Is the author under the impression that foodborne diseases didn't spread under previous administrations? There's dozens of examples here: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_foodborne_illness_outbreaks_in_the_United_States" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_foodborne_illness_outb...
Does the author realize that the cuts to USAID, foodstamps, welfare, and other entitlements and waste are a good thing?
We just surpassed $40 trillion in debt, the bond market is blaring warning signs, and yet the government just keeps wasting money on both democrat and republican causes.
We shouldn't be wasting money on a $47k on a "transgender opera" in Colombia, $100B in food stamps, or $40B on the Iran War.
Both republicans and democrats are jeopardizing the one thing that truly matters in our government: the ability to pay its obligations. Whether it's wasting money on a Tomahawk or a welfare queen, it's reprehensible.
Are you sure cuts to these are a good thing? Both right now and into the future?
The extensive changes are, and will continue, making changes to a world order of which the US was already at the top (Trump seemed to think that the US wasn't at the top or wanted to be _moar_ top). The extent of the changes is already chipping away at the foundations of US dominance. Ironically.
I don't care whether the US falls from it's position, but I do care about the inevitable extended period of global instability of the various powers competing to take the top position.
USAID was utterly ineffective at building or maintaining the US's position in the world order. Look at the success of the Chinese Belt and Road initiative in terms of actually accomplishing geopolitical goals through soft power actually looks like (eg fostering trade, access to resources, pulling countries into your sphere of influence).
Food stamps and welfare as currently structured literally negatively contributed to the US's position: enabling generations of Americans to sponge off the system, rather than work and contribute, incentivizing claiming disability and having children you can't afford/care for, etc.
Cutting these things would be akin to pulling out from Afghanistan. It looks messy, nobody wanted to do it, but continuing it was just sunk cost fallacy.
alex43578 · · focus · HN ↗
Does the author realize that the cuts to USAID, foodstamps, welfare, and other entitlements and waste are a good thing?
We just surpassed $40 trillion in debt, the bond market is blaring warning signs, and yet the government just keeps wasting money on both democrat and republican causes.
We shouldn't be wasting money on a $47k on a "transgender opera" in Colombia, $100B in food stamps, or $40B on the Iran War.
Both republicans and democrats are jeopardizing the one thing that truly matters in our government: the ability to pay its obligations. Whether it's wasting money on a Tomahawk or a welfare queen, it's reprehensible.
BLKNSLVR · · focus · HN ↗
Are you sure cuts to these are a good thing? Both right now and into the future?
The extensive changes are, and will continue, making changes to a world order of which the US was already at the top (Trump seemed to think that the US wasn't at the top or wanted to be _moar_ top). The extent of the changes is already chipping away at the foundations of US dominance. Ironically.
I don't care whether the US falls from it's position, but I do care about the inevitable extended period of global instability of the various powers competing to take the top position.
alex43578 · · focus · HN ↗
Food stamps and welfare as currently structured literally negatively contributed to the US's position: enabling generations of Americans to sponge off the system, rather than work and contribute, incentivizing claiming disability and having children you can't afford/care for, etc.
Cutting these things would be akin to pulling out from Afghanistan. It looks messy, nobody wanted to do it, but continuing it was just sunk cost fallacy.