Crezth
i knew you were a real man of the left
In the U.S. news lately, we're seeing an impending government shutdown become more and more impending, and currently stand about five days away from such a shutdown.
Particularly interesting however is the focus that current talks seem to have on the subject of aid to Ukraine:
Yesterday, the New York Times posted that the money for Ukraine was actually at the center of the current shutdown negotiations.
In other words, it would seem that Americans who might ordinarily be able to rely on government aid and normal operations may have to do without such things as pay increases for teachers, lunches for schoolchildren, and medical care for the disabled and the elderly, in order to fund a large and expensive lobby that is pushing for more and more contributions for war profiteering and the proliferation of dangerous weapons such as cluster munitions.
The question for the thread is this: how much should America continue to support Ukraine and should that support include weapons and military training officers, or be restricted to things like food and medicine? Should America continue to support Ukraine even if it must shut down its own government to do so? And finally, which of these two is a better use of American tax dollars: 1. sending weapons to foreign countries, or 2. feeding the hungry, housing the unhoused, and treating the sick?
NPR said:Congress has returned to Washington with a government shutdown less than five days away and lawmakers are still scrambling for ways to avoid it.
Particularly interesting however is the focus that current talks seem to have on the subject of aid to Ukraine:
NPR said:Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., announced Tuesday that the Senate will vote today to start debate on a bipartisan stop-gap spending bill with funding for Ukraine and disaster relief. Even if the Senate is able to quickly pass the legislation, there is no guarantee House leaders will even schedule a vote on the measure.
"Over the weekend Senate Democrats and Republicans together worked in good faith to reach an agreement on a continuing resolution that will keep the government open beyond Sept. 30," Schumer said on the Senate floor.
"While for sure this bill does not have everything either side wants, it will continue to fund the government at present levels while maintaining our commitment to Ukraine's security and humanitarian needs while also ensuring that those impacted by natural disasters across the country begin to get the resources they need."
Yesterday, the New York Times posted that the money for Ukraine was actually at the center of the current shutdown negotiations.
NY Times said:Money for Ukraine at Center of Senate Bid to Avert Shutdown
With the House in chaos over its spending plans, senators of both parties were deep in negotiations on Monday over efforts to head off a government shutdown this weekend through a stopgap measure and whether to include additional aid to Ukraine in the legislation.
Senators and senior staff members engaged in intense discussions over the past few days on how to proceed given the House impasse, officials said, with the Senate taking steps toward an emergency spending bill that would keep dollars flowing to federal agencies after the current fiscal year ends at midnight Saturday.
People familiar with the talks said a major sticking point was whether to add up to $25 billion in new assistance to Ukraine to what is formally known as a continuing resolution or to keep the legislation free of contentious provisions in what would be a “clean” measure that might enjoy broader support among Republicans in the House, which would also have to pass it to keep the government open.
In other words, it would seem that Americans who might ordinarily be able to rely on government aid and normal operations may have to do without such things as pay increases for teachers, lunches for schoolchildren, and medical care for the disabled and the elderly, in order to fund a large and expensive lobby that is pushing for more and more contributions for war profiteering and the proliferation of dangerous weapons such as cluster munitions.
The question for the thread is this: how much should America continue to support Ukraine and should that support include weapons and military training officers, or be restricted to things like food and medicine? Should America continue to support Ukraine even if it must shut down its own government to do so? And finally, which of these two is a better use of American tax dollars: 1. sending weapons to foreign countries, or 2. feeding the hungry, housing the unhoused, and treating the sick?