Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Major K&R daleanime Jan 2015 #1
They will argue that the defense industry employs thousands, and they do... NoJusticeNoPeace Jan 2015 #2
Yep, paying people to build bombs is good for the economy, for nursing and teaching not so much... Scuba Jan 2015 #3
But left unsaid is, how many would taking care of poverty employ? n2doc Jan 2015 #4
In the grand scheme of things DesertDawg Jan 2015 #7
I thought tat was implied in what I wrote...You can turn the economy completely around NoJusticeNoPeace Jan 2015 #11
I agree; but ... 1StrongBlackMan Jan 2015 #15
IDK, not long or hire the engineer that is out of a job and retrain the other one. NoJusticeNoPeace Jan 2015 #16
Were it that simple ... 1StrongBlackMan Jan 2015 #17
Everything is gradual, either we give most of our money to the one percent thru defense profits NoJusticeNoPeace Jan 2015 #18
PLUS ONE, a huge bunch! Enthusiast Jan 2015 #22
They'd be happy if we started building the Death Star. L0oniX Jan 2015 #12
Tacky, tacky, tacky AndreaCG Jan 2015 #19
So you think an X SOS wouldn't make sure the military keeps getting way more than enough money? L0oniX Jan 2015 #20
Hard to threaten & invade countries for corporations with highways & bridges. nt raouldukelives Jan 2015 #13
While I agree that funding for bullets and bombs ... 1StrongBlackMan Jan 2015 #14
You could argue you wouldn't need to spend all of the 178 billion on poverty programs. Johonny Jan 2015 #21
Yes, military is the most capitol-intensive lovemydog Jan 2015 #35
Yes we can, but greed is stronger than compassion. n/t Avalux Jan 2015 #5
hmm. only 178 billion to eliminate poverty? yodermon Jan 2015 #6
It does seem a sensationally low number. I'd like to see how that money would do the trick. TheKentuckian Jan 2015 #10
Will that be the message of the Pope before Congress, don't feed the rabbits. CK_John Jan 2015 #8
America believes that funding the MIC is more important than "rewarding the weak" AZ Progressive Jan 2015 #9
There is no justification for this level of military spending. Enthusiast Jan 2015 #23
Gee, ya think? Scuba Jan 2015 #24
I have that distinct impression, yes. Enthusiast Jan 2015 #25
Agree. The Nazi's elimination of persons considered weak and undesirable is beginning to appalachiablue Jan 2015 #31
It can creep up on the unaware as it did the hungry downtrodden German citizens. Enthusiast Jan 2015 #36
The media propaganda in the US intentionally keeps many unaware appalachiablue Jan 2015 #39
Thank you. Right on! nt Enthusiast Jan 2015 #40
Amen. woo me with science Jan 2015 #37
Places tin foil firmly on head... ladyVet Jan 2015 #38
A movement to reduce poverty fueled by American businesses Babel_17 Jan 2015 #26
$500 per citizen would eliminate poverty? How? Donald Ian Rankin Jan 2015 #27
You don't just give it to people, although that would also have a multiplier effect. It's to be ... Scuba Jan 2015 #29
Kick. woo me with science Jan 2015 #28
kick woo me with science Jan 2015 #30
But we got TANKS! SomethingFishy Jan 2015 #32
k&r ND-Dem Jan 2015 #33
Time to fire up the soylent green machines i suppose WestCoastLib Jan 2015 #34
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»We can't afford to take c...»Reply #8