Quote:
|
Originally Posted by tecoyah
The statement in this thread was intended to point out an issue created by war funding....in that as a counrty we cannot support the "extra" programs that tend to benefit the population as a whole, and may to some seem unrequired due to what I see as shortsighted thinking. Dragging well established Gov't programs that are unfortunately a part of this society because of poverty into this discussion is simply a tactic used to avoid the actual thread direction intended.
Is it a good Idea to trade science for War?...because thats what it comes down to.
|
really?
is a person any happier today then in 1955? Does household chores get done any faster or cleaner? Is the trade off of better science more expensive healthcare and getting longer life? because those same questions seem to be what it comes down to for me.
personally if I could vote for reducing many programs i would.
__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.
|