why do taxpayers complain about paying for social programs but not military weaponss?

Question

such as apache helicopters, and bombs to kill innocent civiliians in iraq

Answer 1

We tend to shrug our shoulders at defense spending because it is going to be spent anyway. Social programs are an easier target, the poor don't have the power to overthrow the government.

Answer 2

Well, SOME taxpayers believe that defense is a legitimate application of funds whereas social programs aren't as clearly outlined as being under the realm of the (federal) government.

There's an old adage, "the government that does what it shouldn't is less prepared to do what it should"

If one is a strict-constructionist (for instance) defense is "OK" where social programs are less so.

Answer 3

I don't know about everyone, but it bothers me that 42 cents on every dollar I send to the federal government goes to social programing that I'll never get to use, while there are families that are third or forth generation wellfare recipients that have never worked ever, just lived off the government tit. I don't have a problem helping someone out if they're truelly just down on their luck, but most abuse the welfare system. I don't like having to pay for someone to be lazy.

Answer 4

Please do no longer confuse Conservatives with Republicans, they are 2 different animals. As a conservative I oppose holding a status military in time of peace, could close ALL protection tension bases exterior the U. S. and defend an Air tension, military and marines as our first line of protection against distant places invasion, the army Reserve could stand using fact the 2d line of protection with The national shelter - with governors of the respective states as Commander in chief could stand using fact the third line of protection. the thought being, the time it takes from the 1st line of protection to tapping the third line of protection could be adequate for congress to declare war (if suitable) as required below the U. S. shape a protection tension could be drafted and experienced. for many of the historic past of america there became into no huge status military maintained in time of peace -- that in simple terms got here approximately after international war II. Social secure practices isn't constitutional, and due to mis-administration is in simple terms no longer sustainable.

Answer 5

Because "social programs" don't keep someone from delegating how I live my life, where my children go to school, and whether or not I can practice my religious beliefs freely.

Answer 6

Weapons kill people. Social programs help people. We don't want to help people. We want to kill people. That's why we complain about paying for social programs but not weapons.


Now that you've read what you wanted to hear, please f--k off and die so we can get to some real issues. Thanks.

Answer 7

Social programs may actually help someone,which is "wimpy".
Weapons kill,which is "manly'.

So goes the scewed up American/conservative mentality.