85 points

Just tax billionaires and we can have all of the above and a surplus budget.

permalink
report
reply
38 points

How about we tax billionaires and also not give giant gifts to defense companies every year?

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points

unless conflicts end worldwide I want my country to maintain the highest level of military technology and local capacity to ramp up if needed. That being said I don’t want my country involved with every conflict in the world.

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

If the USA wouldn’t be randomly invading countries every few years, they could keep the same level of military technology while spending much less.

The Iraq war did nothing to increase the US military’s capabilities but just wasted enourmous amounts of money while killing civilians on a daily basis.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points
*

Good news, they could reduce it by 400 billion a year and still spend more than the the other 3 biggest spenders combined

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

As a Finn I don’t want the US to stop fully… but they have a huge amount of excess, it’s insane how much money they waste

permalink
report
parent
reply

If it’s at the expense of everything else that could help the state of the country and quality of life, what’s the point?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I’m pretty sure the U.S. can do that without an $816.7 billion defense budget, much of which goes to giant corporations, and without being larger than the next 20 militaries combined.

How about we do a $400 billion defense budget and only be larger than the next 10?

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Watching Ukraine absolutely stonewall Russia using cold era tech has been incredible. Imagine what modern equipment could do. I can’t wait to see what happens when they get f-16s, which were developed in the mid 70s by the way.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I want my country to maintain the highest level of military technology and local capacity to ramp up if needed

There is N-word that will burn some asses: nationalize.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

The last time US was involved in a war that even remotely had something to do with US was WWII. Before that it was probably civil war.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Yeah, because that for sure will stop other world powers from arming themselves and attacking others.

And to answer upcoming question: why we should care not others instead of ourselves. No one attacks us militarily (we are attacked via hubris warfare with disinformation such as this though) because we are armed.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-6 points

Why would being ten times larger than the next ten militaries in the world combined instead of the next twenty make us likely to be attacked?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

not give giant gifts to defense companies

There is N-word that will burn some asses on lemmy.world: nationalize.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

defense companies

You mean mercenaries and arms dealers. The only thing they’re defending is their profits.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

I can’t believe how many people on Lemmy of all places are defending massive defense budgets.

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

Not just billionaires; corporations.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

If we consider corporations people (and the Supreme Courts says we have to) then we should tax their income. That means total income, not profits because I don’t pay taxes on what’s left over after my bills, so why should corps get to?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-8 points

Wouldn’t the billionaires just create private LLC to hold their funds? And they are not income based taxes, this would have to be based on shares or assets, net worth.

Taxing billionaires can help, but we also need to see that they contribute to what laws and rules get made, using lobbyists and support from politicians they fund.

Please inform and educate me, for those that have thought more on this!

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

I think when people say “tax the billionaires” it’s implied that there would need to be new tax policy drafted that closes certain loopholes and exploitable tax shelters.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

I can’t speak on the billionaires but wealthy people are already utilizing private LLCs to do exactly what you are talking about.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

Yes, I agree.

Some have proposed closing loopholes, “extremists” on the republicans and democrat side.

I was asking for information on how and what exactly can be done, with any videos or articles talking on the subject, if y’all have seen or watched any.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-7 points

Just finished listening to August Nimtz on Upstream podcast. He explains why voting for the lesser evil will always push you further right.

permalink
report
parent
reply

So this sounds interesting, but depressing. Is it all just doom or does he propose realistic actionable solutions?

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

August H. Nimtz, Ph.D., is a professor of political science …He specializes in Marxism

What a surprise that the guy who thinks violence is the only way to make political change thinks voting is useless

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

Thanks for the info!

Yes, voting for the status quo will not change anything.

We learned this from Justice Dems. and Bernie Sanders in 2016/2020, you can’t change the system from within, the system will change you.


I watch Richard Wolff, so will watch his interview with August Nimtz.

What Marxism Teaches Us About the Trump Moment & Capitalism in Crisis - August H. Nimtz Jr. [4:59 | Aug 2, 2021 | Democracy At Work]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIo4QSVifbY


Economic Update: Best Years of U.S. Lie in its Past [29:35 | Aug 2, 2021 |Democracy At Work]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dp724UbMtrQ

permalink
report
parent
reply
45 points

We would have money for both if we taxed the rich.

permalink
report
reply
22 points

This is the thing that really drives me nuts.

It’s not either/or. That’s the billionaires’ argument.

permalink
report
parent
reply
29 points

The USA spends twice as much on public healthcare than it does on defense.

(Medicare and Medicaid = 1.4 trillion per year, vs. defense = 700 billion per year)

The problem isn’t that tax money is being used for defense.

The problem is that healthcare prices are insane in the US, and that the government isn’t allowed to negotiate lower prices (even though they have the weight to do so).

permalink
report
reply
28 points

The real problem is that US insurance/healthcare was specifically designed to tie you to an employer.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

Absolutely true. In the late 40s, when other countries were setting up public healthcare, we didn’t do it because we didn’t need to since employers offered healthcare plans. So it didn’t happen for us. Now there is no political will, because employers LOVE the leverage it gives them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

DoD spending was $1.8 trillion in 2023, of which $700B was “discretionary” spending. Medicare and medicaid spending was $1.6 trillion, of which $0 was discretionary.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

and that the government isn’t allowed to negotiate lower prices

I’m not even sure how it works. This sounds like any company can sell any bullshit to medicare and they have no choice, but to buy it.

I don’t live in US, that’s why I’m asking.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

Kind of funny that it’s an F-16 used here. The 22 or 35 would have been even more apt as an example.

permalink
report
reply
17 points

Yeah, the F16 is one of the best examples of a fighter that can do nearly every role competently while being reasonably affordable. There is a reason so many countries bought it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Plus it’s been going for 50 years.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Hey now, at least the 22 looked cool. All my homies hate the F35.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points
*

edit2: F22 is way more expensive than F35 nope, seems F35 is more expensive when you add A+B+C budget of F35, added links

True, looking at the F35 (A+B+C) and F22 buget and plans over the years.

Talk about bloated military budgets.

James Web Telescope budget is made by the same companies, so we know that projects are bloated by design or just by how they operate.

NASA vs. military, I am pretty sure some people would prefer to switch the budgets, hahahaha

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/news/a25678/the-cost-of-new-fighters-keeps-going-up-up-up/

https://hips.hearstapps.com/pop.h-cdn.co/assets/17/11/1489517410-isthemilitarygettingsmaller-figure4.jpg?resize=980:*

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

One of the biggest budget issues with the F35 program is that maintenance and repairs must go through private industry. Corporations just continuing to milk profit at every level. https://www.defensenews.com/air/2023/09/22/gao-blasts-contractor-led-f-35-maintenance-as-costly-slow/

There was the semi-recent report following the plane disappearance in the Carolinas that pointed to the battle readiness of the F35 program being lower than is acceptable (don’t remember the percentage thrown out there), and a lot of that is due to the corporate side of the deal. Parts are not readily available when needed, repairs are going slower than we are used to, and this is on top of using newer technologies in an effort to PREDICT future conflicts.

I hope we have learned our lessons from the F22 and F35 programs. New tank designs for the successor to the M1A2 Abrams are popping up. We cannot allow future programs to continue to favor corporate profits to these levels.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Thank you for the link and info!

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

We’d be mining asteroids and have a robot fleet sifting tritium from the moon surface

Edit: Helium-3, not tritium

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

That would be awesome!

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

It’s not really that funny. The point is made despite it not being the most futuristic American dick extension on the market.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points
*

An F-35 would have been better for this picture, but still a good meme.

Edit. Shit someone else said this

permalink
report
reply

Political Memes

!politicalmemes@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civil

Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformation

Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memes

Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotion

Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

Community stats

  • 13K

    Monthly active users

  • 3.1K

    Posts

  • 137K

    Comments