1 minute ago, StarkJunior said:

Lmao, the military is our single biggest expenditure. Nonsense overspending.

I am well aware of when they started - but they are administered by the SSA, thus making them a result of a New Deal Policy.

And they still don't work and are bankrupting the US, as is Social Security. It isn't sustainable.

2 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

And they still don't work and are bankrupting the US, as is Social Security. It isn't sustainable.

It’s nothing compared to the military budget. Do you want old people to starve or something?

Just now, Eoen said:

It’s nothing compared to the military budget.

And? If there's one thing the government should be spending on it's the military. The military is the first line of defense for the country. As a military veteran myself, I say the Military should get whatever money it needs.

2 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

And they still don't work and are bankrupting the US, as is Social Security. It isn't sustainable.

The Republicans have been cutting social welfare programs as long as I’ve been alive, citing whatever nonsense they need to, and then gaslight people into thinking they don’t work.

Whafrog already pointed out they do when actually cared about.

But, nooooo, how dare we even consider reducing the bloat that is our nonsense military budget.

God forbid we stop giving tax cuts to the rich and actually support our own citizens and the millions in poverty, or without insurance.

The gall!

Just now, Tramp Graphics said:

And? If there's one thing the government should be spending on it's the military. The military is the first line of defense for the country. As a military veteran myself, I say the Military should get whatever money it needs.

Don’t be silly the military is highly a wasteful socialist program.

1 minute ago, Tramp Graphics said:

And? If there's one thing the government should be spending on it's the military. The military is the first line of defense for the country. As a military veteran myself, I say the Military should get whatever money it needs.

Yeah, but it doesn't even remotely need the money it's getting.

Just now, StarkJunior said:

The Republicans have been cutting social welfare programs as long as I’ve been alive, citing whatever nonsense they need to, and then gaslight people into thinking they don’t work.

Whafrog already pointed out they do when actually cared about.

But, nooooo, how dare we even consider reducing the bloat that is our nonsense military budget.

God forbid we stop giving tax cuts to the rich and actually support our own citizens and the millions in poverty, or without insurance.

The gall!

And you say that like it's a bad thing. Most of those "social welfare" programs aren't economically sustainable, and would be better served being handled through private charities or pensions.

Just now, micheldebruyn said:

Yeah, but it doesn't even remotely need the money it's getting.

I disagree whole-heartedly.

Just now, Tramp Graphics said:

And? If there's one thing the government should be spending on it's the military. The military is the first line of defense for the country. As a military veteran myself, I say the Military should get whatever money it needs.

It doesn’t need trillions of dollars, and we’ve already won the Big **** military war. I’ve active duty friends who decry the budget because it’s bloated and no one can actually fight us in a land war on our soil, and so much of what we fight isn’t even traditional anymore.

It’s time to start giving a **** about our own people.

Just now, Tramp Graphics said:

And you say that like it's a bad thing. Most of those "social welfare" programs aren't economically sustainable, and would be better served being handled through private charities or pensions.

Pensions collapse all the time, private charities are full of bloat.

1 minute ago, Tramp Graphics said:

And you say that like it's a bad thing. Most of those "social welfare" programs aren't economically sustainable, and would be better served being handled through private charities or pensions.

No. What the **** is the point of government if not to provide for the people?

What the **** charity is going to cover the 22 million people who have no insurance in this country?

1 minute ago, StarkJunior said:

It doesn’t need trillions of dollars, and we’ve already won the Big **** military war. I’ve active duty friends who decry the budget because it’s bloated and no one can actually fight us in a land war on our soil, and so much of what we fight isn’t even traditional anymore.

It’s time to start giving a **** about our own people.

No, it's not "traditional". It's worse.

Just now, Eoen said:

Pensions collapse all the time, private charities are full of bloat.

And the Government isn't? Social Security is so deep in the red it's laughable.

1 minute ago, StarkJunior said:

No. What the **** is the point of government if not to provide for the people?

What the **** charity is going to cover the 22 million people who have no insurance in this country?

Not in the way you think, and not as per the intent of the Founding Fathers of this country. This country was not built upon big government and government handouts. It was built upon the ideals of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It was built upon the idea that you earn what you get, by working for it; you don't have it handed to you. It was built upon the ideals of keeping the government out of people's personal lives, not meddeling in them.

Has anyone seen something about 'Star Wars' on here? I was told I could find something about 'Star Wars' on this forum. 😕

11 minutes ago, StarkJunior said:

The Republicans have been cutting social welfare programs as long as I’ve been alive, citing whatever nonsense they need to, and then gaslight people into thinking they don’t work.

Whafrog already pointed out they do when actually cared about.

But, nooooo, how dare we even consider reducing the bloat that is our nonsense military budget.

God forbid we stop giving tax cuts to the rich and actually support our own citizens and the millions in poverty, or without insurance.

The gall!

Social welfare programs are the worst offenders for mismanaging funds and having poor results. For example a government charity will provide 60% of its budget to do whatever service. vs. a private charity providing 80%. But that is not all. The private charity will have less instances of fraud and more instance of actually getting people back to self supporting. so pretty much in every way private charities do a better job. so yes social welfare programs should be cut. Because they do a poor job of accomplishing the goals.

4 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

Social welfare programs are the worst offenders for mismanaging funds and having poor results. For example a government charity will provide 60% of its budget to do whatever service. vs. a private charity providing 80%. But that is not all. The private charity will have less instances of fraud and more instance of actually getting people back to self supporting. so pretty much in every way private charities do a better job. so yes social welfare programs should be cut. Because they do a poor job of accomplishing the goals.

Your numbers are off Big private charities can be scandalous up to 80% overhead. There highly politicized as well, sometimes they are front organizations as well.

21 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

Not in the way you think, and not as per the intent of the Founding Fathers of this country. This country was not built upon big government and government handouts. It was built upon the ideals of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It was built upon the idea that you earn what you get, by working for it; you don't have it handed to you. It was built upon the ideals of keeping the government out of people's personal lives, not meddeling in them.

**** the Founding Fathers. I don't give a **** what they thought. They're dead, it doesn't matter. They aren't alive now, we are. A lot of them were **** people who owned slaves, were sexist, racist, and so many other things, too. **** what they intended - they are irrelevant in the year 2020.

21 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

No, it's not "traditional". It's worse.

We don't need to be spending trillions of dollars on new ways to kill people, when there are citizens of our own country ******* dying because they can't afford medical care they need, or people who die of hunger because they can't afford food.

16 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

Social welfare programs are the worst offenders for mismanaging funds and having poor results. For example a government charity will provide 60% of its budget to do whatever service. vs. a private charity providing 80%. But that is not all. The private charity will have less instances of fraud and more instance of actually getting people back to self supporting. so pretty much in every way private charities do a better job. so yes social welfare programs should be cut. Because they do a poor job of accomplishing the goals.

Lol, charities are not better by default. There are tons of scandals all the time regarding charities, and are often way overspending and sooo many other things. And how exactly is it people are supposed to be self-supporting if nothing actually benefits them? When they are exploited by the system, because it's been eroded so much by corporate lapdog politicians that the average person gets ****** in favor of massive profits? When it's expensive to be poor?

What charity has enough money to actually do any of this? None.

7 minutes ago, StarkJunior said:

**** the Founding Father's. I don't give a **** what they thought. They're dead, it doesn't matter. They aren't alive now, we are. A lot of them were **** people who owned slaves, were sexist, racist, and so many other things, too. **** what they intended - they are irrelevant in the year 2020.

We don't need to be spending trillions of dollars on new ways to kill people, when there are citizens of our own country ******* dying because they can't afford medical care they need, or people who die of hunger because they can't afford food.

Lol, charities are not better by default. There are tons of scandals all the time regarding charities, and are often way overspending and sooo many other things. And how exactly is it people are supposed to be self-supporting if nothing actually benefits them? When they are exploited by the system, because it's been eroded so much by corporate lapdog politicians that the average person gets ****** in favor of massive profits? When it's expensive to be poor?

What charity has enough money to actually do any of this? None.

exploited by what system? And if you want to help people stop making it harder to hire them. Stop making it undesirable to hire them. Minimum wage laws lock lows killed workers out of getting jobs and thus out of getting better skills. Things like the ADA make hiring disabled people undesirable because of all the burdens it puts on the company if the building they are in doesnt comply with the ADA and many older building dont comply and would be very expensive to retrofit. and there are a LOT of things like this that make so many people all but unhirable.

Capitalism in America is exploitative. The system that is the American business sector is exploitative.

The minimum wage is meant to increase over time - it's purpose is the "minimum wage required to live without struggle", it's why places have adopted $15 minimum wage which is STILL not enough. Corporate profits soar, but workers get ******. That's ******.

Businesses can ******* suck it up and pay employees fairly and give them health insurance, or don't be in business. If you can't treat workers humanely, you shouldn't have employees.

Small businesses are exploited and overrun by corporate giant ***** like Walmart, but you know, let's let corporations do whatever the **** they want.

1 hour ago, Tramp Graphics said:

There's no difference. Venezuela is proof of that. Socialism, in any form, destroys economies.

Venezuela was, and still is mostly, a mono-economy almost entirely based around petroleum exports. Those tend to do poorly, at times extremely poorly. The issues are bigger than whatever ideology they base their economic decisions on.

6 minutes ago, StarkJunior said:

Capitalism in America is exploitative. The system that is the American business sector is exploitative.

The minimum wage is meant to increase over time - it's purpose is the "minimum wage required to live without struggle", it's why places have adopted $15 minimum wage which is STILL not enough. Corporate profits soar, but workers get ******. That's ******.

Businesses can ******* suck it up and pay employees fairly and give them health insurance, or don't be in business. If you can't treat workers humanely, you shouldn't have employees.

Small businesses are exploited and overrun by corporate giant ***** like Walmart, but you know, let's let corporations do whatever the **** they want.

This attitude it what harms people. Not capitalism.

Just now, Daeglan said:

This attitude it what harms people. Not capitalism.

Empathy and compassion for my fellow human?

Sure, it does.

Just now, Darth Revenant said:

Venezuela was, and still is mostly, a mono-economy almost entirely based around petroleum exports. Those tend to do poorly, at times extremely poorly. The issues are bigger than whatever ideology they base their economic decisions on.

Venezuela was not a mono economy. they had tons of natural resources and were doing fine till the gutted their own economy and Chavez stole all the money. His daughter inherited a huge bank account

1 hour ago, Daeglan said:

Well here is one. They don't tax companies in Sweden. Bernie wants to tax them more. Bernie wants single payer healthcare. They have private and government healthcare in Sweden. They have much fewer regulations on companies and no minimum wage in Sweden. So yeah i agree we should be more like Sweden. But what Bernies Policies do is not make us more like Sweden.

The minimum wage is set between the different branches, governmental ones as well as private ones, and the various unions. It used to be mandatory to be a member of a union if you were employed. That rule has been loosened a bit, but the unions are still quite powerful. You guys are kind of lacking the union parts though.

56 minutes ago, StarkJunior said:

Lmao, the military is our single biggest expenditure.

And for the last (almost) 20 years, it's been our biggest export too!

11 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

Venezuela was not a mono economy. they had tons of natural resources and were doing fine till the gutted their own economy and Chavez stole all the money. His daughter inherited a huge bank account

It's the oil that ruined them though. The fall of the oil prices in the 80's that started their economic instability as well as the following political instability that lead to several attempted coups. Chavez raised the quality of living over several years when he came into power and based it all on the oil. Oil prices fell again and the current economic crises was attempted to be solved by printing money. That didn't work. Btw, 90 to 93% of their exports are based on petroleum. That is quite a mono economy. Sure, they do export some iron products as well, a whooping 585 million dollars worth, which might seem like a lot but is in contrast with 25 billion dollaridoes worth of Petroleum products.

They were doing better under Chavez than they had been doing for most of the 80's and 90's and poverty was decreasing. But they based all of that on oil again. Basing your entire economy on a single resource is a poor policy, no matter how abundant said resource is.