both, aid Ukraine and domestic poor people.

  • LostWon@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    As others said, it’s not billions to Ukraine really, it’s billions to the people who are about to profit off Ukraine (if they aren’t already). Want to buy a piece of the country’s assets? Have at it, here: https://privatization.gov.ua/en/

    • KairuByte@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      Looks like you already got your answer, but it’s honestly shocking how terribly such a large portion of the population is literally starving, or a single paycheck from tipping the scales against them.

      • Sabo_Tabby@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Shocked that a system that makes food distribution a for profit endeavor rather than one with the goal of feeding people?

        • LinkOpensChest.wav@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Capitalism is the problem, not the solution

          Capitalism only “works” due to the inequalities and unjust hierarchies it creates

            • LinkOpensChest.wav@lemmy.one
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Because humans always or against each other towards inequalities and hierarchies.

              I don’t subscribe to this cynical view of humankind. It is systems like capitalism that introduce these inequalities and hierarchies. In a system based on “from each according to their ability, to each according to their need,” there would be no need to establish inequities and hierarchies. In fact, in such a system, it would run against one’s own best interests to invest in such destructive paths.

              You cannot escape human nature

              1. It is human nature to exist in a social group that upholds the interest of self as well as those around us. Are you projecting your own shortcomings onto the rest of us? That seems unfair of you.

              2. Even if your cynical viewpoint were correct, this is still false. We are beings of higher intelligence, not bound by the confines of instinct. We have language that we can use to develop new systems and new understandings that aren’t inherently destructive like capitalism.

              Capitalism at least offers the slight chance to better your own position

              LMAO what? Capitalism does the very opposite. You are victim of the “temporarily embarrassed millionaire” mindset of capitalism. It’s false propaganda. You’ve been deceived. (Or maybe you are benefiting from this system and therefore want people to believe this, which … says something not so good about your character.)

              If you are born smart

              If you’re born smart, you do have privileges and opportunities that others do not have. This itself is an inequity that we should work to correct, and not something to be proud of.

              or very dedicated

              And there it is! The good ol’ bootstraps came out. It was only a matter of time.

                • LinkOpensChest.wav@lemmy.one
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  None of the good things you mentioned are the result of capitalism and are in fact strangled by capitalism. The internet started as a military project, which is not inherently capitalist, and if anything the internet as we know it is an example of the potential of anarchism. Same with much of our infrastructure, such as international railways/highways, public libraries, state and national parks…

                  You also grossly overestimate how much your choices and hard work contribute to success while underestimating sheer luck and privilege.

                  I … can’t really respond to everything you wrote, partially because it’s a borderline gish gallop, but most of your statements have been addressed by leftist and post-leftist literature.

                  I’d recommend reading up on anarcho-communism and anarcho-primitivism. They’re quite different theories that work to solve the unjust and destructive system of capitalism. Also read up on the history of leftist movements in Latin America and how US intervention was used to derail them (US is responsible for the rise of authoritarianism/Soviet alignment in Cuba and the derailment of Sandinistas in Nicaragua, just as two examples.) While not specifically leftist, I’d also recommend reading something like Caste by Isabel Wilkerson to understand racial hierarchies and Everyday Sexism by Lara Bates about gender hierarchies.

                  Frankly, capitalism is killing our people and destroying the planet, and it urgently needs to be stopped. It’s an inherently destructive system, and it can’t be fixed. It must be replaced.