View Single Post
Old 09-30-2011, 04:52 PM
MrFarFromRight MrFarFromRight is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Ping-ponging around Europe, trying to get a publishing concern off the ground
Posts: 718

Originally Posted by MichelleZed View Post
The US should worry about covering every child's health care costs before they worry about sending them packages of baby clothes.
Agreed 100%! But rather than worrying about feeding or clothing them, OR offering free health care, the US Gov't priority seems to be getting involved militarily in other countries. I was just answering NYCI's post by saying that if the will were there, it certainly wouldn't mean a strain on US resources to provide baby-boxes (and much more). The size of the country doesn't make it any more difficult.

Still, large-scale corruption (syphoning of funds / "disappearance" of goods) is a LOT easier in warfare scenarios than in baby-care or SENSIBLE health-care (there's also a lot of corruption in the present health-care system), and warfare makes a MUCH better smoke-screen for the CIA's huge-scale drug-trafficking, so I can understand why they go the road they do.

But, hey, we didn't want to get political on this thread, hmm? (I know: I started it, and I apologise.)
Reply With Quote