6 ms·

Sure we can all acknowledge those are all deeply complex and intertwined facts about the U.S. and its military strategy and spending. Foreign policy, both diplo

Sure we can all acknowledge those are all deeply complex and intertwined facts about the U.S. and its military strategy and spending. Foreign policy, both diplomatic and militaristic, are also not democratic - I think some people just want to call out "the worlds exemplar of democracy" spending the largest portion of its budget on undemocratic means. We The People want to see something more meaningful domestically from our tax dollars and public debts - if the elite know better, then drop the facades.

aphextron 8y ago
>We The People want to see something more meaningful domestically from our tax dollars and public debts - if the elite know better, then drop the facades. I think this is what people don't get about US military spending. From the moment you wake up every single day you are directly benefiting from it as an American. The fact that you, as a normal middle class person, are able to step out of your brand new house purchased with a no money down 30 year mortgage, step into a brand new car you don't own that's financed at 2%, drive to a brand new shiny shopping mall, and buy brand new fancy $200 t-shirts at the shopping mall on your no-limit 0% credit card is because of the fiat-reserve currency system setup by the US fed, and defended by the military.
- marnett 8y ago
  I said that We The People want to see something more meaningful. This would include political policy covering relatively standard democratic ideals: (to keep it extremely simple) health and education. I am aware our public dollars go towards defending the private-enriching capitalistic system you just described. It is ironic you listed all of those things as "benefits" to me - they are exactly what I am saying I do not want. Public expenditures for private gains? I did not vote for that. I want public dollars going to defending something for the majority, not the few.
- dv_dt 8y ago
  Meanwhile a larger and larger portion of our population declines into third world living conditions.
  - choko 8y ago
    According to the US Census Bureau, poverty in the US has been on the decline since 2010. It's still not below the 2000 levels, but is still declining.
    - dv_dt 8y ago
      It is possible for the total poverty rate to get lower, while the rate and absolute numbers of people in extreme poverty (hence the term third-world) increase. https://inequality.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/media/_media/pdf/pathways/summer_2014/Pathways_Summer_2014_ShaeferEdin.pdf https://inequality.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/media/_m... Analysis in this paper also based on Census data. Also, I don't know that I would exactly declare victory on poverty rate based on just recent data. It looks like we've just fought it to a rough standstill from the 70's on, which is disappointing from an advancement of civilization point of view. The 2010 decrease was just getting it back to 1970's level poverty after an increase bubbled up post-2008. https://poverty.ucdavis.edu/faq/what-current-poverty-rate-united-states https://poverty.ucdavis.edu/faq/what-current-poverty-rate-un... Note the rise in the below 50% poverty level figure in the chart.
      - aphextron 8y ago
        >It is possible for the total poverty rate to get lower, while the rate and absolute numbers of people in extreme poverty (hence the term third-world) increase. In fact I'd argue this is exactly what's happening. The people who are willing and able to move out of impoverished regions to the coastal megacities are doing much, much better now than they were 10 years ago. But the ones who have stayed are sinking deeper and deeper into poverty as the economy completely shifts focus.
leetcrew 8y ago
> I think some people just want to call out "the worlds exemplar of democracy" spending the largest portion of its budget on undemocratic means. what do you mean by "largest portion" here?
barrow-rider 8y ago
> spending the largest portion of its budget on undemocratic means That is just simply not true. The largest part of the US budget is ~1.25 trillion USD spent on Social Security and Unemployment, after that it's ~1 trillion on Medicare & Medicade, and ~600 billion on Defense. Make no mistake the US spends wayyyy too much on the military, but it's not #1

aphextron 8y ago

>We The People want to see something more meaningful domestically from our tax dollars and public debts - if the elite know better, then drop the facades. I think this is what people don't get about US military spending. From the moment you wake up every single day you are directly benefiting from it as an American. The fact that you, as a normal middle class person, are able to step out of your brand new house purchased with a no money down 30 year mortgage, step into a brand new car you don't own that's financed at 2%, drive to a brand new shiny shopping mall, and buy brand new fancy $200 t-shirts at the shopping mall on your no-limit 0% credit card is because of the fiat-reserve currency system setup by the US fed, and defended by the military.

marnett 8y ago
I said that We The People want to see something more meaningful. This would include political policy covering relatively standard democratic ideals: (to keep it extremely simple) health and education. I am aware our public dollars go towards defending the private-enriching capitalistic system you just described. It is ironic you listed all of those things as "benefits" to me - they are exactly what I am saying I do not want. Public expenditures for private gains? I did not vote for that. I want public dollars going to defending something for the majority, not the few.
dv_dt 8y ago
Meanwhile a larger and larger portion of our population declines into third world living conditions.
- choko 8y ago
  According to the US Census Bureau, poverty in the US has been on the decline since 2010. It's still not below the 2000 levels, but is still declining.
  - dv_dt 8y ago
    It is possible for the total poverty rate to get lower, while the rate and absolute numbers of people in extreme poverty (hence the term third-world) increase. https://inequality.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/media/_media/pdf/pathways/summer_2014/Pathways_Summer_2014_ShaeferEdin.pdf https://inequality.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/media/_m... Analysis in this paper also based on Census data. Also, I don't know that I would exactly declare victory on poverty rate based on just recent data. It looks like we've just fought it to a rough standstill from the 70's on, which is disappointing from an advancement of civilization point of view. The 2010 decrease was just getting it back to 1970's level poverty after an increase bubbled up post-2008. https://poverty.ucdavis.edu/faq/what-current-poverty-rate-united-states https://poverty.ucdavis.edu/faq/what-current-poverty-rate-un... Note the rise in the below 50% poverty level figure in the chart.
    - aphextron 8y ago
      >It is possible for the total poverty rate to get lower, while the rate and absolute numbers of people in extreme poverty (hence the term third-world) increase. In fact I'd argue this is exactly what's happening. The people who are willing and able to move out of impoverished regions to the coastal megacities are doing much, much better now than they were 10 years ago. But the ones who have stayed are sinking deeper and deeper into poverty as the economy completely shifts focus.

leetcrew 8y ago

> I think some people just want to call out "the worlds exemplar of democracy" spending the largest portion of its budget on undemocratic means. what do you mean by "largest portion" here?

barrow-rider 8y ago

> spending the largest portion of its budget on undemocratic means That is just simply not true. The largest part of the US budget is ~1.25 trillion USD spent on Social Security and Unemployment, after that it's ~1 trillion on Medicare & Medicade, and ~600 billion on Defense. Make no mistake the US spends wayyyy too much on the military, but it's not #1