Post
Conversation
![David Watson 🥑](data:image/svg+xml,<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="96" height="96"><rect fill-opacity="0"/></svg>)
Post your reply
I think it's notable that military spending as a share of the economy was lower at the end of the Biden administration than during any year of the Bush, Obama, or Trump administrations.
We could keep it up indefinitely, I believe.
Now sometimes you hear that the objective of the Trump administration's Ukraine policy is to try to force Europe to shoulder a larger share of the financial load so that we can focus more on China.
I am on board with this objective.
So I continue to be concerned here that people whose actual issue is *substantive sympathy with the aggressor * are mobilizing fiscal sustainability concerns in bad faith in was that will make America weaker and the country less safe.
We've given UKR 350 Bradleys in 3 years. At that rate, we'll run out in 2063, then we'll have to pull 2000 from storage and refurbish.
Once you realize he doesn’t give a fuck
About democracy and wants a technocracy led by Peter thiel it becomes easier to understand
Our military industrial base is a shell of its former self. We can produce something like 50-60k 155mm shells a month; at the height of WW2 we could produce 3-4 million a month. That’s just one example.
“We have infinite room on the back burner” is not a wise foreign policy
I wonder if it has anything to do with him selling his soul to Satan…
It’s not about GDP but about production and manufacturing. We don’t make enough stuff fast enough
Is Vance trying to say that the U.S. is so weak a country that we can’t keep supplying weapons to Ukraine indefinitely? (Note: I don’t think we *should* supply weapons to them indefinitely.) To make this claim is utter b.s. We can’t do it, but Russia can? This is nonsense.
Your contention requires Americans to want fund a meat grinder in Ukraine for eternity. It’s your position that needs to provide evidence.
VP Vance's rebuttal was so on point it flew over the head of this moron.
Is it not self evident? He is not “making a case”, rather he is pointing out the absurd
This Post is from an account you blocked.
I remember when your fraud ass covered economics. Without any legit training. Absolute moron.
How does it feel to have to defend the prospect of a forever war because you hate Trump so much?
It's all he needs to say since you're obviously wrong and thus the burden of rejoinder is pretty low
This Post is from an account you blocked.
“Which we can clearly sustain indefinitely”
Quote
Matthew Yglesias
@mattyglesias
The Vice President is one of the smarter and more articulate people in politics — he's written some very good articles and a pretty good book over the years — so I have to say I find the quality and quantity of the evidence he has produced here to be pretty disappointing.
![Image](data:image/svg+xml,<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="1168" height="506"><rect fill-opacity="0"/></svg>)
![Image](data:image/svg+xml,<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="1180" height="198"><rect fill-opacity="0"/></svg>)
It was unnecessary because of the self-evident buffoonery of your statement.
Even if you could build weapons forever, why would you want to? Why double down on this proposition?
I think we can both agree that Barack Obama, JD Vance and Elon Musk are three of the smartest people to be in politics in the last 2 decades.
All three of them have advocated for a Russian reset.
Do you wonder maybe they see the big picture and you don't?
amazon.com/dp/B0DD3THY27
At Political Pulse Hub, we bring you the latest news and insights on politics from around the world.
Join our community of informed readers and stay up-to-date on the issues that matter most.
what evidence is needed to respond to
“send people to the meat grinder bc we can”
you mushy retard
How many 18-30 Ukrainian men are left? You happy to wipe out an entire generation and then surrender anyway when all the men are dead?
Perfect Yglesias response.
Point missed completely, showing that Vance never really intended it for him.
You think we can indefinitely fund a proxy war while we’re running at 7% deficits?
Matt, we literally can't. All of our tax dollars and entitlements have been earmarked henceforth for tax cuts for Elon. They have a mandate.
Isn't the steelman version of this argument that US aid to Ukraine has run down our stockpiles of expensive precision munitions & other weapons that we manufacture at shockingly low annual rates, leaving us ill-prepared for, say, a full-scale conflict in the western Pacific?
speaking of precision, I wish people knew what words meant. indefinite does not mean forever or eternally,
it always seems to go to the idea that the US is about to default financially and can’t spend on allies; yet congressional GOP is poised to blow budget open again. This has now happened for decades…
Shorter Yglesias: I'm fine with every Ukrainian male dying as long as I feel morally superior in supplying them armament.
People actually from Kentucky do not like him and after the initial buzz, decided they didn’t like his book.
We need to spend the money on shitcoins held by the crypto czar, Matt. Be realistic.
Of course we can't sustain the struggle against Russian geopolitical influence indefinitely! We only get about a hundred years on this planet before we return our atoms to the universe! But we can try not to be jerks to each other while we're here.
To be fair, the post he was responding to - yours - was equally conclusory.
Vance understands how things work but it’s just so much easier to play populist and watch people cheer as you tell them what they want to hear.
He’s smart but he’s also arrogant and prone to shameless lying
So no I don’t take his word for sh**
Vance is not worried that the war will go on forever. He is worried that it won't, that Putin will fall and whomever replaces him won't be as helpful to the GOP in elections and might release exactly how helpful he was in the past.
To be fair he has to deliver a tax cut to his boss Peter Thiel
Sending arms to Ukraine is simply a money transfer from the US treasury directly to the US GDP as the missile makers are US companies. Has anyone asked the question: “what is economic impact if Europe decides to build their own ammo and aircraft?”
The VP is a swineherd and one should assume he's addressing his argument to his swine
What does victory look like in ukraine? Is it pushing Russia out of the Donbas? Is it maintaining the current status quo of sending men into a meat grinder in a war of attrition until Russia can’t maintain crimeria? Is it a maintaining a lab for testing darpa weapon platforms?
If you’re going to send weapons for a full scale war, you have to produce them at a wartime level. Getting us back to a pre-Biden peacetime spending level will still not enable full scale wartime production levels, to say nothing of the national debt.
"Elmore Leonard meets Nabokov, Michael Crichton meets Vonnegut, Carl Hiaasen meets Joseph Heller. And it has what is probably the best gunfight in literary history."
VP is just another bootlicking buttfuck, as far as the rest of America is concerned.
It baffles me the richest nation in the richest time in humanity has a problem that we’ve sent 1/10th of 1% of GDP to help a nation fighting for what we hold so dear. Fighting as the founding patriots of this nation fought much more powerful oppressors, and we tell them give up?
Whatever his talents at self expression, they are exceeded by his dishonesty. This moral failing befalls those who come to see lying, not as sinful, but as part of the rhetorician's professional tool kit--one they are adept at using--and thus as necessary as a surgeon's knife.
He doesn't have to present you with evidence. YOU have to present HIM with evidence if you want him to implement your foreign policy.
He's right without explaining, because most politicians are unaware of the self imposed Strategic Limitations after we began downsized Defense during Obama until now.
For example: we can barely build tanks/IFV and our Fremm Frigate Program is years behind schedule
"Smarter"; "more articulate"? Are you even serious? His bullying was tenth rate. It was STUPID bullying; obvious, dumb - offensively so. Bullying is stupid; only the stupid do it.
Have you ever considered that you’re a big fucking idiot and that clouds your judgement about some stuff?
The book was dogshit.
You guys just thought it was good because it was poverty tourism without having to actually go to a rural diner to talk to Trump voters.
The problem is knows exactly what he’s doing. That’s the most dangerous type of ideologue politician. He understands your points and doesn’t care bc, power, for himself is the ultimate goal.
Why do you keep claiming these people are intelligent when there is zero evidence of them acting in such a way?
Cmon Matt we can’t sustain that indefinitely because we already have to sustain Israel weapons shipments indefinitely, get with it
He’s pointing out the utter absurdity of your post. That is self-evident.
Matt Yglesias is one of the smarter and more articulate people in politics-he’s written some very good books and articles over the years-so I have to say I find it disappointing that he’s unable to conceptualize that smart, successful people can be dishonest liars.
Are you surprised?
Economics and fiscal matters were never Vances focused. He always been a cultural issues guy first.
He's right! I mean, we only spend $900 billion on defense per year so how could we ever be expected to help Ukraine gain the upper hand in the war?
When Matt says that you have written a very good book, it means that it is a mediocre book.
You talk about “indefinitely” do you think weapons are made overnight? Do you realise that OUR forces need stockpiles and that our present ones are being depleted?
It’s people like you that think war is an abstract idea. Everything is easy until you’re in it.
We can send weapons indefinitely. But Ukraine can’t win. Hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian men have died, and their negotiating position is WORSE than when we blocked a peace deal in April 2022. There is no scenario where Ukraine wins. The only question is- do you like… 1/2
Ohhh… are we getting near the end of the ancient, s*it equipment that is a write-off for us as we fill those vacations with upgraded weapons?
Dude…we are indeed running low on specific weapons types …at least to the point of increasing risk in certain planning efforts
Unless we expand our industrial base, we in fact cannot do this
Sucks to be faced by someone not only more successful, but better at exactly the thing you specialize in.
Did you know the U.S. Constitution is a brief document? The original text was only 4,200 words with the additional amendments adding another 3,000 words. Although brief, it packs a lot of punch! Get the 100-page graphic novel from U.S. Comics. kingstonecomics.com/products/the-u
Yep. Loser response. He’s trying to hide behind his clear hate for Ukraine. Because in reality there is no sound argument to hate Ukraine. None. Zero. And he knows that. Hence the obfuscation.
So how many more Ukrainians will need to die in order for this war to continue "indefinitely"?
He’s smart, which makes it even worse because he knows what he’s saying is wrong and his moronic base will go with it
Wait, if he wrote a good book why doesn’t he publicize it more so people focus less on Hillbilly Elegy?
I love how they peddle “America First” but seem to always prioritize Israel, lining the pockets of a billionaire tech bro clique, and shitting on America at every opportunity possible lmao
Vance is Trump's VP now. So, being smart, articulate, and making arguments based on sound evidence would not serve him well anymore
Where is the "the quality and quantity of the evidence" you're providing that this material and financial support can continue indefinitely?
Should we send tactical nukes? Where do you draw the line on “equipment”?
You don’t know the difference between percentages and basis points, you have no say
The evidence is in front of your face. You are obviously an expert on this war. What do you see? And that should be supported indefinitely?
For long term climate goals, and long term peace goals - we most certainly cannot sustain indefinitely.
So the policy you are advocating for is to literally just indefinitely send Ukraine military supplies?
Do you anticipate this strategy to work? What outcome do you anticipate to occur from this strategy? Should the United States continue its cash support as well?
When you need 4 posts to try to counter someone, you are the bullshit telling cunt
100%
Between this and talking about how smart Elon is, why are you simping for goons?
Except JD is correct because there’s no political will for it….except among the elites and that is wearing thin
The burden of proof for such an absurd claim is on you to defend. Not the other way around.
I heard Ukraine is looking for a military blimp, maybe you’d like to volunteer?
You’re the one who made the assertion without evidence, midwit. It’s on you to back up that assertion.
Typical Leftist.
Why would you expect someone whose time is infinitely more valuable than yours to put more effort into his response than you did your original tweet?
Yeah, no country on Earth can afford to send 31 Abram tanks every 3 years.
So you want America to pay for Ukraine’s defence for eternity? Think about that and you might realise why that’s all Vance has to point out to prove you’re an idiot.
Most people would expect a partisan hack (like yourself) to come to that conclusion.
You seem to be incredibly stupid. It's a blessing that your job as a gadfly is inconsequential and your moronic notions are dismissed by all except your fellow nitwits
Your statement was obviously false. I’m not sure what kind of response you were expecting. Servicing the debt is a larger percentage of GDP than it’s ever been and shows no signs of slowing down. We cannot give them $100B/yr forever.
