349

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ca/post/62796168

top 14 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 18 points 2 weeks ago

Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities. It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population. It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals. It is some fifty miles of concrete pavement. We pay for a single fighter with a half-million bushels of wheat. We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people. . . . This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chance_for_Peace_speech

[-] call_me_xale@lemmy.zip 4 points 2 weeks ago

Perhaps my favorite speech.

[-] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 15 points 2 weeks ago
[-] 20cello@lemmy.world 11 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

It is emblematic that the Americans care more about the economic cost than the human cost of using their missiles.

[-] PanGodofPanic@lemmy.blahaj.zone 13 points 2 weeks ago

It's not an either/or thing, nor is such a dichotomy implied. It's possible to waste money committing atrocities.

[-] CanadaPlus@futurology.today 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Yup just Americans.

[The rest of human history glancing off to the side]

Edit: And actually, it's only true of distant, unfamiliar people's lives. If Iran had gotten that pilot, the American public discourse would look very different right now, because it's an American in imminent danger.

[-] yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 2 weeks ago

Not really though.

The US would have more money available for weapons if schools, healthcare etc. was properly founded. That's basic macro economy.

[-] CanadaPlus@futurology.today 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Without defining that a bit more, basically no.

The US has a certain tax base in a given year, and then has to fit their spending into 140% of it or whatever. Simple as. Where medicine and education might help is tax base in a decade or two, but then again a tax cut or basic research grants might work even better. (Spending on weapons now definitely doesn't help weapons later; that's "guns vs. butter")

Where most would say it helps is still having a stable democracy to spend it, but then that's not really macroeconomics anymore.

[-] yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 2 weeks ago

tax base in a decade or two

That's what I'm referring to. A healthy, well-educated population is significantly more productive than an ill and stupid one. And more productive generally translates to more taxes in the long run.

Think of how strong of a military the US could've had if it were not controlled by companies looking for short term profits.

[-] Wilco@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 weeks ago

This is a bit technical, that is a lot of components. Millions in one rocket.

[-] Artisian@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

Genuinely curious: I would have guessed the payload and guidance were the expensive bits, and the rocket fuel/body/shell were fairly cheap?

[-] rainwall@piefed.social 5 points 2 weeks ago

The picture is metaphorical, not literal.

I bet fuel/body/shell have a 100-1000x markup either way though.

[-] CanadaPlus@futurology.today 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

From what I've heard it's like 100x markup on certain things to pay for the massive losses on whatever other crazy project the government demanded, or just on making only a few of whatever bespoke technology.

In the end, defence manufacturing is good money in wartime, but the rest of the time has a reputation as "a rat trap without the cheese".

The markup comes from two different sources. One is as you said. It’s to fund the black ops “doesn’t technically exist on paper, so we can’t have any funds publicly going towards it” types of things. People tend to complain a lot when the government “loses” money, so the government just hides their black expenditures in other more mundane things. Let’s say a bullet for a particular weapon only costs $1. The government marks it as $3, so they can then funnel $2 from every bullet into a black operation. Now the government doesn’t have to solve the problem of their books being unbalanced, because (at least on paper) money out=money spent.

The other reason is due to testing and ratings. Let’s say you need a new bolt for a tank. You can’t just go buy a $1 bolt from Home Depot, because the engineering spec requires that the bolt be able to tolerate a specific (high) amount of torque, shear force, shock (drop) force, static tension, etc… And Home Depot makes no guarantees that their bolts will be able to tolerate those forces. So the government hires a manufacturing contractor to do it. But then you run into scale issues. Because you can’t just buy a hundred bolts in a batch and let them sit on a shelf until they’re needed. People tend to complain about government waste when you do that, (and this bolt doesn’t usually need a lot of maintenance, so it isn’t replaced very often) so you’re only allowed to buy this bolt as needed.

You send the spec over to the manufacturer, who produces six bolts. One for sale, and five more for rating testing. There was also one trashed bolt, because it was out of spec (tolerances on the threads were too loose, by one or two thousands of an inch). Because they need to be able to put those bolts through various destructive tests to see when they fail. Because if you know when a bolt fails, you know what the spec is. So they test the bolts, ensuring it breaks above a certain weight, deforms/snaps (the head twists off or the threads strip) at a certain torque, the bolt cuts at a certain shear force, etc… All of these tests destroy the five testing bolts, but now the manufacturer knows when these specific bolts, from this specific batch of steel, will break. So they’re able to certify that this particular bolt will meet or exceed all of the listed requirements.

Congrats, you just purchased an $800 bolt. Because you’re not just paying for that one bolt. You’re also paying for all of the testing time. All of the materials and machinery needed to test the bolts. All of the fabricator’s hourly time to actually make and test the bolts. And the next time you need another one, it will cost another $800. Because the rating is only for that particular batch of steel. Steel varies pretty widely in quality, and the manufacturer can’t be sure that next month’s batch will have the same rating. So when you need another bolt next month, they have to repeat the tests all over again.

this post was submitted on 05 Apr 2026
349 points (99.2% liked)

NonCredibleDefense

8132 readers
61 users here now

A community for your defence shitposting needs

Rules

1. Be niceDo not make personal attacks against each other, call for violence against anyone, or intentionally antagonize people in the comment sections.

2. Explain incorrect defense articles and takes

If you want to post a non-credible take, it must be from a "credible" source (news article, politician, or military leader) and must have a comment laying out exactly why it's non-credible. Low-hanging fruit such as random Twitter and YouTube comments belong in the Matrix chat.

3. Content must be relevant

Posts must be about military hardware or international security/defense. This is not the page to fawn over Youtube personalities, simp over political leaders, or discuss other areas of international policy.

4. No racism / hatespeech

No slurs. No advocating for the killing of people or insulting them based on physical, religious, or ideological traits.

5. No politics

We don't care if you're Republican, Democrat, Socialist, Stalinist, Baathist, or some other hot mess. Leave it at the door. This applies to comments as well.

6. No seriousposting

We don't want your uncut war footage, fundraisers, credible news articles, or other such things. The world is already serious enough as it is.

7. No classified material

Classified ‘western’ information is off limits regardless of how "open source" and "easy to find" it is.

8. Source artwork

If you use somebody's art in your post or as your post, the OP must provide a direct link to the art's source in the comment section, or a good reason why this was not possible (such as the artist deleting their account). The source should be a place that the artist themselves uploaded the art. A booru is not a source. A watermark is not a source.

9. No low-effort posts

No egregiously low effort posts. E.g. screenshots, recent reposts, simple reaction & template memes, and images with the punchline in the title. Put these in weekly Matrix chat instead.

10. Don't get us banned

No brigading or harassing other communities. Do not post memes with a "haha people that I hate died… haha" punchline or violating the sh.itjust.works rules (below). This includes content illegal in Canada.

11. No misinformation

NCD exists to make fun of misinformation, not to spread it. Make outlandish claims, but if your take doesn’t show signs of satire or exaggeration it will be removed. Misleading content may result in a ban. Regardless of source, don’t post obvious propaganda or fake news. Double-check facts and don't be an idiot.


Join our Matrix chatroom


Other communities you may be interested in


Banner made by u/Fertility18

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS