Jill Stein schooled on politics in brutal interview
Jill Stein schooled on politics in brutal interview
Asked how many members of the House of Reps there were, Stein guessed 600
You're viewing a single thread.
Stein sucks. She's there because she pays Executive Committee bills. No one votes Green for candidate as that candidate can't win. They hope 5% vote Green, which would put their platform on every ballot in 2028, which would attract a quality candidate to represent it. There was an influx of new persons during COVID. Now, the masses must be inoculated with propaganda such that it cannot happen again when the DNC compromises everything they've promised us to suit corporate donors, once again.
At least the Dems are not in favor of disbanding NATO.
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 Very outdated.
You've invalidated my reasoning. Luckily, I can keep repeating my ageism.
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.