3 ms·

I hear what you're saying, but the fact is the roles of poor being helped by these systems are ever growing, therefore them constantly needing more money makes

I hear what you're saying, but the fact is the roles of poor being helped by these systems are ever growing, therefore them constantly needing more money makes perfect sense. Especially after the housing crash in '08, from which many many households never recovered. The fact is though we spent something on the order of 13 trillion dollars on a plane for the USAF that's not yet flown a single mission since it was purchased in what, 2008? Until that type of stuff starts getting cut, I refuse to buy the argument that "we can't afford it." BS we can't. Right now we won't afford it but that's not the same thing.

alexanderstears 9y ago
Are you talking about the F-35? The latest estimates peg our total expenditures on the F-35 at 1.5 trillion through 2055: https://www.cnbc.com/2014/07/31/how-dods-15-trillion-f-35-broke-the-air-force.html https://www.cnbc.com/2014/07/31/how-dods-15-trillion-f-35-br... We've spent less than a trillion on it so far. I don't know where you got your 13 trillion dollar expense, but I'd like to know more about the claim. I don't argue that we don't have the money to take better care of the poor. I'm just reluctant to advocate for more money until our welfare system demonstrates its efficiency. If it kicked butt, I'd want much more money going into the welfare system. But it's awful that so many good intentioned people run a system so poorly and the most vulnerable take the hit.