Well a good share goes back that's true, but certainly not everything. I mean the plants could've also built school busses and ambulances instead of military vehicles, right? I was just pointing out that "no downsides" is a bit optimistic, the costs are very real. And it is a pity that in this day and age we still have to put up with that 🙁

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I mean the plants could’ve also built school busses and ambulances instead of military vehicles, right? I was just pointing out that “no downsides” is a bit optimistic, the costs are very real. And it is a pity that in this day and age we still have to put up with that 🙁

You're not recognizing the reality that existed before this if that is your stance. The plants were already building the military vehicles except those plants were in the USA with the vehicles being shipped to Europe for Europe defense. The difference in this particular aspect is that now Europeans will have a stronger hand in their own defense.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Well I guess if you consider "the west" as one common block then yes, maybe it is a net-zero game. And maybe that really is the fair assessment. But from the purely european point of view it sure was nice when we had a peace divident that we could invest elsewhere.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Well, indeed it is a cost for the society. But when people are forced to work to be allowed to live, the problem is not the workforce.

It is a pity in this day and age that there are still wars, but it is an even greater pity that we have to work artificial jobs to be allowed to live imo.

Money shouldn't be a concern.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

You're not wrong, at least building military things does add value to society especially in times like these. Maybe working some bullshit job is worse in that regard 😉 Still I would prefer to live in a world that wouldn't need both of these things.