It wouldn’t hurt to bring this up the next time someone tells you Trump is an anti-war candidate.

  • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Ultimately there’s no objective measure of whether “war is profitable”. There’s no objective definition of war. There’s no objective measurement of the “sides” and their profit/loss, much less the nuances of who specifically profits or loses.

    But total was is relatively profitable versus being destroyed. And it’s absolutely profitable for a select group of people. Most often it’s similar people on “both sides” that profit.

    • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Profitable for a select group of people, who should be named, shamed, tarred and feathered.

      I believe that if you were to do an economic analysis of the total P/L of the entirety of human conflict, the L column would overwhelmingly outweighs the P column, even leaving out all modern warfare, which just ramps up the L side. I say that because one of my econ professors did just that during a class. He published a paper about it, but I have no clue what it was called, it would have been somewhere between '96 and '98 that he published it.

      • Mammothmothman@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        They own all the guns though how can we name and shame when they can just destroy lives with impunity?