Healthcare please
Or anything to help with inflation, etc.
deleted by creator
“bolster border”
Floating circular saws are bolsters now
But they’re not motorized chainsaw blades so according to one visiting
we need to pack it up because we’ve been checkmated. 
“The latest request from the Biden administration shows America’s continued commitment to helping Americans here at home and our friends abroad”
“…but God help them if those friends try to come here!”
Biden still owes us $600 from his campaign promise lol
Listen here jack
Listen Fat
1200
Please Jack, another $40 million or Lockheed Martin is gonna JFK me.
hell yeah border fascism
An expansion of the Child Tax Credit that focuses on the 19 million children who are shut out of the full credit because their families’ incomes are too low would come at a modest cost. For example, making the current law $2,000 credit fully available to these children would cost roughly $12 billion per year in 2022, according to the Joint Tax Committee estimates.
Sure, we could end child poverty with a snap of our fingers, but what if we stoked the flames of global conflict so we could privatize and exploit the poorest country in Europe? All it costs is their dead children!
“We’re glad you understand”
I’m not seeing this in the article. Is it from somewhere else?
How about 40 billion to support getting some removed… on a Single Payer Healthcare program.
Y’all removed deserve hella healthcare but like… gotta do war and stuff I guess
deleted by creator
Can a single liberal offer a single example of how anything in the USA has improved since Biden became president?
(not a liberal, but) The infrastructure bill was mediocre but should lead to some improvements over the next decade or so.
They recently protected some indigenous land from uranium mining.
Ummmmmmm, anything else after the last 3 years or so?
improvements? Or the decay and collapse of the very walls around us will be a bit less bad?
Hi I’m a lib
He got rid of the horses
deleted by creator
“Nothing would fundamentally change”, and it hasn’t. At least he kept one campaign promise to his true constituents.
Removed by mod
This is good information but don’t bother with hexbear trolls, they love to be assholes to anything capitalism.
Removed by mod
Are you suggesting we just let Putin take over Europe Nazi-style or is this comment unrelated to the article?
The annexations in Ukraine are illegal, but Russia annexing 5 oblasts and Ukraine being locked into a status as a neutral buffer state is not exactly a Hitlerian take-over of Europe.
Its not ilegal in russia. Legality is not a real property of things its the opinion of the guy with the biggest army in the area. Thinking otherwise is
No, annexation is illegal under the UN charter, of which Russia is a signatory, and wars of aggression are criminal in and of themselves. I’ll condemn the illegal annexations performed by Israel and other states, and Russia’s annexations fall under the same boat.
To be even more clear, I do think that Russia would have won fair referendums in Donetsk, Luhansk and certainly Crimea. I doubt that would have been the case for the other two oblasts. Still, all of those annexations were illegal. Just because the neo-cons have flouted the UN charter in favor of the ad hoc “rules-based order” doesn’t mean others should.
What’s your point, that Soros is a hypocrite? That was always obvious. Is he more of a zionist than the average American lib though?
It’s always funny seeing people post that image without the context that Palestine declared war on Israel alongside all its neighbours and attempted to push the Israeli population into the sea.
And Ukraine kept shelling civilians in Donetsk despite signing Minsk 2.
And that’s not even taking into account that Israel has continued to annex new land despite it not being a war.
The correct response to a settler colonial ethnostate being founded in your region by Britain is to try to destroy it.
Well Israel is an ethnostate so it doesn’t deserve to exist.
“The indigenous americans shouldn’t have fought back against the settlers if they didn’t want to get exterminated.”
“international law” comes with what coercive enforcement again?
If russian law considers they are part of russia and the russian army is siting there russian law applies there. Thats how it works. If another army is sitting there then legality is whatever those other guys say.
Pretending otherwise is denying realty.
not exactly a Hitlerian take-over of Europe.
Only because they lack the ability. Civilian massacres like in Bucha are happening and have been happening throughout the war.
Removed by mod
I’m from Europe, this is fucking nonsense. Please can the US piss off and leave the rest of the world alone? You caused this in the first fucking place and then you act like you’re on moral high ground by supporting the continuation of it with the deaths of tens of thousands of people over lines on a fucking map. It’s abhorrent. Let’s not get started on how the US very obviously blew up German infrastructure to cripple Europe and vassalise it. Don’t pretend that any of your support is for any of our benefit thanks. You’ve literally ended european prosperity and fucked the continent for the next 50 years.
sure why not
If only?
Is this actual money in this case or is this more designated monetary amounts of goods, ie the worth of the guns and tanks and other things we’ve been giving them that were just collecting dust over here?
Because that’s what most of the past monetary support was. No actual money was involved and so didn’t really cost us anything.
the worth of the guns and tanks and other things we’ve been giving them that were just collecting dust over here?
Use of reserves motivates replacement. Just because you’re giving them weapons that were produced in the past, and therefore whose (production) cost has already been incurred, doesn’t mean that occurs in a vacuum. With stock running low, contemporary money goes in to replenishing that stock. In effect, there’s no difference whether you send old or new equipment, because both incur costs in the present.
No actual money was involved and so didn’t really cost us anything.
It cost you exactly the amount it cost to produce them. Just because it was produced in the past, doesn’t mean it was free. You paid for it X years ago, and are only now seeing it used. You paid for it. Moreover, you’re now going to pay to replace it.
Except a bunch is old stock or overstock. The US was sitting on stockpiles of 203mm artillery rounds from the m110 that they would’ve had to pay someone to decommission, but it turns out that there’s a soviet arty piece that can use them, and guess what? Ukraine has em. Not to mention they chronically overproduced M1A1 Abrams to the point that generals were begging for it to stop, simply because it would be more expensive to shut down and restart production than simply keep making tanks nobody wanted or needed. Plus, a significant portion of the old inventory was DESIGNED to blow up russian equipment. So the US is clearing out old shit, crippling the Russian military, and aiding a new democracy. The only downside is the fresh money that is probably going to be dumped into the MIC to fill those clean shelves, but (and this is basically NCDposting but here we go) the fact that the US can almost singlehandedly provide Ukraine the resources to hold out against fucking Russia for over a year and that equioment still being only a tiny fraction of their total might? Holy shit. Grab the money shovels boys.
Plus it helps clear out shelf space for new shiny shit, why have massive stocks of old obsolute junk sitting in the Sierra army Depot when you can empty it out and fill it with shiny new junk!
Also its interesting how the Ukrainians have used some of the equipment which gives new data for R&D.
Who are we kidding. You think they wouldn’t just create excess anyways?
Who are you kidding thinking they don’t want to have a constant state of excess? It will be replaced, it has to be bought.
Idk I guess if the military budget increases significantly more in budget to back fill I’ll believe this. But im pretty sure we’re just giving away old shit that is already being replaced with newer models
your answer to your question
the worth of the guns and tanks and other things we’ve been giving them that were just collecting dust over here
Yea we just have billions of dollars of military equipment that popped out of thin air and of course will not be replenished in the next trillion dollar military budget.
You have trillions of dollars worth of military equipment from the cold war mothballed or in storage.
Most of it will never see use because it’s outdated technology. There are thousands of planes, tanks and miscellaneous vehicles just sitting out in the desert waiting to be scrapped or reactivated.We have billions of dollars of military equipment that was made 10+ years ago and has been sitting around since then because we have no reason to use any of it.
To the point where military commanders are begging Congress to not make the military budget so big because it’s being wasted on building more assets that aren’t seeing any use.
Also what amounts are going where? Could be 39 billion to the border and 1 billion to Ukraine.
They intentionally lump these sums together so that they can distribute it as they desire. There is no reason to do this other then to hide funding.
I mean you could have just read the article.
13B for defense support and 8B in Humanitarian aid for Ukraine. 12B for federal disaster funding. ~7B for border funding, Fentanyl seizure Ops, and other stuff. So the 7B is vague, but it’s a budget. You could probably just go to the house or senate page once it’s released to get the details.
Can we go ahead and just declare a state of emergency on the climate crisis? Or do we need the rest of the states to burn down as well? Shit’s getting me frustrated
no that would be totalitarian, and too much money is made by the capitalists who own the politicians to ever do anything real about it.
you need a kind of central planning that the US hasn’t done since world war 2, and you’re not going to get it from liberals.
He will get nothing, probably expects nothing, but the positive press is there.
It’d take 37bn USD a year to end world hunger. I’m also sure that if you are a ghoul and don’t care about that 100bn in investments would have a far bigger return on investment if they I dunno fixed their failing infrasctructure, used it to offer free healthcare, free education or literally anything. I’ve since stopped counting the amount of ‘lethal aid’ the USA has given but by now the USA could’ve combatted world hunger for about 4 years. Priorities I guess gotta pump up those MIC stock prices.
Remember when Elon pretended to care about this and tweeted at the UN about how he’d give billions if they could produce a report showing how they could use $6 billion to help alleviate world hunger problems? And then he didn’t do anything except self-deal?
I’m shocked, I thought
was a stand up guy who wanted to uplift humanity.I love how the hexbear emojis inline nicely across the fediverse that is 👌👨🍳
What I fear is other instances ripping off the idea and having a much weaker emoji game, though
The drawn version of ppb is massive apparently and takes up like half the screen on other instances (which is really funny).
Demonstration:
ppb
It is a weapon which must be wielded with care, I say.
Brb printing 40 bil without taxing profits
Oh hey, it’s a Parenti quote moment.
And when Kenneth Boulding gets up and he says—an economist, and you can see what—you can see what—you can see, when you get Britain people like Kenneth Boulding speaking so naïvely, you can see the troubles you get into, the swamps you go into, the baby talk—silliness you get into when you think without Marx, when you think without class analysis—and Kenneth Boulding says, one of America’s leading economists, he says, “Empire is irrational because it costs more than what we get out of it,” “the British—it costed them more in India than what they got out of it,” “the American investment in the Philippines is only about three-and-a-half billion dollars, but we had to give them about six billion dollars in aid,” “it costs us more than what we get out of it,” and that’s when you think without a class analysis, because as we know—as you’re going to know before the evening’s over— that it’s very profitable, because the people who have the three billion dollar investment aren’t the same ones as the people who pay the six billion.
Foreign aid is when the poor people of a rich country give money to the rich people of a poor country!
aid is good, but we need to stop dancing around and allow provided arms to be used cross border. or maybe itll take the deaths of another 250000 russian conscripts
Aid ukraine people not ukraine government.
Unironically the most logical comment here. Aid to Ukraine is good, but we need to commit and go balls deep. No silly half-measure, attack russia where it hurts, especially those annoying-ass bombers and missile/drone factories.
What are you an Army general? I kinda would prefer the government not give any more reason for a nuclear strike by Russia. Which is absolutely where we’re trending if America starts dropping pretenses and begins directly arming incursions into Russian borders.
Russia only understands one language: violence.
They need to be shown where their place is, and NATO’s combined might is more than capable of doing so. Hell, Ukraine with NATO’s leftovers is keeping russia at bay.
If russia wants to go nuclear, so be it. They’ll be absolutely eradicated, so they won’t strike first.
If russia wants to go nuclear, so be it.
Geez, NATO libs have really gone all in on nuclear armageddon won’t be all that bad actually. I’m sure you think you won’t be sent to the front lines if the US and NATO ends up in a multi front war with Russia, China, India, Brazil, multiple African nations, Cuba, Venezuela, and an ever growing list of other countries.
Maybe we should just chill out and accept that we live in a multipolar world and work together for common goals instead of fighting pointless wars to enrich the shareholders and prop up capitalism for a few more years before it collapses under its inherent contradictions.
Fucking NATO libs have gone off the rails.
Okay armchair army general, I guess we’re going to nuclear war against a country on another continent that we’ve not technically declared war with because of your expert geopolitical analyst.
They need to be shown where their place is
You Americans talk like school bullies lmao.
You Americans talk like school bullies lmao.
As opposed to Russians, who act like school bullies.
who act like school bullies.
Which country has been invading more places? 🤔
Don’t know, and your question is whataboutism.
Russia invades its neighbors and acts surprised when other neighbors want to join NATO!
If Russia doesn’t want other countries to swing to the west, then all it has to do is stop behaving badly. Easy.
Just for interests sake, here’s a map of all the countries that Russia has invaded. It’s pretty telling really.
Name on state or nation in the world that isn’t rooted in violence and that doesn’t have an army
They buy these off china where iphones are made.
Removed by mod
The US hasn’t threatened to nuke anyone, unlike russia. NATO doctrine states that we’d overwhelm russia with conventional means if they use a nuclear strike first, and russia knows that’s a fight it can’t win.
Now go fuck yourself, you tankie removed spunktard.
The US is the only state to have ever used a nuclear weapon against another country.
And that country had invaded China, Korea, Thailand, French Indochina, Indonesia (Dutch East Indies), Burma, Philippines, had plans to invade Australia, and committed genocide while murdering hundreds of thousands of people. This does not even consider with the war crimes that were committed against civilians, and the thousands of instances where they use chemical and biological weapons to murder untold numbers of people.
Japan was a fascist country with an absolutely brutal military that had zero respect for any life. Their military leadership evem attempted to coup to dispose of their emperor after Hiroshima and Nagasaki were nuked, as they did not want the war to end at any cost.
It’s a little difficult to find empathy for a culture who considers absolute loyalty to the emperor and the military a prerequisite for existence. A culture where you are expected to follow any order, including suicide on a moment’s notice.
Did you really just write 3 paragraphs in defence of both vaporizing and radiation poisoning hundreds of thousands of civilians who mostly had literally nothing to do with the atrocities that you speak of? Disgusting.
In a war that killed what, 50 million people? The US and Russia were gearing up to send roughly 10 million soldiers to invade Japan. That would have been far worse. Tens of millions would have died.
In fact, to this day virtually every easy Asian nation that suffered from Japanese aggression had blamed Japan for the war and has sought a public apology, for which Japan has refused to give. It is a major sore spot in relations.
So yes I did.
I find it hard to find empathy for ignorant Americans such as yourself but I don’t advocate murdering innocent civilians with a WMD because your government breaks international laws.
Removed by mod
Yeah but you’re ugly
Removed by mod
