I wasn't trying to say that ethical funds don't exist, I'm well aware of them. I was saying that when money is on the line, loyalty and ethics often end up second place.
I absolutely agree. I used to have no choice but to buy budget and have to deal with it when stuff inevitably failed and broke. But now I'm much more financially stable, I made a commitment to buy quality when I can, the old "buy once, cry once" mantra.
With clothes I'm in the best of both worlds. I'm a proper hawk for charity shops and if you're patient you can get both budget and quality. I bought a £100 shirt for £3 the other day and it looked like it had never even been worn, there's no reason it won't last me decades if I look after it. Good riddance to TK MAXX and fast fashion. Charity shops are especially good for suits and smart shirts as a lot of men only get them out for interviews and weddings, meaning they are usually in great condition and can be bought at a tiny fraction of the original price, you just have to be patient waiting for ones that are the correct size for you.
I heard a while ago that a very well connected person (the sort of person that doesn't need to work and could spend all their free time maintaining family relations and friendships) would really only be able to maintain family relations and friendships with about two hundred people. The sort of people that say "I have 1000 friends on Facebook" are talking complete bollocks, there's a huge difference between a relationship/friendship and an acquaintance that you haven't talked to for fifteen years. The average person truly knows many less people than this, usually in the low dozens.
Using your figures and assuming that these relationships are 50/50 male/female, even these very well connected people would statistically still know less than one injured soldier and have less than a 1/3 chance of personally knowing someone that was killed.
I know this comment assumes and extrapolates quite a bit and the idea is somewhat of a tangent from the original comment, but I think it's quite interesting.
$50 per month for thirty five years saved with no interest at all is $21k, so I can absolutely understand the point of view that it's not worth it if you're currently struggling to scrape by to wait 35 years for what might be just an extra $14k
If that $50 has literally no other use to you, then great, if that $50 can provide fair value for you now, it's a much tougher decision.
Some might not notice a change in the economy, but they will notice that their sons are being taken and that they are not coming back.
Approximately 1 in 1000 Russian males have now been killed. How many more will have to die for the average Russian to say "no more" is a tough question.
Tactically, the plan is to make Russia bleed to death rather than temporarily paralyse it.
Maximizing the loss of russian life and draining the russian economy to the point that the population won't tolerate any further war is the goal. It's unfortunate that this is at the cost of ongoing war in Ukraine.
Japan had huge success with hybrid cars and this caused them to put to many eggs in one basket and delay development of electric vehicles.