No wonder they don't believe in Social Welfare in the States.
Ther's already a thread on US military spending in this section.
I think it is more a case of not believing in any kind of welfare, whether it be social or corporate. Both have the same damaging effect on the economy.
Unfortunately, bar very few politicians, the divide in America is Democrats for social welfare but against corporate welfare, Republicans for corporate welfare but against social welfare; this is the case only on a verbal scale, as no matter what kind of President or Congress both social and corporate welfare programs are increased. Pretty much the only voice against both types of welfare is Ron Paul.
I thought that was obvious. (I don’t think I need to let you know if I’m sighing or shaking my head while I type but if you think it helps let me know)Always useful to post a link.
(rummages)
Oh, you mean *my* thread.
Yes, this is the letting off steam section of an Irish site about financial issues, generally that concern Ireland. If it was a site about the US military, of military topics in general, then two threads might be appropriate but in the context of this site I don’t think it is.Well, its a big subject - the previous was about the quantity of overall spending - $1.2 Trillion per year average for the past ten years.
This thread is about systemic corruption.
Authority figures with vested interests do that to show disapproval, even where the people involved can't see them - its part of the territory.I thought that was obvious. (I don’t think I need to let you know if I’m sighing or shaking my head while I type but if you think it helps let me know)
Any website purporting to be knowledgeable about a "small, open economy like Ireland's" should have incisive knowledge of -Yes, this is the letting off steam section of an Irish site about financial issues, generally that concern Ireland.
I do not post information on AAM from "sensationalist" websites.If it was a site about the US military, of military topics in general, then two threads might be appropriate but in the context of this site I don’t think it is.
Authority figures with vested interests do that to show disapproval, even where the people involved can't see them - its part of the territory.
I see you're a quick study Purple."...he doesn't present all of the facts or pertinent views in a debate. There is little difference between that and misrepresenting the facts."
I think you need to read a bit more about Ron Paul before you come to such conclusions. Wars are started by countries and not private companies. It is actually something that Paul is completely opposed to and he has suggested that the US should bring home ALL foreign based troops in the 150+ countries that they are stationed in. Wars are not the result of free market capitalism.I've read some of Ron Pauls words.
He appears to have taken the Malthusian doctrine to heart, however...
This "survival of the fittest" only works where everyone has a natural enemy.
When a dominant species has no natural enemies, it multiplies to the limits of available energy [= food air and light for most animals].
Long before the rest of the eco-ssytem shuts down, the dominant life form [whose consumption per capita has grown to gargantuan proportions], enters the die back phase.
For people like Ron Paul, self regulation = stagnation, but the alternative is endless wars of expansion, whether military or economic.
So the promoters of free market capitalism are in fact hugely subvented and this subvention extends influence into every town in America where the Military has a presence or every conurbation near where the Military have a base.
Good point. This is a good example of what happens when the state controls the market.Large military contractors are not promoters of free market capitalism, but rather the exact opposite. They are looking for ever increasing payments from government, which is the exact opposite of free market capitalism. What these, and many other, large government protected companies are looking for is more of the system we have in place now, i.e. corporatism/cronyism.
The United States IS a private company and its starts wars using false flag operations and sells arms to both sides. One reason it wanted Russia out of the way was to remove a competitor in the market for arms.I think you need to read a bit more about Ron Paul before you come to such conclusions. Wars are started by countries and not private companies. It is actually something that Paul is completely opposed to and he has suggested that the US should bring home ALL foreign based troops in the 150+ countries that they are stationed in. Wars are not the result of free market capitalism.
Here we are in total agreement. Now look at how much influence such companies wield in the US already - an unaccountable Defense budget - and see if you don't agree with me that private companies run the US - IMO it does not behave like a sovereign state, but a collection of private companies.Large military contractors are not promoters of free market capitalism, but rather the exact opposite. They are looking for ever increasing payments from government, which is the exact opposite of free market capitalism. What these, and many other, large government protected companies are looking for is more of the system we have in place now, i.e. corporatism/cronyism.
I'm not beholden to America - Wall Street has helped destroy our banking industry.ONQ, we seem to have different opinions about your opinions.
Alternatively, you could try to back up your points with supporting references.Therefore further discussion on this topic is pointless.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?