• TooManyFoods@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 days ago

    “says”. I’d like it if articles were more clear about this. 160 is the max range for the “savings”. It’s not that much and I’d prefer that get broken down whenever mentioned. 135 they acknowledge doesn’t include the costs of the legal issues it’s caused. In the meantime the debt goes higher faster, which was the whole point according to them if you take their word. You shouldn’t. I’d guess interest rates on the debt went up because of the instability, but that’s just my guess.

    • enkers@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      Yeah, I’m highly dubious that the 135 figure includes speculative future problems that will inevitably crop up from the damages done. While I’m sure that there is some amount of actual bureaucratic waste that was going on, there’s no way the savings from that is going to cover the true cost which won’t be fully apparent for years.