Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

seekknowledge4ever t1_iycfl8l wrote

The sooner EU does it the better. It's mostly Mafia money anyways.

396

dkran t1_iyf1i72 wrote

I’m confused why the EU needs to invest it and give profits to Ukraine? Why not give Ukraine a better “from the start” bonus? Sounds like bankers wanting to work some numbers.

20

[deleted] t1_iyf6rur wrote

The main problem being no matter how the spend the profits if they were to truly invest that full amount they would have too much influence on the world economy and I guarantee the group in charge of that will not take into full account or care about the full scope of investing a large sum like that at once. Some asshole will end up with too much money and abuse the system on accident or purpose.

9

Greedyanda t1_iyfb2in wrote

Too much influence on the world economy?

Those 300 billion are barely 1/3 of Berkshire Hathaways invested assets. The Norwegian wealth fund alone is 1.2 trillion dollars. Vanguard holds 7.2 trillion under management. BlackRock holds 10 trillion dollars under management.

It's hardly anything noteworthy.

12

Geuji t1_iyfehju wrote

Warren had actually said that if he were to invest Berkshires money in a index fund that the fund would no longer represent the index

8

[deleted] t1_iydwj7w wrote

[removed]

−61

ThatGuyBench t1_iye2k8i wrote

Cmon, its not like all is cool and dandy here, but we don't need that money nearly as much as Ukrainian people need it.

I get that there is a lot of corruption in Ukraine, but instead we could use the money to buy and deliver things needed for rebuilding Ukrainian electric grid or helping refugees or something. It doesnt have to be help in direct cash transfer. Currently Russians were focusing their missle attacks on electric infrastructure, and now its on its last leg. In the winter when pipes will freeze, they will break. There will be no plumbing, electricity and so on. Rural places will be doing fine, but cities will be unsustainable death traps when the winter ramps up.

Here in Europe we have what? Big energy bills, few less degrees on the thermostat and less hot water usage. Petty problems compared to what Ukrainians have to deal with.

Myself, I would be happy to see if that money went to arms purchases for Ukraine, but I guess more people would have issues against that, and would be less likely to pass.

26

HalfLeper t1_iye3046 wrote

Because the EU has a stable power grid. Ukraine does not.

13

[deleted] t1_iydieb9 wrote

[deleted]

−91

TROPtastic t1_iydny8s wrote

What would be the legal reasoning to use money confiscated because of Russia's invasion of Ukraine to benefit the EU?

69

okvrdz t1_iydo4rq wrote

Most wars don’t have legal reasoning.

−40

Throwublee t1_iye70ev wrote

They absolutely do, it might just be very twisted.

E: there's a lot of lawyering in war, i heard some podcast about it but I can't remember which one so I googles this article

17

auniqueusername132 t1_iyeaido wrote

The Roman’s had a very interesting need to justify all their wars as defensive

8

Koa_Niolo t1_iyesrrw wrote

Then when they did declare war they had to announce it by ceremonially hurling a spear from Roman territory into the enemy's territory. Of course this became difficult when they declared war on Epirus and would have needed to hurl the spear across the Adriatic Sea.

So instead they built a column to represent the enemy territory that was then pelted with a spear whenever Rome went to war.

3

[deleted] t1_iyeoilv wrote

Yeah super interesting. Dan Carlin talks about it quite a bit in the Celtic Holocaust podcast

2

dancingteam t1_iye71hp wrote

We should take money from other countries as well. India, China, the middle east. If their citizens have money in EU we should take it and invest in our own stuff.

−14

Artanthos t1_iye5047 wrote

They should invest the money into energy companies.

I hear they are paying great dividends.

Side benefit: seats on the boards of the energy companies.

−8