Lots of countries burn money on labor and goods they don't need, they just call it "socialism" instead of "defence". The US might be better off of they acknowledged that the fruits of this particular labor weren't going anywhere real.
Turning that on its head, is “defense” (a euphemism used to justify wars) really worth it compared to better healthcare and bridges that don’t fall apart?
> Lots of countries burn money on labor and goods they don't need, they just call it "socialism" instead of "defence"
I suppose in your eyes, 'need' is a loaded term. Maslow's hierarchy of needs, while subject to some debate, has become a popular consensus on what the term means. Many socialist policies are in favor of universal health-care, food and housing programs etc. which sit at the foundation of the hierarchy.
