4 ms·
> going to cost the taxpayers more money It's an investment in a public good, which is one of the roles of governments. Sort of like how the German taxpayer he
by hackerlight 3y ago
> going to cost the taxpayers more money
It's an investment in a public good, which is one of the roles of governments. Sort of like how the German taxpayer helped kick start the solar industry decades ago.
- groestl 3y agoYepp. The only money that might "cost" something, to a nation state, is money that leaves it.
- mminer237 3y agoA country spending money employing people to do unproductive work reduces the amount of useful work its populace can do. On paper you keep all the money, but no value is created.
- groestl 3y agoThere's opportunity cost, that's true, and I'm sure one can show that the most optimal situation in this case would be everyone on the world using the same office suite (i.e. free trade is optimal), _provided_ non-US countries would spend the money on actual production cost. However, the money paid is not only for production, but also for rent seeking, squeezing value out of a quasi-monopoly. That is actual money lost for unproductive work, _and_ it is going outside of Germany.