| ▲ | taurath 3 hours ago | ||||||||||||||||
> the state is usually a much more sloppy investor I don’t find this to be true The state invests in important things that have 2nd and 3rd order positive benefit but aren’t immediately profitable. Money in a food bank is a “lost” investment. Alternatively the state plays power games and gets a little too attached to its military toys. | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | nine_k 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
State agencies are often good at choosing right long-term targets. State agencies are often bad at the actual procurement, because of the pork-barrelling and red tape. E.g. both private companies and NASA agree that spaceflight is a worthy target, but NASA ends up with the Space Shuttle (a nice design ruined by various committees) and SLS, while private companies come up with Falcon-9. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | Windchaser 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||
Yeah, our use of our military force provides some of the most obvious cases of "bad investment". Vietnam, Iraq, etc And there are many others that might've been a positive investment from a strictly financial perspective, but not from a moral one: see Banana Republics and all those times the CIA backed military juntas. | |||||||||||||||||