165
Jill Stein schooled on politics in brutal interview
(www.salon.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2024
165 points (94.1% liked)
politics
19145 readers
2470 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Of course not. The Democrats rely on the military industrial complex to pay the bills, just as the Republicans do. Neither is so stupid as to shit where they eat. Only Trump is that dumb.
The revenues of all the military companies in the US are a small fraction of Apple's, much less the rest of the tech sector.
Gotta keep up with the times there gramps, or next you'll be forgetting things like we're a net energy exporter now.
What do you count as military companies? Just things like Raytheon and Blackwater? Or do you include companies like Amazon and Kraft? If you're excluding companies like Google and MS from the MIC, you're greatly underestimating it...
Fair question. Yes I was considering arms suppliers specifically. I'm not sure we can simply include every company that works with the military in any way though, it makes more sense to consider companies that get the majority of their profits from the military-affiliated work.
I would not count Kraft as part of the MIC for instance.
Revenue is quite an oversimplification of geopolitics in a heavily interdependent economic paradigm, kiddo.
Regardless, thinking the MIC is what pays the bills is just, frankly, wrong. Very outdated.
Good luck with that, kiddo.
No, you have not invalidated my reasoning I'm afraid, all you did was point out that revenues are not the whole picture. While true, this does not equate to the MIC being what suddenly pays the bills. To do so, it would have to either directly or indirectly contribute to the coffers the majority of the money spent. It does not, not even close.
You can blather about geopolitics all you want, but at the end of the day a budget is a budget, and most of the money comes from a very wide variety of domestic sources that the military has no relation to. The health care industry, for instance, does extensive lobbying to the parties. No military relation, and that's just one example.
Your ideas are out of date. By a couple decades. Which is extremely common on here, I wouldn't be surprised at all if you started discussing petro-dollars and an unsinkable aircraft carrier in the Middle East next, like so many of the other people on here.
You shouldn't expect me to waste time reading paragraphs after you've demonstrated your shallow understanding, kiddo.
Very cute. I don't expect you to admit when you're wrong, but I just want it to be clear to any other readers that you have no idea what you're talking about.