How much?

[I Have Questions]

But at what cost to your relationship with NATO?

There's no need for a relationship with NATO, so the "cost" isn't a factor.

Think of all the money the United States has flushed down the toilet thanks to NATO. Now imagine if that money was divided among you and every other taxpayer. Could you find some use for it? Would it improve your life in some way? Or would you rather that NATO have your money and not you?

Oh wow. That’s an incredible viewpoint. I’m staggered. Well good luck without NATO. Just on intelligence gathering alone you’d be screwed without NATO.

[Dr. Shades]

There's no need for a relationship with NATO, so the "cost" isn't a factor.

Think of all the money the United States has flushed down the toilet thanks to NATO. Now imagine if that money was divided among you and every other taxpayer. Could you find some use for it? Would it improve your life in some way? Or would you rather that NATO have your money and not you?

Oh wow. That’s an incredible viewpoint. I’m staggered. Well good luck without NATO. Just on intelligence gathering alone you’d be screwed without NATO.

We survived just fine for over a century and a half without it, and we can survive another century and a half without it if need be.

But what are the answers to my questions? To wit, if all the money the United States flushed down the toilet thanks to NATO had been equally divided between you and every other taxpayer, could you find some use for it? Would it improve your life in some way? Or would you rather that NATO have your money and not you?

[I Have Questions]

Oh wow. That’s an incredible viewpoint. I’m staggered. Well good luck without NATO. Just on intelligence gathering alone you’d be screwed without NATO.

We survived just fine for over a century and a half without it, and we can survive another century and a half without it if need be.

But what are the answers to my questions? To wit, if all the money the United States flushed down the toilet thanks to NATO had been equally divided between you and every other taxpayer, could you find some use for it? Would it improve your life in some way? Or would you rather that NATO have your money and not you?

Firstly, I disagree with your terminology of “flushed down the toilet” to describe spending on security partnerships. I think NATO does a better job of assisting national security than I would do with my financial contributions to NATO. I think my country is safer with NATO than without it. Sure, if we stopped paying into NATO and used the money personally, sure we could by some more beers in the short term. But then what? When the Bear comes knocking and we’ve got no friends? What will those extra beers be worth then?

But I have to understand that I’m not talking with someone who is used to contributing to something like a National Health System despite not getting a personal return commensurate with my financial input. And where some people will benefit more than they contribute. It’s a community greater good sort of thing. You seem to take a more selfish view to things like that. I guess you’d be happy with an “every man for himself” type of society. Well, you’ve very nearly got that. Enjoy.

Just in terms of Making America Great Again…when was it great before? Asking for a working class black friend who lives in America. And if you think a reduction in deficit due to stopping NATO spending would help those type of Americans, you’re in cloud cuckoo land.

Here’s. Link for some information on NATO
https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/in-dept ... e-numbers/

But I reckon you could definitely do better sat at home with a few more beers in the fridge and your Smith & Wesson at the ready…

[Dr. Shades]

We survived just fine for over a century and a half without it, and we can survive another century and a half without it if need be.

But what are the answers to my questions? To wit, if all the money the United States flushed down the toilet thanks to NATO had been equally divided between you and every other taxpayer, could you find some use for it? Would it improve your life in some way? Or would you rather that NATO have your money and not you?

Firstly, I disagree with your terminology of “flushed down the toilet” to describe spending on security partnerships. I think NATO does a better job of assisting national security than I would do with my financial contributions to NATO. I think my country is safer with NATO than without it.

I disagree. Like what happened with many European powers during World War I and World War II, it's a fatal alliance that can draw us into World War III through no fault of our own.

Sure, if we stopped paying into NATO and used the money personally, sure we could by some more beers in the short term.

Then why not donate more of your paycheck to NATO, since you're seemingly so in favor of it?

But then what? When the Bear comes knocking and we’ve got no friends? What will those extra beers be worth then?

If the bear was foolish enough to come knocking, then we would defeat it, that's what.

But I have to understand that I’m not talking with someone who is used to contributing to something like a National Health System despite not getting a personal return commensurate with my financial input. And where some people will benefit more than they contribute. It’s a community greater good sort of thing.

No, you ARE talking with someone who is used to contributing to something like a national health system despite not getting a personal return commensurate with my financial input. I'm 100% onboard with paying taxes to build roads, hire firemen, build schools, and so forth. It's simply my belief that taxes extracted from the taxpayer need to return to those taxpayers somehow, not be donated to foreign governments or wasted on useless military hardware that doesn't serve to defend said taxpayers.

You seem to take a more selfish view to things like that. I guess you’d be happy with an “every man for himself” type of society.

You're wrong.

Just in terms of Making America Great Again…when was it great before? Asking for a working class black friend who lives in America.

Whether it is, or ever was, "great" depends on the individual you ask and/or its comparison to other forms of government and/or its comparison to itself at different stages of its existence. In my personal opinion only, in spite of all this nation's myriad problems, I think it is, ALL things considered, generally greater now than it's ever been.

And if you think a reduction in deficit due to stopping NATO spending would help those type of Americans, you’re in cloud cuckoo land.

And a reduction of the deficit is never a bad thing, even if it doesn't immediately help "those type" of Americans. Or, in your opinion, is a large deficit preferable to a small or non-existent one?

But I reckon you could definitely do better sat at home with a few more beers in the fridge and your Smith & Wesson at the ready…

Do you have any beers in the fridge? If so, why? If NATO is so wonderful, shouldn't you be donating 100% of your beer money to NATO?

[Kishkumen]

That's Donbas.

I can’t imagine how much restraint you exercised when you didn’t add “dumbass” to the end of that sentence.

[I Have Questions]

You seem to take a more selfish view to things like that. I guess you’d be happy with an “every man for himself” type of society.

You're wrong.

Just in terms of Making America Great Again…when was it great before? Asking for a working class black friend who lives in America.

Whether it is, or ever was, "great" depends on the individual…

[Kishkumen]

Then hire more teachers.

The federal government doesn’t hire teachers. In my state, teachers are quitting because the job is crappy, not because there are no jobs or no qualified people to fill them.

[Kishkumen]

I would love to see the analysis that shows that our prosperity is not connected to the global security we set up after WWII. If you think someone else will do a better job or replicate what we achieved, let alone care to, I think you are naïve.

[I Have Questions]

To wit, if all the money the United States flushed down the toilet thanks to NATO…

The United States invoked Article Five of the NATO agreement in the aftermath of 911. How might the USA have responded to that event were it to not have had dependable allies? Allies who responded to “the greater good” principle, rather than seeing it as “every country for itself”?

How many more 911’s have been avoided because of NATO intelligence sharing? I guess we will never know for sure. But it will be more than none. If your position Shades is that ‘Merica don’t need no help from foreigners…which it sounds like it is, then you’ve really lost the plot.

[Dr. Shades]

Then hire more teachers.

The federal government doesn’t hire teachers. In my state, teachers are quitting because the job is crappy, not because there are no jobs or no qualified people to fill them.

Then have the government grant, uh, grants to individual states to pay teachers more, thus incentivizing them to stay regardless of its crappy-ness.

To wit, if all the money the United States flushed down the toilet thanks to NATO…

The United States invoked Article Five of the NATO agreement in the aftermath of 911. How might the USA have responded to that event were it to not have had dependable allies?

It would've responded precisely the way it actually did.

How many more 911’s have been avoided because of NATO intelligence sharing? I guess we will never know for sure. But it will be more than none. If your position Shades is that ‘Merica don’t need no help from foreigners…which it sounds like it is, then you’ve really lost the plot.

No, my position is that NATO, and the American foreign policy of foreign aid and military interventionism, is a hugely detrimental money sink, especially considering the size of the deficit.