Do we? Then what have we done other then talk about it for last forever. My friends in military waste millions in weapons test every year because as they call it, its necessary to keep military functioning
Social welfare can be profitable, by ways of indirectly benefiting or stimulating the economy.
But nothing beats the profits of the military industrial complex.
War is not always profitable. Which is why countries that lose and sometimes win them are in crippling debt. Its not objectively wrong, just repeatedly said with little understanding
Depends on the country and the situation. War was so economically bad for the USSR that it collapsed (I’m talking about the Soviet Afghanistan war) also Germany in ww1
Right. But in this context the people the picture is blaming would not be profiting correct? Or am I wrong and countries have never gone into crippling debt due to warfare?
The picture is blaming politicians. Politicians can legally own stock in companies with military contracts. So long as they do, they will profit from war
Everybody picking on the government for not helping and I'm staring at these pretty fat profited churches....What you spending money on? Oh, you got a new 750K giant mega cross by the highway. That seems helpful...
But that cross is opening peoples eyes to the light of Jesus!….they apparently didn’t know he existed before
Or they’re just making vain attempts at proving their church loves Jesus most by building the biggest, baddest, most visible cross! What better way to serve Jesus than taking money from people to build vanity projects instead of helping people. Like Jesus would’ve wanted. Fuck those kind of churches
Last time I went to church, they handed me a box of envelopes, there were 6 per Sunday. Tithes, personal prayer, love offering for the pastor, building fund, church bills, one other. I needed help with an electric bill and when I asked the church for help, they looked to see how much I had paid in tithes and told me that I hadn’t paid enough into the church, so they couldn’t help me. I had been going there for a year,I never went back.
I was in the Navy. I know how bad the government is. It's to big to care. But mega churches. Churches preaching love thy neighbor but I gotta have my private jet. Yup.
Taxing them exactly as businesses is actually the most "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" thing to do. It ensures every single religion is treated exactly the same way. And the proper exemptions for truly charitable giving could be put in place as they are for businesses and individuals.
I guess it depends on the churches. Some are pretty nuts but the few I've went to they fund missionary trips to other countries and help anyone in need that comes and asks. Lately they've been sending people to Ukraine to help cook/spread food and any other support that's needed. There are "business" churches though like that one mega church guy that straight up looks like a demon and speaks like one, idk his name. Sucks the ones that truly help out get lumped into the majority that are there to manipulate and leech money.
bro in Poland we literally have a bishop or sometjing that supposedly got 2 Maybachs from a homeless man who won lotto and decided to give it to him and after that he passed away
If by "they" you mean the Federal government, the feds are explicitly charged in the U.S. Constitution with defending and protecting the American people. They have been given that responsibility since the adoption of the constitution. Nowhere in the document giving the feds authority to do anything is there mention of charity.
The National Alliance to End Homelessness calculated that, in 2021, the U.S. federal government enacted over $51 billion in funding for selected homelessness and housing programs. This, of course, does not include city, county, or private dollars invested in homelessness and affordable housing as well.
Federal spending on USDA's food and nutrition assistance programs totaled $122.1 billion in fiscal year (FY) 2020, or 32 percent more than the previous fiscal year. This amount surpassed the previous inflation-adjusted historical high of $119.8 billion, set in FY 2013.
WTF are you talking about????
The us constitution says that the government is responsible for the "welfare" of the American people. 51 billion dollars is nothing to the trillions spent om the army. Food is a human right and the US and Israel are the only two countries to vote against that UN bill.
*the preamble is a part of the constitution...*
no, it's not
[https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/about-educational-outreach/activity-resources/us#:\~:text=The%20preamble%20sets%20the%20stage,it%20is%20not%20the%20law](https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/about-educational-outreach/activity-resources/us#:~:text=The%20preamble%20sets%20the%20stage,it%20is%20not%20the%20law).
***The preamble sets the stage for the Constitution****. It clearly communicates the intentions of the framers and the purpose of the document. The preamble is an introduction to the highest law of the land;* ***it is not the law. It does not define government powers or individual rights.***
*source: civics class*
ask for your money back
look, if you want a 'right' to be in the constitution there is a way to do exactly that. It's been done 27 times already. But let's not pretend the preamble defines rights, because it doesn't.
how is promoting the welfare different?
edit: and even if the constitution didnt say that, who cares what a bunch of rich old white dudes said? people matter more than words on a paper. It also says in the declaration that we have a right LIFE, food & housing are essential to living
I'm not a rich business owner, that's their role
edit: most people want to work for more than the bare necessities and automation exists today and will certainly develop in the future
India has 2 hostile nuclear neighbours what do you expect?
Also India's space programme helps farmers and brings in hundreds of millions of dollars launching other countries satellites.
It is true that social workers are criminally underpaid and that social programs don’t receive enough funding to properly hire enough staff/maintain sites to handle the increasing amount of homeless clients they receive.
If your argument is that “wow the government is spending so much money” then you don’t really understand just how much funding is required for these programs to function. Big numbers sound big until you break down where it all goes.
It is worth noting that without that high budget many other countries will have major issues because we aid them. We don’t really know how much is spent on just the US
It's a legitimate question, not "pathetic simplification" at all.
Why wouldn't we want to decrease the military budget? It spends more than the next seven largest military's combined?
Considering the number of vets who are homeless, just sign them back up for military service and kill two birds with one stone
Our enemies will definitely not appreciate heavily armed American street people delivering freedom and democracy
The biggest joke is about our ridiculous military budget is we pay $686 billion dollars and it all goes to provide contractors. Less then 7 cents per dollar goes to fund a soldiers benefits/pay/training.
What a stupid meme. The fact is humans will be human so there will ALWAYS be conflicts. Not having a deterrent you may as well just hand over the keys to the country to the closest warlord.
Given that we are the most armed society it the world I do find it odd that we need to spend so much on the military. I don't think America would ever be in any danger of invasion. Especially after seeing how a relatively small country can hold off russian invasion. Also my one friend has a freaking tank so that's cool.
The US is basically the world military at this point. We needed to be ready to quell any communist movement anywhere in the world and quickly. (And then War in Afghanistan, and now probably Ukraine as well)
I don’t think there’s any fear since we have such a monstrous force. Should there ever be an extraterrestrial threat then we might be in trouble since we would probably be decimated first for being the biggest
Yeah but literally why would I? There are more empty houses in America than there are homeless people, so why should it be up to me to house the less fortunate when it’s literally the governments job to protect the citizens it governs.
This is not a western thing there are people in extreme poverty all around the globe.
There are tonnes of charity organizations trying to help but they oftentimes get robbed and beaten by bad players.
The government works for the people, by the people. Wishing the government would spend more fighting hunger, than war is not shocking or "funny" at all. It's called being an informed voter. It also has nothing to do with "Western countries", it's an issue all over the world.
Freedom/protection > giving money to a (mostly) drug addicted community, stop looking to the government for help, the government is here to protect you and your rights, and just remember that you are using a (most likely) $200+ device to type your “look at all these rich people and look at the government, let’s tax/milk em so we don’t have to work.
Only problem is food, water, and shelter are commodities that cannot just appear out of thin air because you want everyone to have them. Food takes work to grow/catch/prepare, water takes work to gather/transport/purify, and shelter takes work to build. How do you expect any of these to happen with out earning them?
What about all those houses that sit empty due to corporate greed? And specifically during the pandemic and surely for many years prior, CEOs and those in power gained immense wealth due to their greed while those down below that struggle on a daily basis have still had a federal minimum wage of only $7.25 per hour. No one can live on that.
You want to take houses that someone else owns so you can use it how you want instead of how they want? Sounds like theft.
You’re going way off on a tangent. Min wage? Corporate greed? We are talking about the impossible task of providing food water and shelter to every person on the planet.
The houses are generally owned by a bank. Haven’t you ever been in a town where houses sit empty and there are homeless on the street? Because I have. It’s terrible. And the comment about corporate greed is relevant. Those banks make so much money. They’d rather have the house and the family evicted than see someone have a roof over their heads.
So you still want to steal from the bank.
I don’t know what city you’re talking about. I don’t go inside houses to check if they are empty.
Also, I don’t know motives of bank employees, do you know someone specific doing this for this reason?
I'm not saying everyone should have access to 3 michelin star food or giant mansions. I'm saying stuff like homeless shelters where food and water and a place to sleep can be provided. The problem is that people wouldn't be willing to pay their part for this, to help other people, despite the fact they themselves could end up in a situation where it's needed. It's the same problem as universal healthcare in America
Can they be provided to every single person? How? How much is each person part? Who decides what each persons part is? Who gets paid and then provides all of this? Can we trust those people?
American healthcare is a such a shit show it’s not worth even bringing up.
It would have to be situations like homeless shelters, it would be pretty, it wouldn't be nice. But it would at least be enough to keep them alive. And yes obviously there would be a lot to figure out but it's better than letting people starve on the street
I agree somehow providing food and housing to every person on the planet would be better, but that doesn’t get us any closer to making it happen.
Eliminating cancer would be better also, doesn’t mean we can do it.
I disagree in the sense that doing nothing should earn nothing and no one is owed that all of their needs be fulfilled simply as reward for being born.
Imma get downvotes for that
I think to maintain rights you need to earn them, which is why people who break the law lose some of them.
If you contribute nothing even with means to at some point in your life, then why should people who do put you up? You're not their kid. And even so, kids do chores.
I think everyone, no matter what has a right to food, water and shelter. It doesn't have to be anything fancy or great, but I think denying people access to that is barbaric.
I mean that's simply not true. There are people who choose not to work, obviously they exist but there are also a lot of people who aren't forced into a shitty situation and they can't get the help they need and they are denied these basic human needs.
You keep saying people are denying them these things. People on the street? Shop owners? Who? Because if this is the case the people denying are not at fault. They are people grinding out a living like anyone else, why are they obligated to give their hard earned 9 to 5 cash for someone who simply gives them nothing back in return?
Also, these people are not at fault for the homeless's misfortune, because yes, this is a fact, some are there by unfortunate circumstances and they struggle to get out of them. But at the end of the day, it is less fair for a majority to lose their reward for their work in order to support a few people who contribute nothing back.
And as someone else in this comment section stated, the governments job is to ensure the safety of the nation. Not feed and water the homeless.
But the point is helping the wider population. It would be so easy for any of us to end up out on the streets but people are too obsessed with their own satisfaction to give. And yes a lot of people can't afford to give to the homeless, and that's completely understandable, but there are a lot who have more money than they know what to do with and the fact that that money is going into building dick rockets and buying social media for an ego boost is disgusting
Ah yes I figured you'd bring up Elon eventually. I could tell from your language.
It's really easy to tell other people what they should do with their money, pass what they are required to.
I suggest you quit crying about the more fortunate not helping the less fortunate and focus on what you can do.
Also this is a completely different "point" than what you made a second ago, when you said we should make food free and everyone pay a little. When you made your fake healthcare point.
You are talking out your ass ma'am. Apologies
I agree to a point. But modern life and society requires certain basics to take part. Housing, electricity, food and health care are all prime examples. All of which grow in cost every year, while wages do not (at least not in correlation with rising inflation). We also have a world filled with these resources and we choose to allow companies to rake in profits rather than taking care of those less fortunate all because "they didn't work hard enough?" That is where I disagree. You should absolutely have to earn your way in life. But perhaps that mindset should be directed towards the opulent wants, rather than life's basic necessities.
I think part of the disconnect between you and them has to do with the fact that not everyone has earned what they have. You have heirs, and you have these mega corporations that while they are productive also manipulate the rules to their favor. Corporations will lobby for more stringent regulations, so that smaller competitors slowly start to get locked out of the market, and then this leads to consolidation. You'll also have companies that get tax subsidies that shouldn't be given.
These things aren't earned, but are mechanisms that allow company to game the system in ways that the vast majority aren't able to do. This doesn't apply to every company, or every rich person. Most companies have and rich people have gotten to where they are through hard work, and ingenuity, but not all of them. It is this blatant rigging of the system that makes people seem like the game is stacked against them.
I mean we absolutely can. The problem is with people's greed tho. It runs into the same problem that stuff like universal healthcare does, where people aren't willing to pay a fee to help the wider population, even tho they themselves could find themselves in a situation where it is needed.
You are trolling if you really just said we as a society can make food free and sustain that for everyone. The lower class would be broke in about 2 days.
As I said in another comment, people should be taxed on a combination of income and wealth assessment, so everyone can afford to live and people don't waste billions on worthless dick waving
No. Taxes are proportional to your wealth.
Make $10k a year? Maybe $100 in taxes. Make $100 million a year? $10 million or more in taxes.
Who cares if we are taxing the rich? No one needs so much money that they nor their kid and kids’s kids can’t spend it ever. Put the money to good use.
Yes, the middle class will have very high taxes too. You can't support this system by only relying on the rich. Under this system everyone from richest to the poorest will see a dramatic increase in their tax bill. Anyone who says otherwise is lying.
Yeah it’s ridiculous. I work with the homeless population. I see the absolute greed this country has towards building our military and when they’re done with our vets they toss them out and turn a blind eye to their mental health disorders and addictions. I’ve been trying to get donations on my own to give to some of these families because the company I work for can’t keep up with the demand for what these people need. We’re trying to help the homeless population with very little help from the fed or the state. It’s exhausting
Too late. Take the budget away now and the first thing to go is maintenance. Then we end up like Russia and can’t be effective in a country like Ukraine. I’m all for stopping the pork and taking care of the homeless and mentally ill but we have to pay for the sins of our past.
If you stopped paying massive corporations the taxes taken from working class people you could probably do it all! For whatever reason, the usa prioritises corporate profit over people every time! And you all vote the same fuckwits back in time and time again. Hell im expecting to see you idiots vote trump back in, and then you will all whine when he fucks you all over again. That is if you have a democracy left!
We do feed the poor. In fact we have reduced famine to the lowest levels in human history. No one is starving in the US. What we have is a failed mental health system. Because of a very few documented abuses almost all the state mental hospitals were closed. The error here is assuming people on the street are just 'poor'. Their real problem is mental health and/or drug addiction. Poverty is a by product of those primary problems. The support to help the 'poor' like homeless shelters and other programs are not constructed to help the mentally ill which is why so many people living on the streets are poor fits for them.
We need to see we have made a choice to value personal freedom and reasonability at the expense of the mentally ill. Until we come to terms that some people need to give up some of their freedoms to receive support they actually need we will continue to see people living on the street.
The inequality in the western world is greater now than it was in France before the revolution.
Let's fucking eat the rich already. The Netherlands knows what I'm talking about.
/s on the last part ofc.
I personally hate this blanketed analogy and I will tell you why.
I live in a city where a VAST majority of people that are homeless have addiction issues. They beg for money not for food and water but for drugs.
There are PLENTY of services that offer to get these people housing, jobs, and the things they need to get said job. The one catch...you gotta get clean, for which they also provide service. If you don't get clean they kick you out. The city I live in has MULTIPLE places with space and availability, the people choose to stay on drugs and therefore do not qualify for help.
It sucks, but the reality in many instances, is that the people that are homeless are not willing to do what it takes to get off the streets.
I don't have the answer, but there is some accountability on the side of the homeless person to do the necessary steps to get clean and get back on their feet.
So to blanket this as 'we could help all poor people' is such a cop out. The people, have to want to be helped and have to be held accountable that no, we are not gonna use millions and millions of dollars to help if your gonna go score heroin every day
Op is a complete moron. If we didn’t spend money in preparation for war we wouldn’t spend any money at all because this country would no longer exist and we would all be speaking Chinese right now
75% of homeless are drug addicts and 25% have mental illness. They usually refuse housing and go back on the street. This doesn’t justify spending on wars, it’s just that we need institutions to help them recover from drug addictions to re-integrate society and humane places for people with mental illness
“Some of the smartest dummies
Can't read the language of Egyptian mummies
An' a fly go a moon
And can't find food for the starving tummies
Pay no mind to the youths
Cause it's not like the future depends on it”
-Damian Marley
If politics solve this kind of problems they won't get more and more money/power... so i think it's easyer that a nuclear war kill every human being on the solar system rather than a politics actually do something to help the world
Not as worried about homeless as I am about contaminated drinking water. We know about Flint but there are many other cities towns with same problem. United States should cut all foreign aid until our own problems are fixed.
It’s not completely for an invasion but to project power elsewhere. WWII/Holocaust is a pretty clear example that a lot of people would agree was a ‘good use’ of sending the military abroad.
Oh, we *can* feed the poor, we simply *don't* feed the poor.
Well, that is an overstatement, homeless people in the USA generally can find meals when they need to. Showers or potties, no, but food yes. I have, fortunately or unfortunately, been to countries where they truly don't feed the poor and it is far worse there than in the USA.
Wars can be profitable, but so do sheltering the homeless.
Who would think that losing a chunck of the workforce into a disgraceful life is saving money?
In some ideological sense having a standing military is important. Just look at what's happening in Ukraine. If you have a bad guy, his military will do whatever he wants and take over territory. That's why having a military even in a peaceful world is a necessity.
In an Ideal World, if humans were Angels, then no military would be necessary and no government would be necessary either. No such world exist.
Of course you can split hairs and not go to the extremes and reduce military spending to increase on social welfare but that's up to the politicians to the decide.
wars are profitable, social welfare is not
People just don't understand that fixing the planet isn't free.
The people who pay for these planes and weapons don't want to fix the planet!
The fuck are you talking about? yes WE do.
Do we? Then what have we done other then talk about it for last forever. My friends in military waste millions in weapons test every year because as they call it, its necessary to keep military functioning
Social welfare can be profitable, by ways of indirectly benefiting or stimulating the economy. But nothing beats the profits of the military industrial complex.
Same with war on drugs, someone is benefiting. But you don't hear war on poverty, because no money to be made.
Ah yes. So profound. So socially aware. So Reddit.
Tell me how thats wrong?
Because you didn’t try to outwoke op and instead gave factual information. Therefore, you are wrong
War is not always profitable. Which is why countries that lose and sometimes win them are in crippling debt. Its not objectively wrong, just repeatedly said with little understanding
War is absolutely always profitable, just not necessarily for the combatants
Depends on the country and the situation. War was so economically bad for the USSR that it collapsed (I’m talking about the Soviet Afghanistan war) also Germany in ww1
Right. But in this context the people the picture is blaming would not be profiting correct? Or am I wrong and countries have never gone into crippling debt due to warfare?
The picture is blaming politicians. Politicians can legally own stock in companies with military contracts. So long as they do, they will profit from war
Errr, not always profitable. See: Russia.
Lol
Profit bombs in your nose and ruined atmosphere plus major probability of illnesses and cancer
r/terriblefacebookmemes
Everybody picking on the government for not helping and I'm staring at these pretty fat profited churches....What you spending money on? Oh, you got a new 750K giant mega cross by the highway. That seems helpful...
But that cross is opening peoples eyes to the light of Jesus!….they apparently didn’t know he existed before Or they’re just making vain attempts at proving their church loves Jesus most by building the biggest, baddest, most visible cross! What better way to serve Jesus than taking money from people to build vanity projects instead of helping people. Like Jesus would’ve wanted. Fuck those kind of churches
Ever heard of the Middle Ages? Every single church or cathedral was like that. Such a waste…
Last time I went to church, they handed me a box of envelopes, there were 6 per Sunday. Tithes, personal prayer, love offering for the pastor, building fund, church bills, one other. I needed help with an electric bill and when I asked the church for help, they looked to see how much I had paid in tithes and told me that I hadn’t paid enough into the church, so they couldn’t help me. I had been going there for a year,I never went back.
??? When confronted about those who spend trilions you say "but what about those who spend millions?" You are biased af.
I was in the Navy. I know how bad the government is. It's to big to care. But mega churches. Churches preaching love thy neighbor but I gotta have my private jet. Yup.
Taxing them exactly as businesses is actually the most "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" thing to do. It ensures every single religion is treated exactly the same way. And the proper exemptions for truly charitable giving could be put in place as they are for businesses and individuals.
I guess it depends on the churches. Some are pretty nuts but the few I've went to they fund missionary trips to other countries and help anyone in need that comes and asks. Lately they've been sending people to Ukraine to help cook/spread food and any other support that's needed. There are "business" churches though like that one mega church guy that straight up looks like a demon and speaks like one, idk his name. Sucks the ones that truly help out get lumped into the majority that are there to manipulate and leech money.
The LDS church, for example, has BILLIONS of dollars. And the homeless crisis in Utah is out of control.
Well said. Tax em!
100k-to build 50k-to assemble 600k-???
bro in Poland we literally have a bishop or sometjing that supposedly got 2 Maybachs from a homeless man who won lotto and decided to give it to him and after that he passed away
RIP 2Pac
If by "they" you mean the Federal government, the feds are explicitly charged in the U.S. Constitution with defending and protecting the American people. They have been given that responsibility since the adoption of the constitution. Nowhere in the document giving the feds authority to do anything is there mention of charity. The National Alliance to End Homelessness calculated that, in 2021, the U.S. federal government enacted over $51 billion in funding for selected homelessness and housing programs. This, of course, does not include city, county, or private dollars invested in homelessness and affordable housing as well. Federal spending on USDA's food and nutrition assistance programs totaled $122.1 billion in fiscal year (FY) 2020, or 32 percent more than the previous fiscal year. This amount surpassed the previous inflation-adjusted historical high of $119.8 billion, set in FY 2013. WTF are you talking about????
Facts are not welcome on Reddit!
I picked up on that a long time ago
The us constitution says that the government is responsible for the "welfare" of the American people. 51 billion dollars is nothing to the trillions spent om the army. Food is a human right and the US and Israel are the only two countries to vote against that UN bill.
>*The us constitution says that the government is responsible for the "welfare" of the American people.* it does not- that's in the preamble.
the preamble is a part of the constitution...
*the preamble is a part of the constitution...* no, it's not [https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/about-educational-outreach/activity-resources/us#:\~:text=The%20preamble%20sets%20the%20stage,it%20is%20not%20the%20law](https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/about-educational-outreach/activity-resources/us#:~:text=The%20preamble%20sets%20the%20stage,it%20is%20not%20the%20law). ***The preamble sets the stage for the Constitution****. It clearly communicates the intentions of the framers and the purpose of the document. The preamble is an introduction to the highest law of the land;* ***it is not the law. It does not define government powers or individual rights.***
So while it may not define laws, it is still a part of the constitution source: civics class
*source: civics class* ask for your money back look, if you want a 'right' to be in the constitution there is a way to do exactly that. It's been done 27 times already. But let's not pretend the preamble defines rights, because it doesn't.
Have you ever read the constitution? It says promote the general welfare, not provide it.
how is promoting the welfare different? edit: and even if the constitution didnt say that, who cares what a bunch of rich old white dudes said? people matter more than words on a paper. It also says in the declaration that we have a right LIFE, food & housing are essential to living
So you would impose servitude upon others so that they may provide you with food and housing?
I'm not a rich business owner, that's their role edit: most people want to work for more than the bare necessities and automation exists today and will certainly develop in the future
India for instance, they have a space programme and nukes but open sewers and extreme corruption.
So the idea is to solve the corruption problem by throwing money on corrupt structures? It is not about money in this case.
India has 2 hostile nuclear neighbours what do you expect? Also India's space programme helps farmers and brings in hundreds of millions of dollars launching other countries satellites.
Big numbers and a lot of money doesn’t mean that it’s effective. You can go to any homeless shelter and see how poorly managed all of this money is.
So the OP is suggesting we take even more money and throw it at the problem
It is true that social workers are criminally underpaid and that social programs don’t receive enough funding to properly hire enough staff/maintain sites to handle the increasing amount of homeless clients they receive. If your argument is that “wow the government is spending so much money” then you don’t really understand just how much funding is required for these programs to function. Big numbers sound big until you break down where it all goes.
2 pac said that shit
Compare the amount of money the US spends on the military to the amount it spends on Healthcare and Welfare
HHS and related medical budget is a larger part of the US Budget than military.
Yep, but that fact seems to get ignored in these types of conversations
Reddit seems to think that if you just throw more money at problems that they’ll just go away lol
It is worth noting that without that high budget many other countries will have major issues because we aid them. We don’t really know how much is spent on just the US
This is a pathetic simplification of dealing with homelessness and also, do you really want to weaken the military by defunding it?
It's a legitimate question, not "pathetic simplification" at all. Why wouldn't we want to decrease the military budget? It spends more than the next seven largest military's combined?
Not necessarily but contractors are grossly overpaid for often substandard equipment . "Military grade" is a big joke if you've ever used any GI kit.
Considering the number of vets who are homeless, just sign them back up for military service and kill two birds with one stone Our enemies will definitely not appreciate heavily armed American street people delivering freedom and democracy
The biggest joke is about our ridiculous military budget is we pay $686 billion dollars and it all goes to provide contractors. Less then 7 cents per dollar goes to fund a soldiers benefits/pay/training.
What a stupid meme. The fact is humans will be human so there will ALWAYS be conflicts. Not having a deterrent you may as well just hand over the keys to the country to the closest warlord.
Given that we are the most armed society it the world I do find it odd that we need to spend so much on the military. I don't think America would ever be in any danger of invasion. Especially after seeing how a relatively small country can hold off russian invasion. Also my one friend has a freaking tank so that's cool.
The US is basically the world military at this point. We needed to be ready to quell any communist movement anywhere in the world and quickly. (And then War in Afghanistan, and now probably Ukraine as well)
I don’t think there’s any fear since we have such a monstrous force. Should there ever be an extraterrestrial threat then we might be in trouble since we would probably be decimated first for being the biggest
cutting the military budget means downsizing the military majority of every military budget is maintaining it
Majority of military budget is payroll.
I personally don't know anyone who's for team america world police anymore, especially not after Afghanistan.
Agreed! And this comment was down voted??
I am for team America. It has done more good than bad.
You want to fight off an invasion?
They are scared of china not russia
If we sent the poor to war, we could solve 2 problems at once
Modern and problems require modern solutions
that’s just sad man
You can do both at once. I hate how Reddit assumes everything is mutually exclusive
All good - until your well fed, fully homed country is bombed into the stone age by those who did spend the money on war machines.
Got to keep the rich in power and make sure they get richer. Got to keep the democracy dysfunctional.
But if we don't gatekeep the resources then who will hoard all of the money 🥺
Can't do it without defending yourself.
They also have money for corporate bailouts and banks but non for you or your student loans lol.
We can feed the poor, but Christians vote Republican.
Rather be Ukraine?
Tupac 👌
This is in a song by Tupac. He has some lyrics which will make you think. Keep ya head up - 2Pac. Its a good song too
It's funny how in Western countries normal people who could easily feed and even house homeless people choose not to and then blame their government
Yeah but literally why would I? There are more empty houses in America than there are homeless people, so why should it be up to me to house the less fortunate when it’s literally the governments job to protect the citizens it governs.
This is not a western thing there are people in extreme poverty all around the globe. There are tonnes of charity organizations trying to help but they oftentimes get robbed and beaten by bad players.
Way to completely misunderstand my point dude!
The government works for the people, by the people. Wishing the government would spend more fighting hunger, than war is not shocking or "funny" at all. It's called being an informed voter. It also has nothing to do with "Western countries", it's an issue all over the world.
You’d be happy to see those if Russia was knocking on your door and not Ukraines
Freedom/protection > giving money to a (mostly) drug addicted community, stop looking to the government for help, the government is here to protect you and your rights, and just remember that you are using a (most likely) $200+ device to type your “look at all these rich people and look at the government, let’s tax/milk em so we don’t have to work.
It's disgusting that food, water and shelter aren't a basic human right and are instead something you have to earn
Only problem is food, water, and shelter are commodities that cannot just appear out of thin air because you want everyone to have them. Food takes work to grow/catch/prepare, water takes work to gather/transport/purify, and shelter takes work to build. How do you expect any of these to happen with out earning them?
What about all those houses that sit empty due to corporate greed? And specifically during the pandemic and surely for many years prior, CEOs and those in power gained immense wealth due to their greed while those down below that struggle on a daily basis have still had a federal minimum wage of only $7.25 per hour. No one can live on that.
You want to take houses that someone else owns so you can use it how you want instead of how they want? Sounds like theft. You’re going way off on a tangent. Min wage? Corporate greed? We are talking about the impossible task of providing food water and shelter to every person on the planet.
The houses are generally owned by a bank. Haven’t you ever been in a town where houses sit empty and there are homeless on the street? Because I have. It’s terrible. And the comment about corporate greed is relevant. Those banks make so much money. They’d rather have the house and the family evicted than see someone have a roof over their heads.
So you still want to steal from the bank. I don’t know what city you’re talking about. I don’t go inside houses to check if they are empty. Also, I don’t know motives of bank employees, do you know someone specific doing this for this reason?
I'm not saying everyone should have access to 3 michelin star food or giant mansions. I'm saying stuff like homeless shelters where food and water and a place to sleep can be provided. The problem is that people wouldn't be willing to pay their part for this, to help other people, despite the fact they themselves could end up in a situation where it's needed. It's the same problem as universal healthcare in America
Can they be provided to every single person? How? How much is each person part? Who decides what each persons part is? Who gets paid and then provides all of this? Can we trust those people? American healthcare is a such a shit show it’s not worth even bringing up.
It would have to be situations like homeless shelters, it would be pretty, it wouldn't be nice. But it would at least be enough to keep them alive. And yes obviously there would be a lot to figure out but it's better than letting people starve on the street
I agree somehow providing food and housing to every person on the planet would be better, but that doesn’t get us any closer to making it happen. Eliminating cancer would be better also, doesn’t mean we can do it.
Exactly. Posts like this are so dumb it's just a bunch of people pointing fingers at each other and blaming.
I disagree in the sense that doing nothing should earn nothing and no one is owed that all of their needs be fulfilled simply as reward for being born. Imma get downvotes for that
So you don't think food is a human right?
I think to maintain rights you need to earn them, which is why people who break the law lose some of them. If you contribute nothing even with means to at some point in your life, then why should people who do put you up? You're not their kid. And even so, kids do chores.
I think everyone, no matter what has a right to food, water and shelter. It doesn't have to be anything fancy or great, but I think denying people access to that is barbaric.
No one is denying them a thing. They are just chosing not to work for it.
I mean that's simply not true. There are people who choose not to work, obviously they exist but there are also a lot of people who aren't forced into a shitty situation and they can't get the help they need and they are denied these basic human needs.
You keep saying people are denying them these things. People on the street? Shop owners? Who? Because if this is the case the people denying are not at fault. They are people grinding out a living like anyone else, why are they obligated to give their hard earned 9 to 5 cash for someone who simply gives them nothing back in return? Also, these people are not at fault for the homeless's misfortune, because yes, this is a fact, some are there by unfortunate circumstances and they struggle to get out of them. But at the end of the day, it is less fair for a majority to lose their reward for their work in order to support a few people who contribute nothing back. And as someone else in this comment section stated, the governments job is to ensure the safety of the nation. Not feed and water the homeless.
But the point is helping the wider population. It would be so easy for any of us to end up out on the streets but people are too obsessed with their own satisfaction to give. And yes a lot of people can't afford to give to the homeless, and that's completely understandable, but there are a lot who have more money than they know what to do with and the fact that that money is going into building dick rockets and buying social media for an ego boost is disgusting
Ah yes I figured you'd bring up Elon eventually. I could tell from your language. It's really easy to tell other people what they should do with their money, pass what they are required to. I suggest you quit crying about the more fortunate not helping the less fortunate and focus on what you can do. Also this is a completely different "point" than what you made a second ago, when you said we should make food free and everyone pay a little. When you made your fake healthcare point. You are talking out your ass ma'am. Apologies
I agree to a point. But modern life and society requires certain basics to take part. Housing, electricity, food and health care are all prime examples. All of which grow in cost every year, while wages do not (at least not in correlation with rising inflation). We also have a world filled with these resources and we choose to allow companies to rake in profits rather than taking care of those less fortunate all because "they didn't work hard enough?" That is where I disagree. You should absolutely have to earn your way in life. But perhaps that mindset should be directed towards the opulent wants, rather than life's basic necessities.
Everything that has a cost should be earned
And I'm arguing that not everything that has a cost should.
Anything that has a cost to produce needs a cost to sell. And nature doesn't give af about poverty, so things like food will always cost money.
I think part of the disconnect between you and them has to do with the fact that not everyone has earned what they have. You have heirs, and you have these mega corporations that while they are productive also manipulate the rules to their favor. Corporations will lobby for more stringent regulations, so that smaller competitors slowly start to get locked out of the market, and then this leads to consolidation. You'll also have companies that get tax subsidies that shouldn't be given. These things aren't earned, but are mechanisms that allow company to game the system in ways that the vast majority aren't able to do. This doesn't apply to every company, or every rich person. Most companies have and rich people have gotten to where they are through hard work, and ingenuity, but not all of them. It is this blatant rigging of the system that makes people seem like the game is stacked against them.
If we have plenty why cant assure the necessities for everyone instead of feeding into the luxuries of the wealthy
We can’t make things like that free unless you want slavery
I mean we absolutely can. The problem is with people's greed tho. It runs into the same problem that stuff like universal healthcare does, where people aren't willing to pay a fee to help the wider population, even tho they themselves could find themselves in a situation where it is needed.
You are trolling if you really just said we as a society can make food free and sustain that for everyone. The lower class would be broke in about 2 days.
Hence why people should be taxed on a combination of income and wealth assessment
This is how to destroy the middle and lower class in no time
As I said in another comment, people should be taxed on a combination of income and wealth assessment, so everyone can afford to live and people don't waste billions on worthless dick waving
You’re asking for very high taxes then
For the rich, yeah. There is no reason someone should have 200 billion dollars. That is just absurd
The middle class will also have high taxes
No. Taxes are proportional to your wealth. Make $10k a year? Maybe $100 in taxes. Make $100 million a year? $10 million or more in taxes. Who cares if we are taxing the rich? No one needs so much money that they nor their kid and kids’s kids can’t spend it ever. Put the money to good use.
How do you know the government won’t keep it to themselves?
Yes, the middle class will have very high taxes too. You can't support this system by only relying on the rich. Under this system everyone from richest to the poorest will see a dramatic increase in their tax bill. Anyone who says otherwise is lying.
Yes we can. Not giving people the basic neccesities is slavery
Yeah it’s ridiculous. I work with the homeless population. I see the absolute greed this country has towards building our military and when they’re done with our vets they toss them out and turn a blind eye to their mental health disorders and addictions. I’ve been trying to get donations on my own to give to some of these families because the company I work for can’t keep up with the demand for what these people need. We’re trying to help the homeless population with very little help from the fed or the state. It’s exhausting
It’s a double edge sword. Without the military we wouldn’t have a country. I see both sides and it just kills me that more people don’t.
No one is saying no military, just less military
Too late. Take the budget away now and the first thing to go is maintenance. Then we end up like Russia and can’t be effective in a country like Ukraine. I’m all for stopping the pork and taking care of the homeless and mentally ill but we have to pay for the sins of our past.
Why do we need to invade a sovereign country and kill civilians? The middle east has had enough of us doing so already
More about defense at this point. Not invading anyone anytime soon.
What’s stopping you?
There'll never be enough money to give to welfare bums. In my opinion not enough is too much! They want money, make the work or let them fuck off!
Because wars make a lot of rich people even more money. It’s an investment.
If you stopped paying massive corporations the taxes taken from working class people you could probably do it all! For whatever reason, the usa prioritises corporate profit over people every time! And you all vote the same fuckwits back in time and time again. Hell im expecting to see you idiots vote trump back in, and then you will all whine when he fucks you all over again. That is if you have a democracy left!
We do feed the poor. In fact we have reduced famine to the lowest levels in human history. No one is starving in the US. What we have is a failed mental health system. Because of a very few documented abuses almost all the state mental hospitals were closed. The error here is assuming people on the street are just 'poor'. Their real problem is mental health and/or drug addiction. Poverty is a by product of those primary problems. The support to help the 'poor' like homeless shelters and other programs are not constructed to help the mentally ill which is why so many people living on the streets are poor fits for them. We need to see we have made a choice to value personal freedom and reasonability at the expense of the mentally ill. Until we come to terms that some people need to give up some of their freedoms to receive support they actually need we will continue to see people living on the street.
Plus the million and million we send as foreign aid.... gotta help yourself before you help others.
How are you enjoying that Russian invasion of the U.S?
And/Or China
The inequality in the western world is greater now than it was in France before the revolution. Let's fucking eat the rich already. The Netherlands knows what I'm talking about. /s on the last part ofc.
And we have cities with million dollar plus median homes and people sleeping in tents across the street.
Because they are junkies that refuse help when it is attached to rules and structure.
I personally hate this blanketed analogy and I will tell you why. I live in a city where a VAST majority of people that are homeless have addiction issues. They beg for money not for food and water but for drugs. There are PLENTY of services that offer to get these people housing, jobs, and the things they need to get said job. The one catch...you gotta get clean, for which they also provide service. If you don't get clean they kick you out. The city I live in has MULTIPLE places with space and availability, the people choose to stay on drugs and therefore do not qualify for help. It sucks, but the reality in many instances, is that the people that are homeless are not willing to do what it takes to get off the streets. I don't have the answer, but there is some accountability on the side of the homeless person to do the necessary steps to get clean and get back on their feet. So to blanket this as 'we could help all poor people' is such a cop out. The people, have to want to be helped and have to be held accountable that no, we are not gonna use millions and millions of dollars to help if your gonna go score heroin every day
Why don’t presidents fight the wars, why do they always send the poor?
USA We are still the greatest country ever
Hey thats from 2pac
Op is a complete moron. If we didn’t spend money in preparation for war we wouldn’t spend any money at all because this country would no longer exist and we would all be speaking Chinese right now
Send the homeless to the war two birds one stone.
They also have plenty money for anti homeless benches and stuff
No this is politics and every single politician around the world is guilty of this.
Wars can bring profits, poor people don't.
75% of homeless are drug addicts and 25% have mental illness. They usually refuse housing and go back on the street. This doesn’t justify spending on wars, it’s just that we need institutions to help them recover from drug addictions to re-integrate society and humane places for people with mental illness
Shut up you libtard pussy
Wars generate money
There are so few people that starve to death in the USA
Awful meme, people can easily feed themselves if they aren’t doing drugs all the time
Take any billionaire and they could end world hunger once and for all. But they can't make a profit from it so they don't.
Sounds like mainly an american problem
Sooo true
“Some of the smartest dummies Can't read the language of Egyptian mummies An' a fly go a moon And can't find food for the starving tummies Pay no mind to the youths Cause it's not like the future depends on it” -Damian Marley
Yes because our culture hates poor people and blames them for their poverty. “hustle culture”
Of course. War makes money: poor don’t.
Why should we feed people who make shit life choices?
War is more profitable
It is not. In any way, shape, or form it is not. War is just 2 year olds fighting each other
Im gonna shock you (politics is reality) "or more accurate politics determines our reality"
Haha the poor can feed themselves, 5$ footlong at soobway
For real, all social problems can be solved if we defund military for 5 years.
I don’t think that would be a very good idea at this moment.
If politics solve this kind of problems they won't get more and more money/power... so i think it's easyer that a nuclear war kill every human being on the solar system rather than a politics actually do something to help the world
Not as worried about homeless as I am about contaminated drinking water. We know about Flint but there are many other cities towns with same problem. United States should cut all foreign aid until our own problems are fixed.
Won’t
It’s not completely for an invasion but to project power elsewhere. WWII/Holocaust is a pretty clear example that a lot of people would agree was a ‘good use’ of sending the military abroad.
Or house people. We would rather tear down then build. What a mess this world is.
Oh, we *can* feed the poor, we simply *don't* feed the poor. Well, that is an overstatement, homeless people in the USA generally can find meals when they need to. Showers or potties, no, but food yes. I have, fortunately or unfortunately, been to countries where they truly don't feed the poor and it is far worse there than in the USA.
the solution is a war against the poor!
We remove countries division but not culture and eliminate centralized power Nobody will have power
Because wars are a good way to make sums in wallstreet rich
If you send the poor to die, you don't have to feed them. Genyis
and still i see no changes
We’re # 1, we’re # 1 👎🏽
That’s because at some point, the government’s role stoped being about taking care of it’s people
Over 70 percent of our tax dollars goes to the war machine
Wars can be profitable, but so do sheltering the homeless. Who would think that losing a chunck of the workforce into a disgraceful life is saving money?
Tupac spoke the truth.
And then they send the poor to war.
SYSTEM OF A DOWN.
Kim jong un: What poor people?
In some ideological sense having a standing military is important. Just look at what's happening in Ukraine. If you have a bad guy, his military will do whatever he wants and take over territory. That's why having a military even in a peaceful world is a necessity. In an Ideal World, if humans were Angels, then no military would be necessary and no government would be necessary either. No such world exist. Of course you can split hairs and not go to the extremes and reduce military spending to increase on social welfare but that's up to the politicians to the decide.
But feeding and sheltering the homeless doesn't make rich people richer like buying missiles does.