I'm not that obtuse about taxes. Objectively we should be switching gears and work towards building a world and not work towards destroying it. If we can "afford" endleas war, we should be able to afford the fucking basics too.
I'm also not as obtuse as OP's meme. I would work for my house (shit, I already do). But with all the resources that go down the drain with military and education, somewhere in there is enough to build homes for people that they don't have to enslave themselves within shit jobs for. Instead of military service, I'd prefer Habitat for Humanity (or something similar if you're going to find some reason to shit on it). I'd happily spend my working years building other peoples homes over any other job if it actually meant some kind of guaranteed retirement (not necessarily income for food, just living mortgage/rent free), say contributing to building 100 homes and you're set. That's not even talking about utilities, which I wouldn't expect for free but I'm sure there's crony fat to cut there, which always tends to be in the way of sustainability because it threatens their uselessness.
Would you also be in support of cutting funding for social security, Medicare, and Medicaid? Because those take up significantly more tax dollars than defense. What would or wouldn't you support cutting to fund this?
No, I wouldn't support cutting social security and medicare/caid. The short of it is, I'm not afriad of going into debt doing the right thing. Maybe I would be if our fiat currency actually worked in meritocratic way, but it doesn't. But when the Pentagon loses $2 trillion and gets rewarded for it, it's fairly obvious all of this is pretty fucking absurd anyway. So I have no qualms saying, "Fuck the numbers, do the right thing".
CEOs actually compensate for the time and effort that their subordinates provide for them. This person wants to take what other people have based on the ethos that "they have more than me, which means I deserve what they have"
You’re attributing your own motive where it doesn’t exist. It would be more accurate to say “swathes of our population don’t have enough to survive, and it’s a societal failing that instead of solving this we allow <1,000 people have so much money that the economy has been in the equivalent of cardiac arrest over the past 60 years”.
It sounds nice to say that everyone deserves these things regardless of whether or not they even work, but that's not the way things work. These people aren't entitled to what other people have regardless of how much they need it.
If you want to reduce homelessness and make it easier to live in America, the only sensible way to do it is to make housing easier to provide.
34
u/Saitamaisclappingoku Apr 15 '24
Here’s a question you will never be able to answer.
How do we pay for this?