When thinking like a businessman is idiotic in Government

[_Bach]

This to me is the classic example of why it is wrong to assume a businessman has the solutions for running a Government.

Trump says we should consider letting Japan and Korea arm themselves with nuclear weapons so they can reduce their dependency on the costly U.S. umbrella.

This is the classic thinking of a businessman, who is trained to look at all departments as 'profit centers'. Looking at our high military expenditures and the relatively low military expenditures of our allies, he asks 'why are we propping these folks up? Cut 'em loose and they will pick up the slack.' And the simplest and lowest cost way to do that is for them to a nuclear capability as a fallback defense.

And again, as a business strategy that makes perfect sense. But for someone who understands the threads of nuclear proliferation that occur as every new nation joins the nuclear club, the world is less safe, not more.

But that is long-term strategic thinking, and Trump is more bottom-line, what's-the-next quarterly-statement mentality. And the problem is that Donald Trump's hubris is so great, he really thinks he can just apply his business sensibilities to government. He is not humble enough to admit he is a babe in the woods when it comes to understanding crucial aspects of American foreign policy.

Seeing this man stumble around when it comes to nuclear proliferation...I'm sorry, but if this guy were a contestant on The Apprentice, how many of you would be hiring?

Just out of qualifying curiosity, have you ever taken a risk to invest capital and actually created jobs for anyone?

[_ajax18]

Basically, yes. At least, I think that he doesn't really believe in about half of the things that he has recently been saying.

Which things specifically? I'll concede that this has been a particularly ugly week in GOP politics. Trump should never be going on Chris Matthews. The whole fight about Melania and Hedi Cruz was bad form. But I think Trump is serious about border enforcement and trade deficits.

[_Themis]

Looking at our high military expenditures and the relatively low military expenditures of our allies, he asks 'why are we propping these folks up? Cut 'em loose and they will pick up the slack.'

Truer words were never spoken.

Sorry but no. Most western countries spend more on foreign aid then the US, and one has to look at how much military you really need. Western countries are not going to be invaded by countries like Russia. The US spends way more then it needs.

[_ajax18]

The US spends way more then it needs.

Because the US ends up paying for other countries who get to spend less, like Canada.

[_honorentheos]

Looking at our high military expenditures and the relatively low military expenditures of our allies, he asks 'why are we propping these folks up? Cut 'em loose and they will pick up the slack.'

Truer words were never spoken.

Anyone who doesn't think South Korea developing a nuclear weapon would avoid a preemptive nuclear attack from North Korea is naïve. Under Trumps plan as expressed we'll see nuclear exchanges.

That said, one would think as a businessman he's also aware of the huge leverage that our nuclear protection of NATO and Asian allies provides us. I don't think he'd really do it. But I hope I never have to find out I was wrong.

[_honorentheos]

The US spends way more then it needs.

Because the US ends up paying for other countries who get to spend less, like Canada.

It helps to look at how dependent much of our economy has become on military production and other spending. It's a big deal to suggest we close a base or shut down an outdated program when Podunksville, Anystate would lose it's underlying economy without it. Cutting military spending really should be a conservative issue but kudos to the geniuses who tricked you all into thinking it's what keeps us from being invaded by the boogieman of the day.

[_Themis]

The US spends way more then it needs.

Because the US ends up paying for other countries who get to spend less, like Canada.

Sorry but no. Canada does spend more on foreign aid. Canada has no enemy that it needs the US to defend from these days. You cannot make a good argument for the amount of spending the US pays on military. It has no enemy capable of attacking it or it's allies with conventional armies. The threat of nuclear attack from several western counties that have them is also a huge deterrent. While I do think Canada does need to spend more, it doesn't need the US to spend more to protect it. You could make that argument for South Korea but then they are in the top ten in military spending by GDP. I suspect though as global warming opens the artic up more you will see Canada spend more to assert it's sovereignty over it's northern territories.

[Guest]

Sorry but no. Most western countries spend more on foreign aid then the US . . .

Themis, I have noticed numerous times that you consistently use the word "then"

then‌ (thĕn)
‌adv.‌
‌1. ‌ At that time: ‌I was still in school then. Come at noon; I'll be ready then.‌
‌2. ‌ Next in time, space, or order; immediately afterward: ‌watched the late movie and then went to bed.‌
‌3. ‌ In addition; moreover; besides: ‌It costs $20, and then there's the sales tax to pay.‌
‌4. ‌ Used after ‌but‌ to qualify or balance a preceding statement: ‌The star was nervous, but then who isn't on the first night of a new play.‌
‌5. ‌ In that case; accordingly: ‌If traffic is heavy, then allow extra time.‌
‌6. ‌ As a consequence; therefore: ‌The case, then, is closed.‌
‌n.‌
That time or moment: ‌The bus leaves at four; until then let's walk.‌
‌adj.‌
Being so at that time: ‌the then chairman of the board.‌
‌Idiom: ‌
‌then again‌
From another standpoint; on the other hand: ‌I need a vacation. Then again, so do my coworkers.

when what you clearly meant to convey, judging by the context, was "than."

than‌ (thăn, thən)
‌conj.‌
‌1. ‌ Used after a comparative adjective or adverb to introduce the second element or clause of an unequal comparison: ‌She is a better athlete than I.‌
‌2. ‌ Used to introduce the second element after certain words indicating difference: ‌He draws quite differently than she does.‌
‌3. ‌ When. Used especially after ‌hardly‌ and ‌scarcely:‌ ‌I had scarcely walked in the door than the commotion started.‌
‌preparation.‌ ‌Usage Problem‌
In comparison or contrast with: ‌could run faster than him; outclassed everyone other than her.

Do you not know that the two words are not equivalent in meaning? As far as I can recall, I have never seen you use the word "than", even when that would clearly have been the correct word to use, judging by the context of what you wrote. It is almost as if you don't even know of the existence of that word (or the correct way to spell it).

[_Dr. Shades]

Truer words were never spoken.

Sorry but no. Most western countries spend more on foreign aid then the US, and one has to look at how much military you really need. Western countries are not going to be invaded by countries like Russia. The US spends way more then it needs.

Um, that's my entire point.

[_moksha]

But for someone who understands the threats of nuclear proliferation that occur as every new nation joins the nuclear club, the world is less safe, not more.

Yes, but... wouldn't there be a hefty profit to be made in selling bunk space in Fallout Vault Housing? Of course, in the aftermath of say 200 years when it is safe the vault dwellers descendants to emerge, it might be wise to bring plenty of bottle caps along for currency afterward. Savvy investors would make a tidy temporary profit from bottle cap sales to the vault dwellers before you know... intercontinental launch time.