Other

Alienation from war. Like armor from mobilization for people with a big salary will kill in others the desire to fight

The war veteran, the publicist Yuri Gudimenko - is strongly opposed to the idea of ​​booking for citizens who make relatively big money. He does not see the benefits of her at all, and great damage is at least three consequences. I am strongly against the idea of ​​booking for citizens who make relatively big money. This idea, if you believe forbes, is now actively spoken in "tall offices". Why am I against? The first argument is historical. It's not a new idea.

Several countries in history tried to implement it and ended it, as a rule, the same: ordinary citizens realized that now the war was only for the poor, and alienated from it, ceased to perceive the war as their own. As a result - problems with mobilization, growth of protest moods, riots. Who is interested in the examples, google Draft Week-so called the riots in New York during the US Civil War.

One of the reasons for the riots was the dissatisfaction with "switching payments" - the opportunity to wealthy people for $ 300 (big money at that time) not to go into the army, but to send another person instead. Well, or just watch "New York gangs", there is just these riots. The movie ends. The second argument is psychological. War for all.

We should be the only society, with the sole challenges and joint work on overcoming them, as it was at the end of February 2022, when we all helped each other when the owners of factories and these factories stood in the queue to the military enlistment office. , students and people of retirement age. Absolute equality is impossible, it is a fact, but it is an ideal that is worth approaching, not removing.

The war did not come to the rich or poor, the war came to all Ukrainians, and to divide our nation is not a step to victory, but to defeat in the war. The third argument is logical (or sophistic, call as you want). Each solution has to solve a problem. If the task is to fill the budget and grow the economy due to the fact that the more wealthy will not go to the front, then it is an inefficient solution of the problem.

It is much more efficient to carry out judicial reform, simplify the tax system, promote transparency and ease of doing business, attract foreign investments and finally, to make specifics, for example, in logistics, they were able to do the best in the army. This will give a plus - economic growth - without minus social tension. Although, of course, it is much easier to adopt any idiotic law than to carry out any systemic reform. And the consequences - they are not today, but tomorrow.

And when it comes tomorrow, right? And the latter is not an argument, but a call. Discard this idea. Throw her Nakhrin from her head. I did not fought for to lose my country in riots and discover between my own. Everyone has to fight, regardless of the size of the wallet. The law must be adhered to all, regardless of the size of the wallet. Everyone, together and near the war, have to suffer and separate pain, win and lose in the war. And if I can't buy my dead for money, then the money is worthless.