• EatYouWell@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        The Pentagon can’t/won’t account for trillions of dollars that they’ve been given, which adds more salt to the wound.

    • JaymesRS@literature.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      10 months ago

      I’m pretty sure that bill only passed the house then the companion bill stalled out in Senate committee. Neither Senate Dems or Biden fell for that bait.

    • ceenote@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      10 months ago

      Source? I thought only the house bill, which was DOA in the senate, included that. Don’t mean to sound confrontational, I’d just like to know and haven’t been able to find anything myself.

      • Decoy321@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        10 months ago

        You’ve got more information than me, I wasn’t aware it died in the Senate. I just assumed the figure in the post was referring to that same House Bill.

    • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      10 months ago

      Brought to by the “if you didn’t do anything wrong, you have nothing to fear” crowd.

  • GoofSchmoofer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    68
    ·
    10 months ago
    • roofuskit@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      With a national healthcare payor negotiating the cost of care you could possibly pay for all of it with that money.

    • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      My only issue is that your estimate of the number of people killed is missing 3 zeroes. It’s more like millions.

      • orrk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        still quite a bit away from “millions” the HIGHEST (by a significant margin) for Iraq is 1.033 million, and that is total excess death, not casualties and for Afghanistan it barely reaches 200,000 in 20 years

        so no, Hundreds of thousands is correct, Millions is Soviet territory

        • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          10 months ago

          More than a million is “millions”. And if we’re talking about total historical deaths attributable then the US has the USSR beat by a lot. Neoliberal capitalism is just as bloodthirsty as state capitalism, except the US had more time and power to kill people.

          • GreenM@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            10 months ago

            I don’t think you anyone can beat Russia’s and all of it’s forms death toll in 20th+21th century.

            • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              They said Soviet so you’re moving the goalposts, and I think if you really believe that Russia is worse then you need to educate yourself on US foreign interventions.

              William Blum map of US interventions, 2005

              Russia is bad, but they haven’t had nearly the global influence the US has had over the last century. The US is singularly militarily dominant. Any claims about other countries being bigger or badder is just fearmongering propaganda.

              If we expand the scope to proxy wars then the US would have to be responsible for more deaths than any other single entity in human history by a large margin, many of which come from outright genocides. They are a global superpower. They are an amoral powerbroking machine.

              • GreenM@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                10 months ago

                They said Soviet territory . It is vague form of point to “Russia & company” among else witch BTW even during Soviet era had causee millions of people to die. Difference is though your comrades kept it secret while US made a lots of their shit public over the years. You have no idea what they did in under the wing of east block if you talk like that.

                • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  10 months ago

                  First of all, don’t call them my comrades. The people I’d consider comrades in that area, the anarchists, were betrayed and slaughtered by the USSR. A tankie wouldn’t call the USSR “state capitalist” as I did.

                  Secondly, if you’re referring to the victims as counted by the black book of communism, you know they counted hypothetical babies that might have otherwise been born in their victim tally? And they also counted Nazi combatants? It’s an absolutely shameful work of revisionism, and the only reason it exists is to put smoke up as cover for the crimes of western capitalist imperialism.

                  And thirdly, are you saying that by “Soviet territory” they were referring to all former eastern bloc countries in both their past and present forms? What an absolutely wild thing to say. That is bizarre. I have never heard that construction before and it’s clearly you reaching for something you can say to not be just simply wrong.

                  They were saying “in the realm of death count of the Soviets”, which is also bizarre but at least it’s a reasonable grammatical construction.

    • Harvey656@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      My only problem with this image is the money is being fed to a soldier, not a general or military political advisor, the people who end up with the real money.

      • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        10 months ago

        I think the “soldier” in the image represents exactly that, the MIC/War Machine, not just a soldier. I’ve seen this cartoon many times and always assumed the intent was the military soaking up tons of money.

        I will leave this quote from Eisenhower’s “A Chance For Peace” speech.

        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.

        The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities.

        It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population.

        It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals. It is some 50 miles of concrete highway.

        We pay for a single fighter plane with a half million bushels of wheat.

        We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people.

        This, I repeat, is the best way of life to be found on the road. the world has been taking.

        This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron.

  • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    It’s not mystery money, it’s Modern Monetary Theory. Republicans are invested in hiding that fact that we can afford to do all the good stuff and fund the military at the same time

    • starbreaker@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      10 months ago

      And if putting “too much” fiat currency into circulation is a real problem, then tax the shit out of the rich. Republicans under Eisenhower were OK with that in the 1950s. If that’s unpalatable, why can’t we tax corporate revenue instead of profit? It’s not like I only pay taxes on what’s left over after I’ve paid all my bills (though there is a standard deduction for individuals).

      • PopOfAfrica@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        I heard a very good theory on how to combat inflation.

        The government collects an increased tax amount from the wealthy and holds on to that money, effectively taking it out of circulation, and over the course of the next 10 or 20 years you trickle it out into public services.

        Boom, suddenly you took money out of circulation and helped people at the same time.

        • starbreaker@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          19
          ·
          10 months ago

          Reminds me of something Will Rogers wrote about Herbert Hoover:

          This election was lost four and five and six years ago not this year. They dident start thinking of the old common fellow till just as they started out on the election tour. The money was all appropriated for the top in the hopes that it would trickle down to the needy. Mr. Hoover was an engineer. He knew that water trickled down. Put it uphill and let it go and it will reach the dryest little spot. But he dident know that money trickled up. Give it to the people at the bottom and the people at the top will have it before night anyhow. But it will at least have passed through the poor fellow’s hands. They saved the big banks but the little ones went up the flue.

  • Wrench@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    10 months ago

    My fiscally conservative friend made a point to bring up Biden spending his children’s legacy on Ukraine aid every time conversations would turn political. Then the Isreal bombing happened, and he won’t touch it. His wife is Jewish.

    • workerONE@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      When the federal government spends it is creating money with the press of a keystroke. It is essentially putting money into circulation. And that money is going to American businesses that make weapons and technology which is then sent to Ukraine. Those American businesses employ American workers.

      Government spending creates money, it doesn’t create debt. Too much government spending could create inflation though.

      • Rockyrikoko@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Any amount of money printing in this context adds to inflation. Every dollar printed devalues the rest

        • GreenM@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Though AFAIK controlled inflation is healthy for economy. At least in comparison to deflation.

      • Aceticon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        10 months ago

        Which is why the cost of living has increased massivelly in the US all the while that very same FED that’s creating new money by the truckload keeps pushing out Official Inflation figures that are way off from the observed reality of cost of living increases.

        “Printing” money (it’s not really printed nowadays, but let’s go with calling it “printing”) decreases the value of the money already in exitence (it increases the count of units of claim to the underlying value whilst not at all increasing the underlying value) hence more money units are needed to get the same things - a.k.a. Inflation - but since there very same people who print the money are the ones telling the rest officially how much Inflation is, they can easilly print money whilst they deceive the public about the negative side effects of it.

  • ristoril_zip@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    It’s important to be clear about “they” here. Most of the Democrats in Congress and President Biden tried to pass money for education and health care, but they were blocked by all the Republicans and a couple Democrats. If John Fetterman had been elected in 2020 instead of 2022, there’s a decent chance we could’ve gotten it. Not a sure thing, but decent.

    On the other hand, almost everyone in Congress supports military spending because it almost always benefits their constituents directly because military contractors have shrewdly built production facilities in nearly every state.

    If we can give Biden another term (moderately difficult against Trump, hard against anyone else), expand the Democratic lead in the Senate (difficult), and flip the house (probably easy), we can probably get some education and health care spending. Maybe even a minimum wage increase and a permanent expansion of the child tax credit. Maybe a small UBI. Lots of things!!

    (And yes the lavish spending on the military will certainly continue.)

    • Fredselfish@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      10 months ago

      Even with a majority in both chambers Biden and Democrats will not pass any of that.

      If you look at elections you will see the Democrats like having only a slim margin in control and they always have someone who will fall on the sword and vote against things if it looks like something progressive will pass.

      Hell they put money into Republicans to beat progressive Democratic candidates.

      Only way you going get any of that is when we get rid of the two party system. Like with rank style voting.

      • explodicle@local106.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        This is why I vote single issue for voting reform. If a Democrat supports IRV, I’ll vote Democrat. If not, I vote third party.

        “But Explodicle, you’re effectively just voting for Republicans! This is the most important election ever, past and future.”

        No. I’m not voting Republican either. People who do vote Republican have not voted twice. We’ve been voting lesser evil for decades and it does not work. “Buying time” for nothing to change does not work. Giving Democrats the house, senate, and presidency does not work. They refuse to even try to expand the Supreme Court. We’re being played.

        The Democrats need to go and we need an actual leftist major party. Each candidate can either get on board with that, or wait for revolution to become our only choice.

        • Fredselfish@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          10 months ago

          I agree lets start a third progressive party and start taking over towns and city elections. Hell we can probably get Congress if we try hard enough.

          Democrats have no support in red states like here In Oklahoma. They can’t win but a good third party could.

      • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        They only had a majority on paper thanks to Manchin and Sinema. But sure, let’s blame them for falling to squeeze blood from a stone.

  • sndmn@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    10 months ago

    Israel needs that help! There are still some living children in the land they’re about to steal.

  • darthelmet@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    10 months ago

    Yeah. It drives me nuts when the media talks about misinformation as if they didn’t help lie us into a war that’s lasted most of my life. Clearly none of the bad things that we all see happening daily are the reason we’re all sad and angry right?

  • EmperorHenry@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    10 months ago

    You can’t expect billionaires to pay taxes or risk anything of their own, right? That would be silly.

    Why should the richest people to ever live on this planet have to pay taxes so that the rest of us can have medicare for all and a UBI equivalent to a living wage? Or to pay their workers an equal share of the profits from the companies they own?

  • penquin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    10 months ago

    The thing that keeps that happening is people themselves. Best we can do is bitch and moan on social media. Of course they will continue doing nothing for us.

    • EatYouWell@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      While true, when the representatives that you keep voting for keep advancing corporate interests instead of helping their constituents, it starts to feel like the democratic process has failed us.

      What would fix a lot of this would be a mechanism where the people could vote to remove someone from a federal position, because the people have no recourse but to wait a few years and hope enough people still remember the bad things the incumbent did.

      Term limits would help too.

      • dragonflyteaparty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        What would fix a lot of this would be a mechanism where the people could vote to remove someone from a federal position

        A vote of no confidence and we get to reelect Congress?

        Term limits would help too.

        Term limits only help when you make politics about the issues rather than who has the most money to get noticed. Make the term limits too short and all you do is give it to the people with the most money considering our politicians currently spend half their time fund raising for their next election.

        democratic process has failed us

        This isn’t the fault of the democratic process, but allowing money to be speech, companies to be people, and the oligarchy to take over.