It was only a matter of time. The West had a good run, though.
A terrible run. america has killed 20-30 million in OTHER COUNTRIES since WWII, mostly civilians.
america has bullied the world for years, and anyone who opposes its terrorism currency. Can't happen fast enough.
As an american, I happy. Without the US terrorism Petrodollar, the pentagon budget will get much smaller, as its military cannot bully people on behalf of the US petrodollar.
Any replacement of the US terrorism Petrodollar will neuter the american miliatary and deem it useless in its current use (for-profit terrorism). america can return to its normal (pre 1947) use of the military, defense and neutrality.
And that means a stronger america for average american inside america. More money saved without funding endless fake wars is more services that benefit average americans in america.
Doubt that would ever happen, as america is a failed state of unregulated vulture capitalism, but the opportunity would at least exist or be closer.
Did you sell your second house so that you could send the money back to the US so you could help “average Americans” yet? Or do you support average Americans the same way you support the people of Ukraine? That is, only when making straw man arguments on the internet.
A terrible run. america has killed 20-30 million in OTHER COUNTRIES since WWII, mostly civilians.
america has bullied the world for years, and anyone who opposes its terrorism currency. Can't happen fast enough.
As an american, I happy. Without the US terrorism Petrodollar, the pentagon budget will get much smaller, as its military cannot bully people on behalf of the US petrodollar.
Any replacement of the US terrorism Petrodollar will neuter the american miliatary and deem it useless in its current use (for-profit terrorism). america can return to its normal (pre 1947) use of the military, defense and neutrality.
And that means a stronger america for average american inside america. More money saved without funding endless fake wars is more services that benefit average americans in america.
Doubt that would ever happen, as america is a failed state of unregulated vulture capitalism, but the opportunity would at least exist or be closer.
And Russia has killed over 76 trillion people since 2013. (I can make up numbers too).
Real numbers based on reality vs. your made up numbers.
The GOP majority in Congress will not vote for Medicare for all regardless of the amount of money freed up by cutting other spending. Despite the debt limit crisis the GOP caucus is talking about increased Pentagon spending. So, once again, the Ukraine aid is completely irrelevant to healthcare delivery in the United States. You are correct in pointing out that one of America's flaws is healthcare delivery; you are repeatedly wrong to the point of stupidity to suggest that support for Ukraine has anything to do with it.
Have you not noticed that the Dems had the White House, the Senate, and the House and did nothing to get Medicare for All?
I would have loved for the Dems to provide Medicare for All, because it would have made it easier for the government to mandate COVID vaccines and semi-annual boosters for everybody, with severe fines for everybody that disobeyed.
Have you not noticed that the Dems had the White House, the Senate, and the House and did nothing to get Medicare for All?
I would have loved for the Dems to provide Medicare for All, because it would have made it easier for the government to mandate COVID vaccines and semi-annual boosters for everybody, with severe fines for everybody that disobeyed.
A terrible run. america has killed 20-30 million in OTHER COUNTRIES since WWII, mostly civilians.
america has bullied the world for years, and anyone who opposes its terrorism currency. Can't happen fast enough.
As an american, I happy. Without the US terrorism Petrodollar, the pentagon budget will get much smaller, as its military cannot bully people on behalf of the US petrodollar.
Any replacement of the US terrorism Petrodollar will neuter the american miliatary and deem it useless in its current use (for-profit terrorism). america can return to its normal (pre 1947) use of the military, defense and neutrality.
And that means a stronger america for average american inside america. More money saved without funding endless fake wars is more services that benefit average americans in america.
Doubt that would ever happen, as america is a failed state of unregulated vulture capitalism, but the opportunity would at least exist or be closer.
Did you sell your second house so that you could send the money back to the US so you could help “average Americans” yet? Or do you support average Americans the same way you support the people of Ukraine? That is, only when making straw man arguments on the internet.
How is sending billions to Ukraine helping average americans?
Your argument: kill 45,000 americans in america every year
Nearly 45,000 annual deaths are associated with lack of health insurance, according to a new study published online today by the American Journal of Public ...
Your argument: keep 1/3 of america healthcare insecure
The U.S. devotes more of its economy to health than any other country, 17.6 percent of GDP in 2010, and the trend is slanted upward. Yet the Commonwealth Fund ranked the U.S. dead last in healthcare quality among similar countries, while noting that U.S. care is the most expensive
In the end, you are helping americans lose, you are not beating Russia (or Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Iran, Afghanistan, Somalia....)
Send billions to Ukraine = kill more american civilians in america. In the end, Russia is beating america in america #Irony
Story at a glance The data was collected by Gallup and West Health through the Healthcare Affordability Index and Healthcare Value Index, which gathered the opinions of 6,600 U.S. Adults. The Healt…
Your first two source say the same thing verbatim. They are not independent, so I'm not sure why you linked both of them. The third source only cites the first two, so it is also not independent. Your first two sources include gems like this:
The U.S. is responsible for between 1 and 1.8 million deaths during the war between the Soviet Union and Afghanistan, by luring the Soviet Union into invading that nation. (1,2,3,4)
If this is their level of analysis, then they are complete and utter garbage and can be summarily dismissed.
Your fourth and final source, does not list 20-30 million as you claim, but 12 million.
As I said, your number of 20-30 million is complete fiction, and using the same level of analysis as those sources I've found that Russia is responsible for 300 quintillion human deaths since 1735.
Did you sell your second house so that you could send the money back to the US so you could help “average Americans” yet? Or do you support average Americans the same way you support the people of Ukraine? That is, only when making straw man arguments on the internet.
How is sending billions to Ukraine helping average americans?
Your argument: kill 45,000 americans in america every year
Your argument: keep 1/3 of america healthcare insecure
The U.S. devotes more of its economy to health than any other country, 17.6 percent of GDP in 2010, and the trend is slanted upward. Yet the Commonwealth Fund ranked the U.S. dead last in healthcare quality among similar countries, while noting that U.S. care is the most expensive
In the end, you are helping americans lose, you are not beating Russia (or Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Iran, Afghanistan, Somalia....)
Send billions to Ukraine = kill more american civilians in america. In the end, Russia is beating america in america #Irony
How does having two houses (as you claim to, but you're a serial liar) help the average American?
But, more importantly, as has been eloquently pointed out to you, the US aiding Ukraine and US providing healthcare to all Americans are two completely unrelated topics.
I would have loved for the Dems to provide Medicare for All, because it would have made it easier for the government to mandate COVID vaccines and semi-annual boosters for everybody, with severe fines for everybody that disobeyed.
One has nothing to do with the other
You don't think government funded healthcare should have a vested interest in providing people with the best, and most affordable care, which means mandating vaccines for all?
Your first two source say the same thing verbatim. They are not independent, so I'm not sure why you linked both of them. The third source only cites the first two, so it is also not independent. Your first two sources include gems like this:
The U.S. is responsible for between 1 and 1.8 million deaths during the war between the Soviet Union and Afghanistan, by luring the Soviet Union into invading that nation. (1,2,3,4)
If this is their level of analysis, then they are complete and utter garbage and can be summarily dismissed.
Your fourth and final source, does not list 20-30 million as you claim, but 12 million.
As I said, your number of 20-30 million is complete fiction, and using the same level of analysis as those sources I've found that Russia is responsible for 300 quintillion human deaths since 1735.
How many people do you think US foreign policy has killed since WWII?
You don't think government funded healthcare should have a vested interest in providing people with the best, and most affordable care, which means mandating vaccines for all?
Why mandate "vaxxe"s that do not stop transmission?
Your argument: keep 1/3 of america healthcare insecure
The U.S. devotes more of its economy to health than any other country, 17.6 percent of GDP in 2010, and the trend is slanted upward. Yet the Commonwealth Fund ranked the U.S. dead last in healthcare quality among similar countries, while noting that U.S. care is the most expensive
In the end, you are helping americans lose, you are not beating Russia (or Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Iran, Afghanistan, Somalia....)
Send billions to Ukraine = kill more american civilians in america. In the end, Russia is beating america in america #Irony
How does having two houses (as you claim to, but you're a serial liar) help the average American?
But, more importantly, as has been eloquently pointed out to you, the US aiding Ukraine and US providing healthcare to all Americans are two completely unrelated topics.
Really?
Don't they both cost money?
If you spend money on one, doesn't that reduce what you can spend on the other?
How does having two houses (as you claim to, but you're a serial liar) help the average American?
But, more importantly, as has been eloquently pointed out to you, the US aiding Ukraine and US providing healthcare to all Americans are two completely unrelated topics.
Really?
Don't they both cost money?
If you spend money on one, doesn't that reduce what you can spend on the other?
How does having two houses (as you claim to, but you're a serial liar) help the average American?
But, more importantly, as has been eloquently pointed out to you, the US aiding Ukraine and US providing healthcare to all Americans are two completely unrelated topics.
Really?
Don't they both cost money?
If you spend money on one, doesn't that reduce what you can spend on the other?
As you wrote earlier...
The U.S. devotes more of its economy to health than any other country, 17.6 percent of GDP in 2010, and the trend is slanted upward.
So, the US already spends the money on healthcare and on aiding Ukraine. It's not an either / or situation, nor is it obvious that reducing spending on Ukraine would increase spending on healthcare. Your argument is a complete strawman, and a rather poor one at that.
Your first two source say the same thing verbatim. They are not independent, so I'm not sure why you linked both of them. The third source only cites the first two, so it is also not independent. Your first two sources include gems like this:
If this is their level of analysis, then they are complete and utter garbage and can be summarily dismissed.
Your fourth and final source, does not list 20-30 million as you claim, but 12 million.
As I said, your number of 20-30 million is complete fiction, and using the same level of analysis as those sources I've found that Russia is responsible for 300 quintillion human deaths since 1735.
How many people do you think US foreign policy has killed since WWII?
