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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?