• Ooops
    link
    fedilink
    -4
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    That’s an interesting headline… what did they expect instead? “After 18 months of only giving Ukraine a fraction of what we can spare for laughs and giggles we now probably need to actually support them for once to replace the missing US aid”?

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    -8
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The US is effectively acting as a guarantor of EU safety, the EU should let us fly our sick people over there for treatment IMO. Because our sick staying sick are the reason we can afford to have a military that could arm the entire world. Their safety is being subsidized by US citizens health.

    “Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children.”

    A quote from a US President that I think means more than some sourceless internet comments implying the size of US millitary has nothing to do with the US’s lack of social servies. Argue with the president.

    Never thought I’d get this much flac for arguing that the over funding the US military negatively impacts the US’s social welfare on lemmy of all places.

    • @Airazz
      link
      321 year ago

      US spends more on healthcare per capita than any other country. The reason why you can’t afford medical bills is because of for-profit health insurance companies. They pocket billions every year.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        8
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        They spend more and get less, look at the deliverables not the money spent. The US also has among the highest costs of healthcare, of course they spend more, it costs 30k to have a baby there, that doesn’t mean they’re getting child bearing care Europeans are not.

        The reason we have companies with this much power is that the government stays out of healthcare and doesn’t help negotiate prices. Probably because they’re busy finding lower bidders for their Military projects. Theres no world in which US citizens don’t incur suffering to fund their military. The US even at peacetime is running more military operations than the next ten militaries if you count all their overseas bases. All of that takes time money and labor away from social needs, necessarily.

        • @Airazz
          link
          11 year ago

          Or you could just get rid of predatory insurance companies.

            • @Airazz
              link
              11 year ago

              Talks about serious military spending increase are on the rise in Europe, because of Trump. US is no longer a reliable ally.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      131 year ago

      The US could cut its military budget by half and still continue to do what they do

      They waste a huge amount of money for literally nothing just like their police force

      There are too many ineffective middlemen

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        -3
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Source for that wild claim that half of the largest budget in the US doesn’t go to weapons manufacturing, soldiers, or necessary administration? If the US budget was cut in half there would be a West Russia today. If you want safety in your continent to be guarenteed by American citizen suffering just say so like the rest of the Americans who support their own military but acting like the MIC has nothing to do with the state of social services in America is hilarious.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          5
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          If the US budget was cut in half there would be a West Russia today.

          The US military budget (USD 877 bn) is larger than those of the next ten militaries put together (USD 849 bn). Also three of those ten (UK, Germany and France) are NATO members, and another three (Japan, S Korea and Ukraine) are all-weather allies. If the US decided to cut its military budget by 50%, it would still have a larger budget than the next two (China and Russia) combined.

          Source: https://www.sipri.org/sites/default/files/2023-04/2304_fs_milex_2022.pdf

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            -1
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Okay and that means what? That doesn’t imply 50% of the money is simply wasted. The US is aiding Ukraine now, posturing to aide Taiwan, also theyre making buzz about operations in Haiti, and have hundreds of bases over the world and you think absolutely none of that comes at the expense of their citizens who live below the QOL of more than most countries as rich as them?

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              11 year ago

              Okay and that means what? That doesn’t imply 50% of the money is simply wasted.

              If the US can already outspend both its geopolitical rivals together at 50% of its current expenditure, then it does suggest that the other 50% is not achieving anything more.

              you think absolutely none of that comes at the expense of their citizens who live below the QOL of more than most countries as rich as them?

              I don’t. I was replying to the suggestion that the US military needs such a large budget in the first place.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                1
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                If the US can already outspend both its geopolitical rivals together at 50% of its current expenditure, then it does suggest that the other 50% is not achieving anything more.

                Thats not how militaries work. Money doesn’t fight other money. Unless they all develop, order, and make the same tech, and employ the exact same steategies you can’t even begin to make that comparison. The US likes to spend its money on things and programs it considers ‘deterrants’. Deterrance inherently cost much more than Destruction. Simply spending more money does not win wars and it’s assanine to think forces of equal monetary value are necessarily equal. My only point is that the US military funds comes at the expense of the US population. No where have I tried to justify their budget, and simply refusing to believe 50% of it disappears to middlemen is not a support of the military, it’s a rebuke of an obviously blown out of proportion claim. Let’s take an example, do you think Russia or the US spends more effort on making sure its soldiers come back home, and which option do you think costs more money?

                The US spends more than the next two superpowers, and they also occupy/defend more territory than the next 10 since we can now say today European security is dependent on American money and weapons. Not to mention the US collab with Isreal for security in that whole region, and the over 700 military bases across the world. Again this is all money American citizens are giving up, so that people much much closer to a problem that will never effect them dont have to sacrifice as much. People love running to America when they have military needs their country wont fulfill, but no one wants to consider helping Americans with needs their country won’t fulfill.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  11 year ago

                  Money doesn’t fight other money.

                  I know. Defence expenditure is just a quick and dirty estimate, so I don’t have to compare their assets gun by gun and ship by ship. Of course it won’t be 100% accurate, but when you are spending double what both your main opponents are spending, it suggests that there is something wrong.

                  simply refusing to believe 50% of it disappears to middlemen

                  More like ‘50% or so is unnecessary expenditure authorised by politicians for their friends in business’.

                  they also occupy/defend more territory than the next 10

                  Well that’s the problem, isn’t it? Recent wars have shown that the defender usually has a strong advantage. The US could keep its borders (and any allied countries) safe for a fraction of its current budget. It’s the ‘invading random countries’ part that costs tons of money.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  11 year ago

                  And you blame Europe for America’s bad financing and decisions to arm their opponents?

                  America doesn’t do things so that other countries don’t have to sacrifice as much… why do people think countries and companies have feelings

                  America runs on military so they need to keep demand up, US weapons companies spend money on lobbying and politicians who can affect US military outcomes own stocks in those companies

                  Why would politicians cut down on military budget when every increase in it also increases their net worth?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      41 year ago

      And why do you think the US keeps playing this role in Europe? What possible motive could they have?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        4
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        To keep spying on their allies like was uncovered years bacn and promoting their corporate interests, same as much of Europe does to Africa, I’m not sure how that diminishes the fact that US citizens suffering is fuling the budgets that Ukraine gets, I got no problem they get that money, but Europe could stand to give what they can and they have a robust health network, not a robust military complex. You act like the corporate neo colonialism is benefitting US citizens and easing their suffering when all it does is boost the stock market lining the pockets of those who funded the economic colonialism in the first place. The US is the last country on earth this Russian Invasion would materially effect yet they’re doing more legwork than countries that can heard the missle blasts.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      11 year ago

      Id like to see more of that type of internationalism in the world. I think thats a great idea.

      Theres no way it will ever happen tho, because neither us nor our votes decide these things. Its the capitalists who decide, and they chose a private for profit model of health insurance.

  • @[email protected]OPM
    link
    fedilink
    -91 year ago

    What will Biden sacrifice to pass Ukrainian aid through the budget? Healthcare? Education? Social support? Clean energy? Semiconductors? Space exploration? The prevailing position in Washington is that China is the greater threat to American hegemony, so how much is Biden willing to cut to fight a war against Russia?

    He’s lacking power in the House and Republicans will gladly extract concessions out of him leading up to the next election.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        151 year ago

        I mean the Republican Party acts in benefit of Russia at every opportunity. They’re gonna ramp up the faux news propaganda, vilify ukraine using ork rhetoric that their brain dead supporters fall for, and make it a wedge issue in 2024. Guaranteed.