[pjc50]

I think this is just a representation of where the money is in the world. Two things:

- stocks are called stocks for a reason, they're not flows. $60bn is effectively an estimate of all future profits of the company over its lifetime

- Crowdstrike generates a return by charging enterprises huge amounts of money to feel secure and tick security boxes (Actual security is questionable). Big enterprises have a lot of money to waste, but they feel they're getting a return on it

- hardly anyone outside Ukraine gets a specific return from backing Ukraine. The same goes for all sorts of other worthy projects of the "end world hunger" kind - there's huge benefits, but not to the people actually spending the money.

[falcor84]

>stocks are called stocks for a reason, they're not flows

Indeed, and of course we have Kalecki's famous quip that economics is "the science of confusing stocks with flows"

[qaq]

Pretending that being geopolitical superpower has no direct economic benefits is just silly. If USD lost the status of world's reserve currency it would have pretty catastrophic consequences for US economy.

[pjc50]

How do I, as an individual investor, capture the return of sending a shell to Ukraine?

> If USD lost the status of world's reserve currency it would have pretty catastrophic consequences for US economy

.. but for everyone at once. Collective action problem. You've argued why it's in the interest of the US government to tax people and send shells to Ukraine, but this is not an argument for Blackrock to divert VC funding to individual armored brigades.

[qaq]

Very true