this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2023
21 points (100.0% liked)
Politics
10180 readers
101 users here now
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
- Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
- Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
- Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
- Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
- Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This is the military in a nutshell. It ostensibly needs to protect the nation, but civilian industries exist as a result, whose executives have generals in their pockets. If the industry no longer serves the needs of the military, then the military should stop using it; but that doesn't reduce the plight of a worker who would become unemployed as a result. Who suffers from this tension? Every taxpayer who isn't an executive or a general with a cushy retirement job, but especially workers and average servicemembers.
Certainly true.
Right now we have a military that serves the interests of the industrial complex and not the other way around.
In WWII it wasn't that way. The government did not have companies that it would be seduced into paying more than a fair value for military equipment