• PsychedSy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    61
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The majority of the federal budget goes to welfare and entitlements. I’m on the “no standing army” side of things, but it doesn’t help to propagate incorrect information.

    Edit: this is absurd. There’s no opinion here: the comment I replied to is factually wrong. You can’t dislike facts until they’re not true.

    • Alien Nathan Edward@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      you failed to engage with their actual argument, which was that military spending is absurdly high but always univocally supported by everyone in the establishment and increased with every new budget, but that it’s an uphill fight to get anything new for people who actually need help.

      • PsychedSy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        1 year ago

        To be fair, I engaged with that portion by pointing out I don’t actually believe in standing armies. So defense spending should be close to zero. But, yeah, everyone wants their pork and defense spending is free money to them.

        • madcaesar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          You don’t believe in standing armies? I’m sorry but you’re either 5 years old or incredibly naive.

          • PsychedSy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            I mean you don’t do it overnight. There’s nothing naive about having principled goals.

            • madcaesar@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              It’s a ridiculous goal. Armies aren’t just for waging wars against other people. Emergencies arise where it’s absolutely CRUCIAL you have well trained, organized soldiers ready to respond.

              • PsychedSy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                A trained, voluntary militia is the only way to have ethical defense that can’t be abused. Maybe we don’t get there, but having the goal be more militia vs standing army can be worked out.

                The world won’t always be the same and we should plan for more liberty oriented and equitable outcomes instead of dismissing them out of hand because we don’t think they’re pragmatic today.

    • Simpsonator@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think you’re getting down voted for two reasons.

      1. OP’s comment didn’t state anything factual. It was rude to accuse him of attempting to “propagate incorrect information.”

      2. You’re lumping together two very different types of spending and it feels like you’re making a disingenuous argument. The vast majority of spending you’re talking about is Social Security/Medicare which has received near constant increases. Welfare programs on the other hand have been under attack since the 90s. I can say that Social Security, Medicare, and the FAA together make up almost half the budget but it doesn’t make a good argument for cutting the FAA.

      All that said, I do think you make a good point that there’s other programs to look at. Maybe we can cut the military budget while also looking at saving money on Medicare.

      • PsychedSy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I didn’t call it a lie because I don’t think it’s an issue of will or intent, so I didn’t mean it to be insulting. I see where you’re coming from otherwise, but this isn’t a comment made from nowhere. This is a common talking point people try to use and I genuinely think it reinforces the trope.

        I don’t think it’s disingenuous at all. Whether it’s for a single mother or a pensioner it’s certainly not being used for useless bases or bombs.

        I don’t believe we can solve problems if we don’t understand them and our lack of understanding is disastrous when it comes to voting.

    • Mini_Moonpie@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think you just misinterpreted the OP’s statement. Conservatives also don’t want welfare and entitlement spending and try to cut those back all the time. OP’s statement is a characterization of conservative opinions on spending. Conservatives don’t support spending on student debt relief, welfare, or entitlements. They do support military spending. That’s not factually incorrect. And, it is irrelevant how much of the budget those categories represent because conservatives didn’t choose those levels and don’t support them.

    • ZzyzxRoad@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      https://www.nationalpriorities.org/budget-basics/federal-budget-101/spending/

      By far, the biggest category of discretionary spending is spending on the Pentagon and military. In most years, this accounts for more than half of the discretionary budget. In 2020, because some discretionary spending passed through supplemental appropriations went to pandemic programs, the share of the discretionary budget that went to the military was smaller – even though the amount that went to the military was just as high as in previous years.

      Most “welfare” falls under discretionary. Medicare, medicaid, and social security (also “welfare”) fall under mandatory spending. Social security and medicare make up the largest categories. This organization explains how “welfare” spending increased in recent years due to pandemic spending on things like stimulus checks and increased unemployment.

      The bottom line thoughis that people pay into it for years so that it’s available when it’s their turn to need it. If they never do, then great. It can help someone else, god forbid.

      • PsychedSy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        1 year ago

        I didn’t realize that if you promised to spend money it didn’t count. I’ll be sure to keep my rent out of my financial planning.

      • PsychedSy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        National defense is the fifth on that chart by percent. Everything above it is entitlement spending. Looks like income security is where welfare falls - it’s a little over half. The other half is other forms of payouts to peeps.

        • bdiddy@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Entitlements are not welfare. Period. Welfare is hardly a drop in the overall bucket. Entitlements are money that people are owed because they paid in. As in they are entitled to that. Welfare is paying for poor people to be able to survive.

          You are purposely mixing the 2 because you fall for the serious propaganda on the “right” that somehow social security should be ended. If they end it they owe us that money back.

      • Zuberi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Bootlickers need their own bat-signal. I propose we post something about equal treatment.