Here’s how to end our War’s For Profits”. Subsidize GE and the other war profiteers

[rhett o rick]

for NOT producing war machines and bombs. Start out at an increase over their current war profits and decrease their profits over a period of five years.

Sad that we need to kill so many innocent people just to ensure huge profits for GE and the other war profiteers.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

1. Yup, treat them like farmers, pay them for not doing what it is they do. n/t

[rhett o rick]

15. It would save lives. nm

[Scuba]

2. I'll bet they are opposed to this plan. They plan on ramping up war profits over time. n/t

[Donnachaidh]

3. f*ck that -- break up these massive companies

I got yer subsidy right here. :sarcasm:

GE should be getting their asses sued off by the irradiated folks in Japan...

[rhett o rick]

4. Who is going to break em up? Not Congress. nm

[Donnachaidh]

5. so instead you want to subsidize them not to war profiteer?

:rofl:

[rhett o rick]

6. At least it would save lives. nm

[sad sally]

7. Ain't gonna' happen - the Pentagon's crying has started:

WASHINGTON | Wed Apr 13, 2011 5:19pm EDT
(Reuters) - The United States would have to abandon some military missions and trim troop levels if President Barack Obama presses ahead with new proposed defense cuts, the Pentagon said on Wednesday.

Obama announced a goal of saving $400 billion on security spending by 2023 as part of a larger objective of cutting the U.S. budget deficit by $4 trillion.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates, a holdover from the Republican Bush administration who is expected to step down later this year, has warned repeatedly in the past against further deep cuts in defense spending.

Minutes after Obama announced his austerity plan, the Pentagon renewed those concerns even as Gates endorsed Obama's commitment to a thorough review before making any cuts.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/13/us-usa-budget-pentagon-idUSTRE73C6XG20110413?du

[RevStPatrick]

8. The war industry's purpose...

...is population control for profit.

At least, that's how they see it.

[rhett o rick]

9. Sad but probably true. nm

[taterguy]

10. Profit isn't the only motive for war

The main reason we're at war now is to make sure we have a reliable supply of oil.

How did you get to work today?

[rhett o rick]

13. Afghanistan is about minerals. But I get your point. nm

[taterguy]

14. We went there to chase someone from Saudi Arabia

If not for oil we'd care as much about Bin Laden as we do about someone who commits an act of terrorism in Sri Lanka.

[Motown_Johnny]

11. why would they agree to only 5 years of decreasing profits

when they know they have endlessly increasing profits in-perpetuity

[rhett o rick]

12. They might be tempted to the subsidies for not producing. How great could that be?

Of course they wont go for it. What do you think I am an idiot? (rhetorical, please dont answer)

[Motown_Johnny]

16. they would still want to produce to sell to other governments

and/or to sell to our government and have them products items overseas as aid.