Home | About | Donate

Ending Poverty, Hunger Possible With Just a Fraction of Global Military Spending


#1

Ending Poverty, Hunger Possible With Just a Fraction of Global Military Spending

Andrea Germanos, staff writer

Eradictating extreme poverty and hunger—two of the the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) agreed by the United Nations in 2015—may seem far out of reach. But, according to a new study, it could done with about ten percent of the world's military spending.


#2

Poverty is the result of stealing. Poverty is the result of killing. Stop stealing from each other. Stop killing each other. Both of them are clear signs of Insanity. Wage Peace by becoming humbling humane. All of our shadows are the same color, world wide. It makes no sense to rob, steal and kill from kith and kin.


#3

Why the obfuscation with Global Military spending ? We, the USA, are the greatest purveyor of violence and war spending. Our MSM is used by the war mongers to fabricate enemies and justify war spending. From the false flag of 911 to the placement of troops in Muslim countries, the U.S. is trying to provoke incidents to continue this theft of tax money for the war machine. Why are Trump and Bernie, two outsiders of the corrupt establishment doing well? It is obvious, people are sick of our evil, war criminals who run the govt.


#4

Military spending is based on the solid common sense principle that if you kill a person that person cannot kill others.Hence military spending is humanitarian, Christian and the American way. Our military entertains the people with parades, victories and glory. If you don't like it go back to where you came from.


#5

I'd love to build a rubble-bouncing video game. You put in your money, of course, then you push this one button on the console and the game knocks over half of the remaining rubble. Then you push the button again and the game knocks over another 50% of the remaining rubble. The game does essentially nothing.

Rubble bouncing capability alone costs hundreds of billions of dollars.


#6

The well paid financial sales people are Global but it seems that the better paid Military folk are mostly American. The connection seems thin but maybe it is time we reap what we have sown. Investment bankers living under the freeway bridge dying of exsposure to depleted uranium. God Bless Amerika.


#8

How about the rest of us come and take all of your shit and leave you with nothing?


#9

There is a place in Mongolia that I recently read about maybe it was National Geo. Civilization has been there for thousands of years but the people were somehow cut off until recently. They have a Matriarchal society. They have no word for war. Conflicts are settle by the head women. No one is killed. Ever.


#10

It's not about the type of government. Nor is the answer the so-called 'free market'.
For instance, while China may have "opened up its markets", it hasn't - yet- opened up its media. , As I understand it, Chinese media , including social media, have blocked information about the President's offshore wealth reported in the Panama papers. Likewise with information about Chinese workers' protests - e.g. re housing conditions, mining accidents etc.
So you can have an un-free political system along with a 'free market' economy..
Also it's a mistake to claim that the US economy is a 'free market'. Consider the large subsidies from state funds to farmers, the military industrial complex, etc. Consider the protectionist tariffs protecting US industries from cheaper imported goods. A really 'free market' economy without any state interference probably does not exist anywhere - and it certainly doesn't in the US.
The amount spent globally on wasteful and harmful military expenditure is huge, and the amount spent on alleviating poverty is relatively just a fraction.
The question is: WHY do states, rich and poor, 'democratic' or dictatorial, all feel the need to arm themselves?
One answer is that their property and trade interests put states in competition with each other, and war is just an extension of their economic competition.
Try thinking of a government as something like a Mafia protection racket. Both raise funds - taxes etc - from businesses, in return for which the state looks after the interests of these businesses.
Since businesses see this system as operating in their interests, they go along with these taxes etc.
And the peoples of the world, exploited and used as cannon fodder, have to like it or lump it.
Or do we? Maybe we do have a choice?
After all, our children and grandchildren should have a better future than a Hobbesian dystopia of endless wars, a world divided between the 1% filthy rich and powerful, and the rest of us who do all the useful work, and even fight their wars for them!


#11

Anyone else been to this Mongolian Utopia - or even read about this fabulous and possibly mythical community? More information please folks!
I doubt if a matriarchy would necessarily prevent wars - remember Thatcher and the Falklands war? Or Indira Gandhi and India's wars and annexations?
Or Hillary Clinton's support for drone warfare, etc?


#14

Thanks for a fascinating link re the 'Mosuo' people.
Hardly a matriarchy since the women do all the work, almost. An interesting .social/economic/political lifestyle and primitive familial relationships.

Ref your final comment about not having to choose between only war and living in a hut without electricity:- I disagree.
Many victims of wars with their homes, schools, hospitals etc destroyed by war, with their lives at risk from dictators or religious fascists, millions of people are displaced e.g 60m. in Syria.
Unfortunately in our 'supposedly civilised' society, we have thousands of refugees - including unaccompanied,orphaned, traumatised children - stuck on European and Turkish borders, trapped in 'camps'/detention centres, or in the chaos of the Calais 'Jungle'. And the affluent become increasingly xenophobic and inhumane.
Result: millions of humans have no choice: if they flee from the horrors of war, they have no life but live in limbo, a nowhere land,.


#15

You must not have read the article. The Mossuo people are happier and live longer than the bottom 1/3 of Americans and compared the standard of living of Native Americas who lived in North America for thousands of years, those folks as you may know are the people we ripped off, the Mossuo people are wealthy. They live well. Many people that have plenty of money do not live well and are unhappy.


#17

This whole debate resembles the old debates when people argued that the billions of dollars spent on the costly space programme would be better spent alleviating world hunger and poverty.
The do-gooders always lose out in such arguments, since the world is currently organised with property, national and class interests dominating any discussion. So common sense is chucked out of the window and we continue to have governments making the same idiotic - self-centred - decisions.
And the result is this dysfunctional 1% -99% class division, and economies based on waste, while many peoples around the world suffer from want!
What sort of legacy will our grandchildren inherit? And will they thank us for the mess we make of things?