Iran War Cost Tracker • Hacker News Board

Re: Iran War Cost Tracker

#461

Post by danny_codes » Wed, Mar 04, 2026, 9:40 PM UTC

ineedaj0b wrote: post #213

danny_codes wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Universal healthcare is cheaper than our system of healthcare by a factor of 2 (comparing other OECD countries). If we raised taxes and implemented universal healthcare we’d save about $1T a year. Cost isn’t the relevant factor, it’s politics. Or more accurately, naked bribery that we, for some insane reason, call “lobbying”.

I've looked into this for work and no way. You must unfactor the European models getting subsidized by the current US model. Some very smart people have looked at fixing the system, and there's no golden goose (except ozempic maybe). We'll need pharmacological breakthroughs. Also, regrettably - A LOT of medical care is unnecessary but we love grandma.

The Europeans don’t get subsidized by us. Not sure what you’re talking about.

We don’t “need” pharmacological breakthroughs to provide the current standard of care. That’s why it’s the current standard of care.

Re: Iran War Cost Tracker

#462

Post by ImPostingOnHN » Wed, Mar 04, 2026, 11:20 PM UTC

ajross wrote: post #448

gravisultra wrote: post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm talking about the majority position, not minority.

So, no, you're not. Or you're misunderstanding how this works. "Stop the war in Iran" is a majority position in polls . People don't vote on that, because people don't care about the war in Iran. Instead, wars at the ballot box are fought over which ethnicity needs to be the target of state violence, or whether or not it's a good thing for citizens to have health care. And those wars are serious, and hard-fought, and…

By this logic, everything any politician does would by definition be exactly what their constituents want, regardless of polling on any particular issue, because they still voted for the politician.

To wit: there are I issues and P positions for each issue, yet there are not I*P ballot choices, so people inevitably get something they don't want.

The logic also falls apart when you realize politicians can do whatever they want after getting elected, including flipping their positions on issues that got them elected (like no war), regardless of what the voters want.

Re: Iran War Cost Tracker

#463

Post by ajross » Thu, Mar 05, 2026, 12:22 AM UTC

ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #462

ajross wrote: post #448

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, no, you're not. Or you're misunderstanding how this works. "Stop the war in Iran" is a majority position in polls . People don't vote on that, because people don't care about the war in Iran. Instead, wars at the ballot box are fought over which ethnicity needs to be the target of state violence, or whether or not it's a good thing for citizens to have health care. And those wars are serious, and hard-fought, and…

By this logic, everything any politician does would by definition be exactly what their constituents want, regardless of polling on any particular issue, because they still voted for the politician. To wit: there are I issues and P positions for each issue, yet there are not I*P ballot choices, so people inevitably get something they don't want. The logic also falls apart when you realize politicians can do whatever…

> To wit: there are I issues and P positions for each issue, yet there are not I * P ballot choices, so people inevitably get something they don't want.

Sigh. I hate the internet. That was exactly my point. Thank you.

The democratic process inherently produces outcomes where not every action taken by a government has majority support. Always. Inevitably.

And, precisely because this is an inevitable result, arguments of the form that such actions represent the manipulation of the government by a conspiracy of elites suppressing the will of the masses are, in the jargon, batshit.

There is no conspiracy. You're just, to repeat for the fifth time, in a minority. Not on the issue itself, but on your prioritization. Sure, lots of people might "agree" with you, but no one gives enough of a shit to change their vote. So the government chases the votes instead, and the interests of those who can deliver the votes.

Re: Iran War Cost Tracker

#464

Post by gravisultra » Thu, Mar 05, 2026, 12:47 AM UTC

ajross wrote: post #463

ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #462

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By this logic, everything any politician does would by definition be exactly what their constituents want, regardless of polling on any particular issue, because they still voted for the politician. To wit: there are I issues and P positions for each issue, yet there are not I*P ballot choices, so people inevitably get something they don't want. The logic also falls apart when you realize politicians can do whatever…

> To wit: there are I issues and P positions for each issue, yet there are not I * P ballot choices, so people inevitably get something they don't want. Sigh. I hate the internet. That was exactly my point. Thank you. The democratic process inherently produces outcomes where not every action taken by a government has majority support. Always. Inevitably. And, precisely because this is an inevitable result, arguments…

This is the logic that cost Kamala Harris the election. Liberals are absolutely addicted to putting their head in the sand about how much people care about genocide and Israel's influence on our lives. We've hit the breaking point, Zionism is no longer electorally valid.

Re: Iran War Cost Tracker

#465

Post by ImPostingOnHN » Thu, Mar 05, 2026, 1:09 AM UTC

ajross wrote: post #463

ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #462

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By this logic, everything any politician does would by definition be exactly what their constituents want, regardless of polling on any particular issue, because they still voted for the politician. To wit: there are I issues and P positions for each issue, yet there are not I*P ballot choices, so people inevitably get something they don't want. The logic also falls apart when you realize politicians can do whatever…

> To wit: there are I issues and P positions for each issue, yet there are not I * P ballot choices, so people inevitably get something they don't want. Sigh. I hate the internet. That was exactly my point. Thank you. The democratic process inherently produces outcomes where not every action taken by a government has majority support. Always. Inevitably. And, precisely because this is an inevitable result, arguments…

> The democratic process inherently produces outcomes where not every action taken by a government has majority support. Always. Inevitably.

Precisely -- you are repeating my point. And precisely because this is an inevitable result, arguments result of the form that such actions are what people want, because they voted for that politician, and that politician did that, therefore the people must have wanted it, therefore anyone who doesn't want it must be in the minority. This was your argument.

For the 6th time: This is not the case. Just because a politician did something does not mean it has majority support. Polling shows this particular position (pro-Iran-war) does not have majority support, but rather majority opposition [0], contrary to your argument. Because of the aforementioned I*P limitation, polls are the way to determine this, and that is what they determined [0]. If you think there is majority support for the Iran war, you are in a bubble. Your own personal "batshit" conspiracy theory about "elites" or whatever has no bearing on this.

0 - https://time.com/7382231/iran-us-israel-war-support-polling-...

Re: Iran War Cost Tracker

#466

Post by hereme888 » Thu, Mar 05, 2026, 1:31 AM UTC

hypeatei wrote: post #446

hereme888 wrote: post #445

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did not miss any points. You are uninformed. Iran was less than a month away from having a viable nuke, and they've been swearing to use it against America and Israel for the past 47 years. In the last set of negotiations, Iran refused to rule out building the nuke. That's the official information, and if you think they're lying, you have no alternative sources of trustworthy information besides terrorist-aligned i…

> Iran was less than a month away from having a viable nuke Oh, I see, you've bought the propaganda that Iran is close to a nuke. That's been the scare tactic for decades. Did you already forget the strike we did on their nuclear facilities months ago that supposedly set them back? There was no justification for this war, the official US position is that we needed to get involved because Israel striked first and Iran…

Here you go: they were 7-10 days from weapon's grade enrichment.

https://x.com/stinchfield1776/status/2029365225426649346

That's the guy who met to negotiate with the Iranians. They admitted it. You won't get clearer evidence than that.

Re: Iran War Cost Tracker

#467

Post by ajross » Thu, Mar 05, 2026, 1:48 AM UTC

ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #465

ajross wrote: post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> To wit: there are I issues and P positions for each issue, yet there are not I * P ballot choices, so people inevitably get something they don't want. Sigh. I hate the internet. That was exactly my point. Thank you. The democratic process inherently produces outcomes where not every action taken by a government has majority support. Always. Inevitably. And, precisely because this is an inevitable result, arguments…

> The democratic process inherently produces outcomes where not every action taken by a government has majority support. Always. Inevitably. Precisely -- you are repeating my point. And precisely because this is an inevitable result, arguments result of the form that such actions are what people want, because they voted for that politician, and that politician did that, therefore the people must have wanted it, there…

> arguments result of the form that such actions are what people want

... who are you replying to? Not me. I certainly didn't say that.

Re: Iran War Cost Tracker

#468

Post by RiverStone » Thu, Mar 05, 2026, 3:20 AM UTC

hereme888 wrote: post #200

danny_codes wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah that’s the likely outcome given our track record /s

Venezuela is undergoing tremendous freedom and hope. My fellow Venezuelans and I are super grateful for the well-planned, surgical mission of the US. They can have all the oil they want and help restore our industries in exchange for their financial benefit and partnership, which is the most recent track record.

Every Iranian I know has the same sentiment right now. Feeling very conflicted in that 1) their country is being attacked, and 2) thankful that the oppressive regime is being destroyed. Cautiously optimistic about the future.

Re: Iran War Cost Tracker

#469

Post by RiverStone » Thu, Mar 05, 2026, 3:30 AM UTC

coffinbirth wrote: post #199

Dear Americans, what are the costs of the 165 killed children of the Minab school airstrike[1]? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Minab_school_airstrike

I’ll defer to every Iranian I know, the millions of Iranians expats, and millions of Iranians within Iran, who are all cheering us on and celebrating Khamenei’s death.

Re: Iran War Cost Tracker

#470

Post by hedora » Thu, Mar 05, 2026, 3:32 AM UTC

Quarrelsome wrote: post #222

hedora wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This strike isn't even close to Hamas-levels of planning. If anything Hamas got the US to make an unforced mistake in a game of checkers three moves out. According to the IDF's analysis of captured Hamas documents, step 2 was: "Get Israel to commit so many war crimes that we actually have the moral high ground. Then, regional partners will be forced to support us again, and our recruitment numbers go back up. Do ever…

> This strike isn't even close to Hamas-levels of planning. Yes it is, its an attack without any surefire plans for later stages of the war. While they might fluke it, I don't see how just missiling a bunch of targets and murdering a nation's leader really achieves tangible change. Its like a bully taking a swing at someone in class, they can, so they do, but there's no thought about end outcomes. They might get lunc…

As of Saturday, Hamas achieved 100% of their objectives from those strikes. The primary objective was starting a regional conflict. That was way beyond their capabilities.

Trump doesn't even seem to know what the US's objectives are in Iran. It changes every time anyone in the administration opens their mouth.