Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
Thanks. Nice analysis. Mentions the role of war in keeping Russia’s industrial machinery / economy running. Possibly applies to many other economies including our own.
A (perhaps misguided) college Prof’ once explained it this way:
”War is better for an economy than other types of spending because many weapons are used just one-time and need to be replaced immediately, whereas more productive assets like autos, homes or domestic infrastructure may last for decades before requiring replacement.” In addition, spending to reconstruct devastated infrastructure also stimulates economies while at the same time modernizing that infrastructure. The (now likely deranged) Prof’ then ventured so far as to suggest that modern economies couldn’t function without spending for war.
- Manufactured by US weapons manufacturers Raytheon and Lockheed Martin, the Javelin (anti-tank missile) costs $178,000, including the launch system and missile. Each replacement missile costs around $78,000.
- America’s subsonic Tomahawk cruise missiles come in a variety of forms, but the most modern iterations ring it at around $2 million each.
- Independent assessments put the cost to purchase the newest versions of the existing ground-based (anti-missile) interceptors at $90–100 million per missile.
PS - David’s source explains that it is better to derive wartime stimulus from wars fought in someone else’s country rather than inside your own. (ie: Russia is destroying Ukraine). Important point. Japan’s economy accelerated rapidly in the 40 years following WWII, becoming ”the economic wonder of the world” by 1990. However, the cost to Japan (including 2 nuked cities) was very high.
Comments
A (perhaps misguided) college Prof’ once explained it this way:
”War is better for an economy than other types of spending because many weapons are used just one-time and need to be replaced immediately, whereas more productive assets like autos, homes or domestic infrastructure may last for decades before requiring replacement.” In addition, spending to reconstruct devastated infrastructure also stimulates economies while at the same time modernizing that infrastructure. The (now likely deranged) Prof’ then ventured so far as to suggest that modern economies couldn’t function without spending for war.
Cost of Various Weapons
- Manufactured by US weapons manufacturers Raytheon and Lockheed Martin, the Javelin (anti-tank missile) costs $178,000, including the launch system and missile. Each replacement missile costs around $78,000.
- America’s subsonic Tomahawk cruise missiles come in a variety of forms, but the most modern iterations ring it at around $2 million each.
- Independent assessments put the cost to purchase the newest versions of the existing ground-based (anti-missile) interceptors at $90–100 million per missile.
PS - David’s source explains that it is better to derive wartime stimulus from wars fought in someone else’s country rather than inside your own. (ie: Russia is destroying Ukraine). Important point. Japan’s economy accelerated rapidly in the 40 years following WWII, becoming ”the economic wonder of the world” by 1990. However, the cost to Japan (including 2 nuked cities) was very high.