alt Hacker NewsIt certainly involved a lot of skill and expense, but how many more lives could be saved if the same money had been spent on improved traffic safety or NHS in general?
Replies
This is a classic. It occurs in two forms:
Wow, logistics to <remote place> are very expensive! We could spend that money better in the cities!
Wow, logistics in <city> is expensive! We could spend that money better in rural areas!
I read about a new road tunnel in London last year, a ten-digit price tag for about 1km of road IIRC. I'm 100% sure some people suggested that that money could have been better spent in rural areas.
People respond to inspiring stories that show what is possible. Inevitably that means choices that might not match what a perfect allocation looks like.
Quiet, bland execution in government will get you voted out. Technocrats tend to come in after corruption, but they don’t usually last.
True, but this is military expenditure. So would you rather they spend this on an exercise or on actually saving people?
Probably not that many. You underestimate how expensive either of those things are.
We have obligations to provide services like this to the people living in our overseas territories, and you won’t find many people who’ll oppose that.