Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Economic costs of war

watson.brown.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

571–580 of 618 posts

Re: Economic costs of war

#571

Post by MagnumOpus »

anticodon wrote: post #544
prehistoricdog wrote: post #543

Earlier quoted context omitted.

typical Russian imperialistic brainwashed conclusions. I'm sorry. I'm not going to discuss all of your wrong assumptions, just mentioning "closing media". Do you know the narrative those media were spreading? Do you know who is Medvedchuk? These media were pro-russia propagandists.

But am I wrong in the assessment of the economical situation and population decline in Ukraine? Am I wrong that all the industry in Ukraine was destroyed (aviation, shipbuilding, cars and trucks, etc)? Am I wrong that energy consumption in Ukraine is declining (means that industry and/or population are declining)?

> am I wrong in the assessment of the economical situation and population decline in Ukraine

Yes you are. You showed (without evidence but let's assume) that $40bn of agricultural exports don't cover the $60 of Ukraine imports. Only 15% of people there work in agriculture. The other 85% of workers are just as capable of creating value for export.

> Am I wrong that all the industry in Ukraine was destroyed

Yes, and it is so obvious a lie that it strains credulity. Even just ignoring the well known mining/iron ore/iron/steel/pipe industry that has at least a dozen well known big companies. Plus of course Ukraine manufactures a lot of other things from cars to armament to confectionary.

And if it came to an export/currency collapse people would and could adapt and buy the local food/cars/trucks (even if they don't have the same quality or variety as foreign goods).

Re: Economic costs of war

#572

Post by leetcrew »

sul_tasto wrote: post #294
secondaryacct wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also they dont humiliate you day and night calling your culture backward, a bonus when you want people to work with you.

I see this pattern a lot in the US. I don’t fully understand where it comes from, the early puritanical religious roots of the colonial period?

large scale "boots on the ground" invasions are pretty hard to sell to the american public. they don't generally want to see american soldiers die without a good reason. retaliating against the people who harbored bin laden is already a pretty good reason, and liberating the subjects of an oppressive regime is icing on the cake. of course, it's hard to paint a regime as oppressive without also calling them "backwards". after all, if they were as advanced as us westerners, surely they would have a free democratic society already. /s

Re: Economic costs of war

#573

Post by swader999 »

epistasis wrote: post #421
gruez wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does opium have to do with oil?

I don't think opium has much to do with the initial invasion of Afghanistan, but I think that there's a pretty good argument that it has had a big effect on what has played out during the occupation. So I'm not fully sure of the relevance of the comment either.

The conspiracy theory is that much of the increased opium production funded a lot of CIA black programs.

Re: Economic costs of war

#574

Post by hestefisk »

thatwasunusual wrote: post #381
hestefisk wrote: post #207

“Medicare for all”, the single payer universal healthcare system in the US, was projected to cost between $16-34T [1] over a decade. I know there are some big questions around the actual cost of US aggression / state terrorism since 9/11 (ie 6.4T vs 2T as per other entries in this thread). A rough 80/20 analysis suggests: * We could have funded free healthcare to roughly one quarter of the US population for 10 years…

> “Medicare for all”, the single payer universal healthcare system in the US, was projected to cost [...] Are you American?

No, but I'm an avid follower of American politics.

Re: Economic costs of war

#575

Post by C19is20 »

el_jay wrote: post #118

To those here riffing on the theme of “this misrepresents the volume and beneficiaries of the transactions involved” - you’re not wrong. Accurate representation of public info like this is a top organisational problem for our species at the moment. But I do think you miss the point, so aptly put by Mr Eisenhower: “Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a thef…

Mr E left out "x...politicians lining their pockets".

Re: Economic costs of war

#576

Post by rayiner »

watwut wrote: post #529
mc32 wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cultural aspect is critical and people have overlooked in many places. The Optimism for Russia after the fall of the USSR, Ukraine and Afghanistan, Libya, etc. Places with no democratic foundation or tradition but plagued by corruption. It needs to grow over decades organically for the people to get used to the idea and the institutions, for example, like in Hong-Kong. Singapore is another example and they yet do…

Germany had no democratic tradition either, it was corrupt too. And, as someone else said, many former USSR countries are doing quite well with their new democracies. The factors are way more complicated then just that.

Germany had the conditions precedent to democracy, as did Japan: https://noahpinion.substack.com/p/the-afghanistan-occupation.... Things like rule of law, market economies, etc.

An authoritarian regime that liberalizes the underlying foundation of the country often creates the stage for a functional democracy. That happened in Germany, South Korea, Singapore, etc. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Future_of_Freedom

But you can’t go from being a tribal society based on kinship ties and the only rule of law being the decisions of village elders to democracy.

Re: Economic costs of war

#577

Post by rayiner »

watwut wrote: post #537
Pius_IX wrote: post #533

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course Germany had democratic traditions, going back to the early/middle of the 19th century. The Frankfurter Nationalversammlung at 1848, while it failed quite spectacularly, consisted of people from all over Germany debating. Even before that in many of the smaller kingdoms the people had achieved some representation and constitutions they guaranteed them the basic democratic rights of assembly, speech and a par…

Weimar was forced on them and was seen as disorderly mess by population. Yes, they had parliament pre-WWI and they still were not democracy. They were monarchy run by royal families. They were also highly militarized country at that too. Some debates and some representation does not constitute "democratic tradition".

> Some debates and some representation does not constitute "democratic tradition".

Those things are the foundation for what becomes democracy. To use England as the clearest example, Democracy there evolved with feudal aristocrats creating a parliament to have input to the king’s decision making, and from there parliament taking on more and more power and eventually being turned over to popular control through elections.

Re: Economic costs of war

#578

Post by [deleted] »

DSingularity wrote: post #493
mc32 wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cultural aspect is critical and people have overlooked in many places. The Optimism for Russia after the fall of the USSR, Ukraine and Afghanistan, Libya, etc. Places with no democratic foundation or tradition but plagued by corruption. It needs to grow over decades organically for the people to get used to the idea and the institutions, for example, like in Hong-Kong. Singapore is another example and they yet do…

The western democracies are so pure and noble. Definitely not colonizing, dictator supporting, or war mongering countries.

[deleted]

Re: Economic costs of war

#579

Post by prossercj »

el_jay wrote: post #118

To those here riffing on the theme of “this misrepresents the volume and beneficiaries of the transactions involved” - you’re not wrong. Accurate representation of public info like this is a top organisational problem for our species at the moment. But I do think you miss the point, so aptly put by Mr Eisenhower: “Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a thef…

For anyone like me inspired by this quote, here is an audio recording and transcript:

https://millercenter.org/the-presidency/presidential-speeche...

Re: Economic costs of war

#580

Post by 71a54xd »

MagnumOpus wrote: post #571
anticodon wrote: post #544

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But am I wrong in the assessment of the economical situation and population decline in Ukraine? Am I wrong that all the industry in Ukraine was destroyed (aviation, shipbuilding, cars and trucks, etc)? Am I wrong that energy consumption in Ukraine is declining (means that industry and/or population are declining)?

> am I wrong in the assessment of the economical situation and population decline in Ukraine Yes you are. You showed (without evidence but let's assume) that $40bn of agricultural exports don't cover the $60 of Ukraine imports. Only 15% of people there work in agriculture. The other 85% of workers are just as capable of creating value for export. > Am I wrong that all the industry in Ukraine was destroyed Yes, and it…

Many of my friends who are from Ukraine actually prefer to work in St. Petersburg and Moscow due to better opportunities and higher pay. Granted, compared to the US Russia's economy is horrendous, but the opportunities are still greater than what is available in Ukraine, at least as perceived by 20-something aged Ukrainians.
Post reply on HN