Debate House Prices


In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Nationalisation

123457»

Comments

  • cells
    cells Posts: 5,246 Forumite
    kinger101 wrote: »
    We don't know what war we'll fight next. If it were with a global superpower, then yes, steel works, docks, airfields, power stations etc could be rapidly taken out within a few days.

    But the UK has been involved in many military conflicts post-1945. In fact, the UK has spent more years engaged in conflict the that at peace.

    A UK steel industry wasn't necessary for these conflicts, but I don't think the future is certain enough to say we would never be at a military disadvantage without UK steel. Not an easy risk to assess.


    only multi year wars would require the replenishment of war machines. Can a modern war last for years? I dont think so in which case what matters is your stock of weapons not your ability to manufacture more
  • kabayiri
    kabayiri Posts: 22,740 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts
    cells wrote: »
    this is nonsense steel will be part of the materials we use for thousands of years.

    better quality materials do not replace lower quality materials unless everything about it is better including the economic cost

    We still use stones, we still use wood, they did not go away when we invented iron and steel.

    I don't think anyone is suggesting we stop using steel; more that is it profitable for us to produce steel.

    It's about what we invest in to make us money in the future, and does that include materials production
  • cells
    cells Posts: 5,246 Forumite
    kinger101 wrote: »
    True, but we'd likely have lost it to without the UK-based steel production as well.


    modern war machines are not material heavy

    probably the most important ones are air planes which have little to no steel in them and make use of aluminium and carbon fibre and other materials. or cruise missiles or intercontinental ballistic missiles again not all that much steel

    Even if you think tanks would be important in a modern survival war a tank is about 60 tons.

    A steel plant can output about 3 million tons or the equivalent of 50,000 tanks a year. The UK currently has about 250 tanks that it seems to think is sufficient. So even a single steel plant is overkill if you thought you needed steel to make tanks for a war then stockpile a few slabs of steel.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 351.3K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 453.7K Spending & Discounts
  • 244.2K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 599.4K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.1K Life & Family
  • 257.7K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.