3 ms·
Ideally this kind of subsidy would be paid any time the expected return on investment for the government was better than breaking even. It’s not about making su
by taneq 3y ago
Ideally this kind of subsidy would be paid any time the expected return on investment for the government was better than breaking even. It’s not about making sure only the most deserving get help, it’s about making sure everyone (including the most deserving) gets more.
- nabla9 3y agoIt's a strategic investment for national security with net negative value. The government does not want return of investment. The government wants to lose money so that national security gets better.
- User23 3y agoInvesting money is different when you can create it from nothing. Needless to say the intuitions one develops from investing while not being able to create money at will are not entirely applicable.
- kiba 3y agoMaybe or maybe not in term of net tax revenue, but it's certainly an investment with an expectation of the preferred outcome of national security, with some portion of the subsidy maybe being returned as taxes of various kinds.
- taneq 3y agoI think we're using different definitions. A "strategic investment for national security" only has "net negative value" is the overall expected outcome is negative. War is pretty expensive so it's worth spending a bit of money to avoid it, or at least sway the outcome. The government doesn't want a dollar ROI in the sense of increased revenues because it defines the dollar. What happens to the local currency is just one factor in the overall considerations.