this post was submitted on 18 Feb 2024
141 points (94.9% liked)

World News

32314 readers
699 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Well allocating more funds for Ukraine is kinda the solution. The issue is that, even now, arms spending is not that hot. And the arms industry are "afraid" to scale up production if they don't have long term contracts. Aka they want to profit as much as they can. So allocating funds and signing large long scale contracts will make the arms industries ramp up their production, solving the ammunition scarcity and so on.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Allocating funds is not the solution when you lack industrial capacity to convert those funds into actual weapons and ammunition. Here's what actually happens in a scenario where you allocate funds and supply of a commodity is limited:

In October, NATO’s senior military officer, Adm. Rob Bauer, said that the price for one 155mm shell had risen from 2,000 euros ($2,171) at the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion to 8,000 euros ($8,489.60).

https://www.defenseone.com/business/2023/11/race-make-artillery-shells-us-eu-see-different-results/392288/

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The reasoning is that arms manufacturers are not willing to "take the risk" with expanding their industrial capacity, hence their demand for long term contracts. When they start supplying the war will end and their profits will diminish.

Exactly, they're taking all the chances to earn more money on the war.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

So far, there's been very little actual expansion of military production. There's been a bit in the US and practically none in the EU. The reality is that even if companies committed to this, it can't be done overnight. You need trained workers skilled in trades, you need to build factories, you need secure supply chains, and so on. All of that takes years to implement. Real life isn't like video games.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yeah lol. Our ammunition manufacturer could potentially triple their output with a small additional building, but they "lack the economy" to do so. Other arms manufacturers here gives the same reason. The issue is apparently not labour but profit and as you said, supply chains. They European shells manufacturing takes place in several different countries and they have issues cooperating. At least the explosives aren't scare as that would make it by far more difficult to solve

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Historically the free-market has never attempted to do anything except maximize profit. The way the contracting system works in the Us, you never have to actual produce anything to get paid, all you have to do create a shell company that will produce the thing you are contracted to produce. When the shell company can't produce the thing, you blame it on the suppliers of the shell company, and then you pocket the contract money. At no point would shells ever be produced.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago

Haha indeed. The whole point of capitalism and the free market is to maximize profits. Seeing increased prices for shells is neither surprising since an increased demand mean higher prices.

That wouldn't work in the EU though, doesn't matter if your supply company can't deliver, you still have the responsibility to deliver and if you don't you're liable and have to pay back.