Excerpt: "Bernie Sanders' common sense proposals for dealing with universal
health care, college tuition, restoring the infrastructure, confronting
poverty and more have encountered predictable scorn from 'fiscally
responsible' corporatists. But nowhere do we find anyone willing to take on
the biggest imperial welfare program of them all, the most obvious source of
revenue for the programs needed to heal our nation: the military budget."
Bernie Sanders. (photo: Charlie Leight/Getty Images)
Why the Deafening Silence on Cutting the Military Budget?
By Harvey Wasserman, David Swanson and Bob Fitrakis, Reader Supported News
23 February 16
Watch Amy Goodman interview Harvey Wasserman on Democracy Now!
ernie Sanders' common sense proposals for dealing with universal health
care, college tuition, restoring the infrastructure, confronting poverty and
more have encountered predictable scorn from "fiscally responsible"
corporatists.
They all scream about the "deficit spending" and tax hikes that might be
required to pay for these vital programs. From predictable right-wing
corporatists to Hillary Clinton ("free stuff! free stuff!" she mocks) to
fictional "left-leaning economists" invented by the New York Times, numerous
voices scorn Bernie's agenda because his proposals "cost too much."
But nowhere do we find anyone willing to take on the biggest imperial
welfare program of them all, the most obvious source of revenue for the
programs needed to heal our nation: the military budget. If Sanders were
willing to cut the military budget he'd encounter no criticism for raising
taxes, because he'd have no need to raise taxes. We hope that he'll no
longer pass up this opportunity to tell us how he would cut into a military
budget that exceeds nearly all the rest of the world's combined, and that
largely has nothing to do with fighting terrorism (and so often makes it
worse).
It's not that Bernie doesn't have a good answer for how he would pay for
everything. He does, and it's plenty clear and simple for an intelligent
fourth grader, and possibly even Donald Trump, to grasp. But just try
squeezing the following into a sound byte television response to "You want
to raise my taxes!"
Bernie Sanders economic proposal. (photo: Worldbeyondwar.org)
Even this lengthy list does not seem to straightforwardly explain that
Medicare for All could raise your taxes, but would give you net savings as
you dropped your health insurance payments.
For those who can get past sound bytes, Sanders' proposals are good, and the
taxes all needed for the sake of equitable sharing of wealth and power. But
cutting the oceans of cash going to the armed forces is also needed for the
purpose of slowing down the military industrial complex and its penchant for
creating wars.
And there are projects that the United States and the world desperately need
that aren't listed above. Rather than more wars and occupations, the United
States has a moral responsibility to begin a massive investment in actual
humanitarian aid to the world, a world beginning to suffer from climate
change driven more by the United States than any other nation, with the
possible exception of the much, much larger nation of China.
The United States is currently extremely stingy in foreign aid by global
standards, and a Marshall-Plan scale investment could work wonders in
transforming world opinion about the U.S. government. A similar investment,
much more than $100 billion per year, is needed in the United States for
green energy. The possibility of creating a Solartopia is slipping away from
us, while the cost of the Iraq war alone would have been enough to halt
climate change.
Here are some simple, obvious ways to pay for all those programs Bernie
advocates, and much much more:
. There are various plans afoot to "upgrade" the U.S. nuclear weapons
arsenal, with price tags in the range of $1,000,000,000,000 and more. Why
don't we just get rid of all of them and use the money to pay for much of
the above?
. There is talk of a replacement fleet of a dozen "Ohio Class" nuclear
submarines at a (currently estimated) cost of up to $8,000,000,000 each
(which is bound to soar), with construction to begin in 2021. These are
perfectly designed to protect us from the Soviet Union, which no longer
exists, and will do nothing except bankrupt us, making us more vulnerable to
the likes of ISIS, which was created by our intervention in Iraq.
. The United States currently maintains at least 900 bases outside its
borders, with troops stationed in 175 foreign nations and waging or
threating war in some of the handful of nations that do not have U.S. troops
(Syria, Iran). The financial cost is over $100 billion a year. The bases, in
many cases, generate an enormous amount of popular resentment and hatred,
serving as motivations for attacks on the bases themselves or elsewhere -
famously including the attacks of September 11, 2001. Why continue to pay
for this?
. The military spends millions every year advertising itself as a career
opportunity, with fly-overs at football games, saturation TV spots, marching
bands (the military is the nation's leading employer of musicians) and more.
In fact, it has an entrenched interest in keeping college tuitions high, as
a key incentive for young people to enlist is to be able to afford tuition.
Yet while the armed forces are heavily over-staffed, and recruitment ads for
the National Guard depict the bringing of aid to natural disasters, the
reality is that a major effort to aid those at home and abroad impacted by
climate change or disasters like the methane gas leak at Port Ranch,
California, doesn't exist and would be a prime step toward guaranteeing a
true global peace.
If the military were scaled back even a little, in the direction of a purely
defensive operation, we could create such a modern civilian conservation
corps and, among other things, put solar panels on the rooftops of every
building on earth.
There is, of course, much more that could be done to cut the military budget
and pay for what we really need. The vast bulk of military expenditures
today have nothing to do with fighting terrorism. In many cases, the clumsy
bludgeonings of our over-stuffed military actually promote it.
Yet this kind of discussion has not yet made it into the mainstream. We look
forward to either journalists or brave nonviolent event disruptors inserting
this topic into the endless election coverage.
________________________________________
Originally published on World Beyond War.
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid. Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.
Bernie Sanders. (photo: Charlie Leight/Getty Images)
http://readersupportednews.org/http://readersupportednews.org/
Why the Deafening Silence on Cutting the Military Budget?
By Harvey Wasserman, David Swanson and Bob Fitrakis, Reader Supported News
23 February 16
Watch Amy Goodman interview Harvey Wasserman on Democracy Now!
ernie Sanders' common sense proposals for dealing with universal health
care, college tuition, restoring the infrastructure, confronting poverty and
more have encountered predictable scorn from "fiscally responsible"
corporatists.
They all scream about the "deficit spending" and tax hikes that might be
required to pay for these vital programs. From predictable right-wing
corporatists to Hillary Clinton ("free stuff! free stuff!" she mocks) to
fictional "left-leaning economists" invented by the New York Times, numerous
voices scorn Bernie's agenda because his proposals "cost too much."
But nowhere do we find anyone willing to take on the biggest imperial
welfare program of them all, the most obvious source of revenue for the
programs needed to heal our nation: the military budget. If Sanders were
willing to cut the military budget he'd encounter no criticism for raising
taxes, because he'd have no need to raise taxes. We hope that he'll no
longer pass up this opportunity to tell us how he would cut into a military
budget that exceeds nearly all the rest of the world's combined, and that
largely has nothing to do with fighting terrorism (and so often makes it
worse).
It's not that Bernie doesn't have a good answer for how he would pay for
everything. He does, and it's plenty clear and simple for an intelligent
fourth grader, and possibly even Donald Trump, to grasp. But just try
squeezing the following into a sound byte television response to "You want
to raise my taxes!"
Bernie Sanders economic proposal. (photo: Worldbeyondwar.org)
Even this lengthy list does not seem to straightforwardly explain that
Medicare for All could raise your taxes, but would give you net savings as
you dropped your health insurance payments.
For those who can get past sound bytes, Sanders' proposals are good, and the
taxes all needed for the sake of equitable sharing of wealth and power. But
cutting the oceans of cash going to the armed forces is also needed for the
purpose of slowing down the military industrial complex and its penchant for
creating wars.
And there are projects that the United States and the world desperately need
that aren't listed above. Rather than more wars and occupations, the United
States has a moral responsibility to begin a massive investment in actual
humanitarian aid to the world, a world beginning to suffer from climate
change driven more by the United States than any other nation, with the
possible exception of the much, much larger nation of China.
The United States is currently extremely stingy in foreign aid by global
standards, and a Marshall-Plan scale investment could work wonders in
transforming world opinion about the U.S. government. A similar investment,
much more than $100 billion per year, is needed in the United States for
green energy. The possibility of creating a Solartopia is slipping away from
us, while the cost of the Iraq war alone would have been enough to halt
climate change.
Here are some simple, obvious ways to pay for all those programs Bernie
advocates, and much much more:
There are various plans afoot to "upgrade" the U.S. nuclear weapons arsenal,
with price tags in the range of $1,000,000,000,000 and more. Why don't we
just get rid of all of them and use the money to pay for much of the above?
There is talk of a replacement fleet of a dozen "Ohio Class" nuclear
submarines at a (currently estimated) cost of up to $8,000,000,000 each
(which is bound to soar), with construction to begin in 2021. These are
perfectly designed to protect us from the Soviet Union, which no longer
exists, and will do nothing except bankrupt us, making us more vulnerable to
the likes of ISIS, which was created by our intervention in Iraq.
The United States currently maintains at least 900 bases outside its
borders, with troops stationed in 175 foreign nations and waging or
threating war in some of the handful of nations that do not have U.S. troops
(Syria, Iran). The financial cost is over $100 billion a year. The bases, in
many cases, generate an enormous amount of popular resentment and hatred,
serving as motivations for attacks on the bases themselves or elsewhere -
famously including the attacks of September 11, 2001. Why continue to pay
for this?
The military spends millions every year advertising itself as a career
opportunity, with fly-overs at football games, saturation TV spots, marching
bands (the military is the nation's leading employer of musicians) and more.
In fact, it has an entrenched interest in keeping college tuitions high, as
a key incentive for young people to enlist is to be able to afford tuition.
Yet while the armed forces are heavily over-staffed, and recruitment ads for
the National Guard depict the bringing of aid to natural disasters, the
reality is that a major effort to aid those at home and abroad impacted by
climate change or disasters like the methane gas leak at Port Ranch,
California, doesn't exist and would be a prime step toward guaranteeing a
true global peace.
If the military were scaled back even a little, in the direction of a purely
defensive operation, we could create such a modern civilian conservation
corps and, among other things, put solar panels on the rooftops of every
building on earth.
There is, of course, much more that could be done to cut the military budget
and pay for what we really need. The vast bulk of military expenditures
today have nothing to do with fighting terrorism. In many cases, the clumsy
bludgeonings of our over-stuffed military actually promote it.
Yet this kind of discussion has not yet made it into the mainstream. We look
forward to either journalists or brave nonviolent event disruptors inserting
this topic into the endless election coverage.
Originally published on World Beyond War.
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize