Sure glad my taxes are 55%
I don't mind paying high taxes in the US... I mind that it just seems to get pissed away on literally nothing.
It wasn't _literally_ nothing. Think of all the companies that made billions in profits from all this.
Economic costs of war
211–220 of 618 posts
Re: Economic costs of war
#212Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or not? Maybe it’s China’s turn to burn trillions in Afghanistan.
China is likely to gain trillions from their belt and road initiative expanding into Afghanistan and from getting involved with the mining of the $3T in mineral resources identified previously in Afghanistan. China has already recognized the new Taliban government and the Taliban previously welcomed a new relationship with China that would protect Chinese interests, as they put it. China literally met with the incomi…
Yes.
They have also invested heavily in their relationship with Pakistan. Pakistan protected Bin Ladin and are deeply involved in Afghanistan. China can lean on Pakistan to compliment its direct relationship with the Taliban.
Not to mention that the Chinese are significantly more motivated to make Afghanistan work.
As a sign of their influence, the Taliban has said that whatever happens in China’s borders is their business. This was in response to questions about the Uighurs, which, you know, if you’re an Islamic regime you might at least pretend to care about.
Re: Economic costs of war
#213Earlier quoted context omitted.
$6.4T into renewables and storage over the past 20 years would have decarbonized the US grid several time over, accelerated the tech curve drastically, nearly completely transitioned us to EVs, and we'd probably have decarbonized a good chunk of industry that is hard to decarbonize now. We'd have cheaper energy than we do today, and cheaper energy forever. We could have been looking at current levels of climate chang…
What evidence do you have that Afghanistan was due to oil, and not due to the most direct motivations, like Taliban sheltering Al Qaeda (as they still do)? This seems like a conspiracy theory.
If you want to go there look at the acres of cultivation of opium under Taliban and then under US occupation. Ask where that exponential increase in production was spent.
Re: Economic costs of war
#214Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anti-terror efforts were called for. But there wasn't much overlap between what was called for and what we actually did.
What does that have to do with covid though? Im not here to justify the war on terror Im just wondering what the basis of comparison is. Covid has affected nearly 100% of the population in almost every country either directly and indirectly, either by getting sick or not being allowed to work or shop or show their face in public. The reach of covid response has gone far beyond having to take our shoes off in airports…
> What does that have to do with covid though?
The argument is that the effort we spent in the war on terror, per motivating death, was massively greater than the effort we've spent fighting covid.
> far beyond having to take our shoes off in airports
That would be a valid comparison in TSA vs. covid response. This is about much more than the TSA!
Re: Economic costs of war
#215Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or not? Maybe it’s China’s turn to burn trillions in Afghanistan.
China is likely to gain trillions from their belt and road initiative expanding into Afghanistan and from getting involved with the mining of the $3T in mineral resources identified previously in Afghanistan. China has already recognized the new Taliban government and the Taliban previously welcomed a new relationship with China that would protect Chinese interests, as they put it. China literally met with the incomi…
If they can stabilize it without human rights abuses, then good for them.
Re: Economic costs of war
#216Earlier quoted context omitted.
He was pretty adamant about that in his speech today.
Did you happen to catch his press conference last week? "The drawdown is proceeding in a secure and orderly way" "I also assured Ghani that U.S. support for the people of Afghanistan will endure" "I intend to maintain our diplomatic presence in Afghanistan, and we are coordinating closely with our international partners in order to continue to secure the international airport" "the Afghan troops have 300,000 well-equ…
If anything, the events of the last week have proven it's the right choice.
Re: Economic costs of war
#217Earlier quoted context omitted.
We also literally left giant weapon caches for the Taliban to use. We will pay for that, but in a different way.
Or not? Maybe it’s China’s turn to burn trillions in Afghanistan.
I see this a lot but don't understand why. China has every motivation to prop up the Taliban.
A sister comment already noted the mineral resources, but don't forget the main function of Afghanistan as a nation: production of heroin. Narcopolitics are so fantastically more significant than ever gets any attention from "surface" media, but this is the name of the game. Chinese fentanyl has taken over the global opiate black market, so they have every incentive to support the Taliban who will repress the rival heroin trade over the US-backed government who supported it.
Re: Economic costs of war
#218Earlier quoted context omitted.
No one "lent" us money. It's a fiat currency with a self-imposed limit on new money creation.
> No one "lent" us money. Obviously you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. BOND. Issued by US government. Is a promise that US will pay back the price of the bond at some predetermined future date and in the meantime it will also be paying interest in regular installments. Others (including other countries) buy US bonds, which finances US spending. You know, whenever there is this big debate about wh…
Wow, you are a dick.
Re: Economic costs of war
#219Earlier quoted context omitted.
Read up what happens when countries start creating money from thin air rather than borrow it. Very bad things happen. 100 quintillion (10^20) pengő, the largest denomination bill ever issued, Hungary, 1946.
Well, apparently they become economic superpowers because that is what all powerful nations with monetary sovereignty and fiat money have been doing under the guise of government debt. Hyperinflation largely happens in countries where the money wasn't really worth much to begin with because it's value was pegged to the price of gold or other currencies. Or because most of the economy functioned on foreign currency an…
Taxes are paid in a nations currency which creates demand for the currency scaled to their economy. Borrowing money is the only way to get spending > taxes without an exponential increase in the amount of money generated every year. That exponential growth then gets worse as the economy tanks and debt explodes. It’s been demonstrated repeatedly, things get out of control extremely quickly.
There is a little wiggle room. Governments do get to create a little money as their economies grow or if it’s used in foreign economies without causing significant inflation, but it’s dangerous to just spend it directly. The issue of course excessive printing or any economic contraction.
PS: Foreign debt is of course a closely related issue, but countries don’t create foreign debt unless they are forced to. You can’t get hyper inflation with a currency actually pegged to another currency or gold, those ties break long before hyper inflation happen.
Re: Economic costs of war
#220[dead]