3 ms·
Reducing war - full stop - would make even better sense. Considering the fact that most wars - stated or not - are about natural resources (and the control the
by chiefalchemist 5y ago
Reducing war - full stop - would make even better sense.
Considering the fact that most wars - stated or not - are about natural resources (and the control there of), if these war wefforts (i.e., lives, money, time, etc.) were channeled into productive things, there would be plenty to go around.
The USA alone has an annual DoD budget close to three-quarters of a trillion dollars. Even if that was cut in half, that frees up resources for good (e.g., nuclear fusion).
- landemva 5y agoWell said. When will USA exit NATO, allow Europe to pay for it's own defense, and spend those funds on beneficial projects at home?
- cracrecry 5y ago>and spend those funds on beneficial projects at home? What funds? The US is what it is because it forces the world to buy dollars. If a European country wants to buy gas from Saudi Arabia, the deal must be done is dollars. Why? Because the US forces that to happen, by force. The moment the US stops using military force outside their borders, the world does not need dollars anymore, and the US becomes way poorer, because they can not print dollars anymore.
- chiefalchemist 5y agoPrinting dollars doesn't create wealth. Print money (fiat) devalues that currency. Ron Paul (per End The Fed) would say that it's the unthrottled printing of dollars than enables the USA's warmongering.