<Snipped quote by souleaterfan320>
When I said "there are no openings," that meant airtight.
<Snipped quote by The World>
Good in theory, horrible in practice. Socialism has been tried, and even if he's bringing in socialist practices, that's bad enough. We need a strong military to defend ourselves as well. I would take literally any other candidate above Sanders.
Democratic socialism. Not sure why that distinction keeps being missed. Plus, it's 4 to 8 years after a decade of horrid to passable capitalist practices. Balance is important.
Our military doesn't need as much money poured in as it has. More than the next ten top spenders combined is way too much. Most of it goes towards war machines that'll never see combat, aren't needed or even wanted by the top brass, and isn't going to be recycled when it's decommissioned. The military industrial complex takes up, I don't remember which, either three fourths, two thirds, or four fifths of our entire economy. It's too much and it's a waste. We don't even do anything with outdated military gear, we give it to police which adds to the horrible police corruption or they sell it to countries and it ends up in the hands of terrorists. We'd literally be better off piling physical dollars of half our military budget each year and burning it as fuel for electricity. It'd stop the waste, lower inflation, and provide something worthwhile instead of being the worst monetary decision we make.
Sanders isn't saying he'll cut the military, I was offering that as an alternative to his plan.
Full on socialism has been tried, democratic hasn't to my knowledge. AND FUNNILY ENOUGH, SOCIALISM IS WORKING, RIGHT AS WE SPEAK. CHINA. They've got socialism with capitalist leanings, which is far less capitalist than Sanders will ever get to, and they're passing if not already passed us in nearly every way other than free speech and societal structure.
RPM,
Threads of Fate,
vue2026,
D3AD ST4R,
Lady Arya,
Ohm,
souleaterfan320,
Antlers,
Stargazer6225,
abcbcb
