OPJul 2, 2020Turn off fox news and qanon alerts plz
Jul 2, 2020·1 reply
ThuggerBabyNo. We have to. We are at a point now where we could barely afford to even fight one war should it happen. Back in the 1950s, we had the money to fight two wars at once.
The problem is that countries like China and Russia are spending a lot more on military than they used too and they are actually making bigger progression in military tech than we are (likely due to their ability to exploit their workers through communism/socialism). So we have to spend this amount of money to stay ahead (which we are gradually losing the race on regardless).
And you know those countries are thinking the same thing about us, right?
Maybe it's not the best idea to perpetuate an arms race that will only end with us all killing eachother idk
- Jul 2, 2020·1 replyThuggerBaby
We have seen so many war scares in just the past 10 years, and we literally fought a war after 9/11. There can easily be another war at any time. And you don't think fighting a war with technology wouldn't be far more expensive than sending human soldiers?
We started that war
- Jul 2, 2020·1 replyTheGreatGameLord
And you know those countries are thinking the same thing about us, right?
Maybe it's not the best idea to perpetuate an arms race that will only end with us all killing eachother idk
Of course they see us as the enemy and we see them as an enemy too. This is why we are policing each others technology and applications when they're being used (like how China censors Google and we are starting to police TikTok more heavily).
If we gave up on it, I doubt China or Russia are. That's just the nature of competition. Someone has to win.
- Jul 2, 2020·1 replyThuggerBaby
no where near that level, don't be delusional
the total homicides here are also way f***ing higher than in those countries. Maybe that is the real issue with our country.
And you know this how? There’s massive evidence of US surveillance of citizens
- Jul 2, 2020ThuggerBaby
Of course they see us as the enemy and we see them as an enemy too. This is why we are policing each others technology and applications when they're being used (like how China censors Google and we are starting to police TikTok more heavily).
If we gave up on it, I doubt China or Russia are. That's just the nature of competition. Someone has to win.
Better someone win than everyone lose
- Jul 2, 2020·2 repliesTheGreatGameLord
We started that war
We're the ones who got bombed by Osama. We didn't have to invade countries to get revenge. We really coulda just spied on them and then send in a team to wipe em out, but I guess America wanted to make a statement to not f*** with them. It was clearly a bad idea but I am saying wars can start at any point.
- Jul 2, 2020·1 replySmoofer
And you know this how? There’s massive evidence of US surveillance of citizens
Because we don't have literal legal rights for cops to be out there in public with this tech. It's not being done right out there in public vicinity like it is with Korea and China. that shows its not as bad as them.
- Jul 2, 2020·1 replyThuggerBaby
We're the ones who got bombed by Osama. We didn't have to invade countries to get revenge. We really coulda just spied on them and then send in a team to wipe em out, but I guess America wanted to make a statement to not f*** with them. It was clearly a bad idea but I am saying wars can start at any point.
Unless we don't start them
- Jul 2, 2020·1 replyTheGreatGameLord
Unless we don't start them
if we don't, someone else will. And I'd rather they don't start a war on our turf.
- Jul 2, 2020
What did we get for not participating in WW2? Japan bombing up our backyard.
- Jul 2, 2020·1 replyThuggerBaby
Because we don't have literal legal rights for cops to be out there in public with this tech. It's not being done right out there in public vicinity like it is with Korea and China. that shows its not as bad as them.
Ok lol....
So if you support small government why do you support massive police and military spending?
- Jul 2, 2020·2 repliesThuggerBaby
if we don't, someone else will. And I'd rather they don't start a war on our turf.
This is the exact attitude that gets us in these wars what don't you understand
- Jul 2, 2020·1 replySmoofer
Ok lol....
So if you support small government why do you support massive police and military spending?
Where did I say I support massive police? I don't lmao. I think it works best when you decrease the police and invest in other avenues of legal forces to deal with other problems that dont need a cop to intervene
As for military spending, I think its better for the gov to handle that than a private corp.
- Jul 2, 2020·1 replyTheGreatGameLord
This is the exact attitude that gets us in these wars what don't you understand
We got that attitude after Pearl Harbor. Never again
- Jul 2, 2020·1 replyThuggerBaby
We got that attitude after Pearl Harbor. Never again
You do realize that us not participating in WW2 wasn't the only thing that got us attacked, right?
Jul 2, 2020·1 replyThuggerBabyWe have seen so many war scares in just the past 10 years, and we literally fought a war after 9/11. There can easily be another war at any time. And you don't think fighting a war with technology wouldn't be far more expensive than sending human soldiers?
I really hope you’re not basing a military funding argument on our Middle East oil war
How is fighting a war with technology going to work? Who benefits?
What constitutes a war scare? Tweets?
Jul 2, 2020TheGreatGameLordThis is the exact attitude that gets us in these wars what don't you understand
i agree to the extent that we need to keep our military the best and strongest in the world, because we are one of the strongest nations in world
it’s like, celebrities spend mad money on security and body guards, because if they didn’t, they’d get robbed
same principle here. if we didn’t have the protection we do have, we’d be blown out the water
i’m not saying we need to go around starting wars with everyone at all, we should be strictly defense and preventative instead of instigative, but we need a strong military to sustain
- Jul 2, 2020·1 replyThuggerBaby
Where did I say I support massive police? I don't lmao. I think it works best when you decrease the police and invest in other avenues of legal forces to deal with other problems that dont need a cop to intervene
As for military spending, I think its better for the gov to handle that than a private corp.
Ok but whether it’s private or public why do we need such a huge military power? You realize that’s the main expenditure of the govt that you claim to be in favor of reducing in size / power?
- Jul 2, 2020·1 replyTheGreatGameLord
You do realize that us not participating in WW2 wasn't the only thing that got us attacked, right?
It happened mainly because Japan seeked to become a world power and we didn't want to support their new ideas and started cutting off agreements with them.
And for that they bombed us. Never again can we be submissive. We should've bombed them first.
- Jul 2, 2020·3 replies
Synops wants to watch the world burn
- Jul 2, 2020·1 replyThuggerBaby
We're the ones who got bombed by Osama. We didn't have to invade countries to get revenge. We really coulda just spied on them and then send in a team to wipe em out, but I guess America wanted to make a statement to not f*** with them. It was clearly a bad idea but I am saying wars can start at any point.
Not a statement.
There was trillions of dollars to be made by a war.
- Jul 2, 2020AKFresh
Synops wants to watch the world burn
anarcho-communist type beat
- Jul 2, 2020·1 replyJim Halpert
Not a statement.
There was trillions of dollars to be made by a war.
It can be both
Jul 2, 2020·1 replyhot pancakesi would argue they leave private sector to go to public sector for the benefits (especially in the higher level positions). A lot of people refer to government jobs as “cushy” because they get to leave at 5 everyday and have pension plans
in terms of space, legal, and other really specific areas I’m sure government positions are better, BUT, if there were no private entities, and the government absolved any and all innovation projects, financially and realistically, they would not be able to support the whole workforce. they would not be able to supply pension plans and competitive pay (although not all government jobs supply competitive pay right now anyway).
there would no freedom to choose which projects to peruse, and all entrepreneurial-ship would cease to exist. And entrepreneurs are the driving force for innovation: the people who take the chance to risk it all for a big product that will generate them financial freedom
if the government controlled all of this, we would be subject to what they deem is worth innovating / perusing, and the people who choose what is worth it will have positions that are limited and locked down for decades until they retire
In an open market, anyone can think of a product and attempt to develop, fine tune, produce, and distribute it
On what basis are entrepreneurs are the driving force of innovation? your problem is you enjoy regurgitating vomit out conservative slogans?
"Not real capitalism" "Entrepreneurs drive innovation" "In an open market, anyone... (a daft statement)"On what basis can anyone think, develop, fine tune, produce, and distribute a product? capitalists literally copyrighted the human genome at one point in time. which segues perfectly into this thread and the inherent flaws in private property