Guys, we really need to save on welfare costs. That's why we made a controversial cut of £5b to disability support.
Meanwhile, we think the army needs more money. £3b last year, and £8.4b here. It's really worth it, I promise.
Guys, we really need to save on welfare costs. That's why we made a controversial cut of £5b to disability support.
Meanwhile, we think the army needs more money. £3b last year, and £8.4b here. It's really worth it, I promise.
9 Comments
wewbull@feddit.uk · 10 pts · 25d
It's Trident.
This is on top of £16B since the 2020 defence spending report, and £30-40B before that (Wikipedia is a bit fuzzy on some of it). This is sunk-cost spending (no pun intended). There's no other option except cancel the program.
...and none of it covers the missiles, which isn't an independent system.
We need to have much better government procurement oversight. Contract values need to be understood properly upfront. Bids are intentionally low, with companies knowing that once they're "in" costs can go up and they'll get paid. It's a well understood strategy, but it continually happens.
Flamekebab@piefed.social · 2 pts · 25d
I really hate the whole "it's gone over budget" thing. If the budget doesn't mean anything then why even have it?
wewbull@feddit.uk · 2 pts · 25d
At least this is money primarily going to UK workers.
Trident pisses me off because it buys missile we're perfectly capable of designing and making ourselves. Relying on another nation for last resort national defence is bonkers if you have the choice.
ohulancutash@feddit.uk · 1 pts · 25d
In a long term scheme such as this, inflation and interest rates can wildly inflate the budget in unpredictable ways.
als@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 8 pts · 25d
just what we need to lower the cost of living
mrdown@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 25d
Iran has the right to have nukes
addie@feddit.uk · 0 pts · 25d
Question is, who is this a deterrent against? Only other nuclear powers.
Russia? We can just blow the shit out of them with conventional weapons, don't need this.
China? We'd fucking lose, a hundred-fold. Only deterrent against China is a very strong Europe, so let's get back to the table.
USA? These submarines carry their missiles, and they'll just remote-disable the fucking things.
France? They've got more nukes than we do, and honestly I can't see us ever being at war with them again.
Israel? Can't see any global power actually taking them to task for their genocide.
Conclusion: useless. On the basis that they're a stupidly expensive left-over from the cold war, might as well cancel it, invest half of the money into conventional boom, and pocket the rest.
crimson_iris@piefed.social · 3 pts · 25d
And what's stopping them from escalating with nuclear weapons, if not a strategic nuclear deterrent? Also, you may be severely overestimating the conventional forces of the UK.
ohulancutash@feddit.uk · -1 pts · 25d
This is the Navy, not the army, and it’s in a very sorry state. At least half the fleet is laid up for maintenance, and what’s left isn’t exactly brilliant. The 2010 strategic review gutted military capability and now, as things are hotting up, there are Russian ships conducting live fire exercises in the channel.