--- In [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> , "shempmcgurk" <shempmcg...@...> wrote: > > --- In [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> , TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > [snip] > > > > > Also in their favor is that Euro-nations have not spent > > the decades since World War II spending literally *half* > > of their Gross National Product on "defense," which is > > a euphemism for both "Better ways to kill people," and > > "Subsidies for Defense Industries." America has. > > [snip] > > > Before you open your big, fat mouth about things you know nothing about, why don't you actually do some research? > > Show me one year since WWII when half of the GDP was spent on "defense". >
I have to agree with Turq on this. If you take Social Security out of the equation, then almost every year more than half was spent on military. Social Security trust fund was inserted into the equation by the Republicans in the 1960's to try to hide their exorbitant defense spending. It has no business being in there because it is a trust find and not the Government's to use, spend, or touch. OffWorld
