How come we have money for wars, but no money to give to the poor?

Answer 1

I beleive that TuPac asked this question about 10 years ago. He made plenty of money off of the song, but did not give it to the poor. Instead he started a street war and got killed. I guess people like to talk about giving money to poor, but only when it will make them money.

Answer 2

Because by carear/poor economists - (1) Giving money to war have always been considered INVESTMENT into more jobs and wealth, and (2) Giving money to the poor have always been considered a mere EXPENCE.

They say, the poor can't make more money, jobs, and wealth that you enjoy now. Would YOU share your internet access with the poor? Why should those "poor" economists do or think otherwise?

But the bigger problem that they overlook is that gaining wealth through wars lead to more poverty. Waging wars is POOR governence.

Thus, as the old adage goes - a nation is worth what it gains.
(Meaning that spending on wars is related to whom you voted for)

Answer 3

I have often thrown that question in the face of many that support our Government. The answer is simply this... corporate fascism. War is waged by those who profit from it. Giving the American people the heath care that their taxes pay for many times over makes none of them any richer or more powerful. Therefore, your tax dollars, along with many other dollars made at the expense of the American people are used to kill for profit. The part that really makes me angry is that we work hard for small wages while corporations make billions, then they tax our little piece of the pie and use that money to so called "protect" us. Which is nothing more than taking away our rights and freedom and replacing them with a police state. All of you who wish to laugh, go ahead... I hope you have friends in high places, or the American people start standing up for themselves and retake this country that corporations and their government puppets have stolen, because if it isn't stopped you won't be laughing for long.

Answer 4

The super rich finance both sides of wars and make money either way. It is not in their interest to stop war. On the contrary. N.B. Bush and his family are related by blood to the Queen of England who is the richest woman in the world. One of Bush's forebears had a big financial stake in WW1.

Answer 5

Did you ever notice that when a person gets a copy of Playboy and National Geographic in the mail on the same day - they just don't seem to have time to read National Geographic but they somehow manage to squeeze in a few minutes for Playboy.

It's like that with war and poverty - we spend our money on the stuff we want to spend it on.

Answer 6

Let me ask you a question first, though: what profit would we gain from giving money to the poor, and what profit would we gain if we fight to control a land that holds oil?

We get something in return for war. Who cares if it would be a better thing to do if we gave money to the poor, we wouldn't be getting any monetary profit from it. Bah, government, stick it to the man!

Answer 7

Because, like it or not, other countries don't respect the boundaries and we need to defend ours. If we didn't have a military presence, other countries would walk all over us. We need the defence forces to maintain our healthy limits and boundaries. The poor don't need to be given to, that just sustains their dependence - what needs to happen is encouragement of the poor to develop their own independence to the best of their abilities so they can change their financial status.

Answer 8

That question I have been asking myself. I think is a matter of ego. The guy in charge wants to be remembered by something he thinks is important, but it seems to be easier to destroy and kill than to do good deeds

Answer 9

OMG
What do you think welfare is? Ever heard of food stamps, homeless shelters, WIC?
That's giving to the poor every day.

Answer 10

War is fun, poor People suck.