Home | About | Donate

Nation "Too Broke" for Universal Healthcare to Spend $406 Billion More on F-35


Bernie's support for the boondoggle is evil. He is really bad on foreign policy.


We need to lobby Bernie.


in previous generations, there has been a buildup to war, meaning weapons have to be manufactured, then war in which millions die,

now we don't have wars on that scale, but we still have the instinct to build wartoys, even if we can only use them sporadically

it is futile, but we will go on doing it at the expense of everything else---it keeps millions of people in employment



And then you woke up-


This is the CRIME of the century and the past century. Its why we need to get corporate money out of politics. But what is the real issue here? The MEDIA! We might see some story here and there about military spending---but never a real dialog about what is being accomplished with all this spending. All this money could have gone to community healthcare centers-creating thousands of jobs-and improving a sense of well being in so many broken communities.

How about a boycott of all the products advertised on "news" programs until they start reporting on the military??????State rights---lets get rid of federal funding on the military----give states a block grant and they can use it on the military or healthcare--their choice?????


Come now, it's always been this way in the U.S.


"Nation "Too Broke" for Universal Healthcare to Spend $406 Billion More on F-35"

Anybody proofread these titles? The whole acquisition cost of program is $406B, The latest cost increase is $27B.

Plus, this is for the lifetime of the project of 70 years. Of course that does not include ops and mx which is about $1T over the 70 years span.


But this is a jobs program.

Also, as the Rs like to remind us, the government can't create jobs.


Uh, illusion, the role of government is to protect its people so military expenditures should be the only funds the fed govt spends. Rest of the stuff (education, healthcare, etc) should be left to the states.


If only respondents and the MSM understood modern macroeconomics, this whole article would be seen as misguided, unnecessary even. Why? because the fed can afford [easily] to fund both options. There is absolutely no link between the two options. They are separate issues. They need separate agendas. Both are purely political in nature. The military industrial complex wants the fighter. The general population wants universal healthcare. Well change the political landscape. Don't be sidetracked by ignorant ideas about the money.


This, in a nutshell, is what defines this nation, and it's convoluted priorities: endless, easily available billions $$$ for the military machinery, but not a cent to be found when it comes to helping a person who has the audacity to live in the USA but NOT be a millionaire, and who needs health care and some basic humanitarian help..


It is odd that when it comes to foreign policy Bernie is very much of a pragmatist but when it comes to domestic policy he is an idealist. I think that is an unusual combination. Hillary Clinton is very much a pragmatist for all types of policies. Bernie has his own space in politics.


Their won't anything left to defend after MIC bankrupts the country.


You must not be paying attention....Sanders has been to numerous cities just this past month speaking on behalf of the American people, advocating universal healthcare! He's a true leader!


Let's spend our money on us! Let's fund a living wage, health care, jobs, infrastructure, clean energy, education, arts and culture and if there's anything left over, then we'll see if we can afford new wespons systems. My hope is that we can't.


I'm sure Bernie will stand strong against this deathly boondoogle.

Won't he ... ?


Sometimes I ask fellow commenters here to clarify or get to the gist of what they're trying to say.

I don't have that problem with your 'cheerleader for the establishment' platform.

Just a reminder: the establishment candidate you supported whole hog lost to Donald Trump.


That requires a new social contract. Among and between negoiating states and the Federal Gov't.
We simply change funding of the fiscal Federal Budget.
As to the F-35 funding and the MIC: In 1974-75 I met hundreds of returning Vietnam Vets and I always tried to get them to answer one question: " What did you fear most while serving, Pres. Richard Nixon's policies or the N. Vietnamese? " These were draftees, mostly.
Watergate was always in the news then so this ? was skewed, but yeah, Tricky Dick lost bigly.
I'll take my chances with N. Korean ICBMs, China, Russia, ISIS, Hamas and ... . rather than this form of crazy. Ending military madness isn't a hypothetical question for our politicians, it should be an essential one for them to receive our vote. Enough is often times way, way to much. This is definitely one of those times.


Exactly right. Since the US uses a Fiat Currency, it can never go broke since it can literally create money out of thin air. Anyone who says that the US is going broke either doesn't understand our monetary system or their lying for political reasons. Families, cities, states, and corporations can go broke since they aren't allowed create money out of thin air but the US government can, meaning there is no limit to the amount of money it can create. There's no maximum ceiling that once exceeded, we're bankrupt. Unlike charities, churches, individuals, cities, and states, we can afford to help those who need assistance, especially since we seem to have an unlimited cash flow for the MIC...


No, the US does not create money out of thin air. You do not understand the monetary system. If the US were simply printing money that was essentially worthless, a claim made by ideologues of the Right (Ryan. Paul) and the Left (Stein) inflation would have long ago erased any value. To the contrary, the dollar has retained, even gained value against other currencies, gold, whatever measure you apply. Congress played with that strength by threatening to suspend debt payments. Those debts are largely to ourselves,