Iraqi War Costs? $3 Trillion? Is The Current War Spending To Blame For This Crisis?
I've had this post in my queue for six months so I thought I'd clear it out. If you believe democracy is more than voting once every four years in a Presidential election, then you are supportive of a healthy debate on issues facing society. As, in a democracy, it is imperative that the electorate be engaged and educated by the press and government to determine the future direction of policy and the country. There is a consistent tone from elitists that Americans aren't capable of making the appropriate decisions and that is why we are in this mess. I couldn't disagree more. An educated and engaged society will make better decisions for our future than any politician or corporation. For we each understand what is best for us than any other person could come close to understanding. And, I suspect what most people believe is best for them is fair economic opportunity, opportunity to determine their own destiny, to live without fear of life's many avoidable catastrophes and to see similar ideals available to all of humankind. Were the press and government focused on educating the American people instead of trying to tell us what is best for us we would have a substantially more civil and beneficial discourse on substantive issues. And, we would more quickly solve our problems.
Our founding fathers recognized the media's role in this process. Yet, recently we see much of media has been consolidated under the umbrella of large corporations leaving its independence and motives to often be suspect. And, leaving its substantiveness seemingly less important than ratings and advertising revenue. Or as I've quoted President Kennedy below:
"Without debate and without criticism no administration and no country can survive.........that is why the Athenian lawmaker Solon decreed it a crime for any citizen to shrink from controversy. And that is why our press is protected by the First Amendments. The only business in America specifically protected by the Constitution. Not primarily to amuse and entertain. Not to emphasize the trivial and the sentimental. Not to simply give the public what it wants. But to inform. To arouse. To reflect. To state our dangers and our opportunities. To indicate our crises and our choices. To lead, mold, educate and sometimes even anger public opinion......And it means finally that government at all levels must meet its obligation to provide you with the fullest possible obligation.........."
Do you really embrace what President Kennedy said? It is a crime for you to not be engaged in shaping the future of your government and your society. A crime not to demand that government work on your behalf. A crime not to challenge the status quo if it is morally wrong.
With that, public radio and television journalists at DemocracyNow.org interview Nobel Prize winning economist Professor Joesph Stiglitz. Professor Stiglitz has written a book that pegs society's total costs of the Iraqi War at $3 trillion. We have been told giving healthcare to all Americans might cost $80 billion annually. Discounting the future cost of money, that is probably enough money to prepay one hundred years of health insurance for every American. Or twenty years of health insurance and enough money left over to give a free college or trade school degree to every American that currently doesn't have that education. Remember, war gives purpose to the state and is to the detriment of the sovereign.
Stiglitz also believes the driving force behind the economic problems in the U.S. are the expenditures associated with this war. I don't agree with that position. I am substantially confident the more appropriate perspective is that the war spending has delayed this crisis and made it substantially worse. And, left the U.S. with less economic options given the public debt the war has created.
Now, you may support current policy efforts or you may be against them or you may be in the middle. I'm not posting this in support or opposition of anything. I'm posting this because a noted economist has done substantial research supporting an economic position. And, that position is unique and thoughtful.
We do know government spending does not create wealth. Money taken out of the private sector is a drag on investment and wealth creation. That is a fact. You might consider this with Paulson's plan that will most likely cost the American taxpayer over $2 trillion if executed to its full extent over the coming years. Government involvement in the solution to this crisis is a foregone conclusion but the framework proposed is likely to have the most dire economic consequences of any option available.
A 45 minute interview with Professor Stiglitz is available in multiple video and audio formats including MP3 download. Putting aside what I see as obvious bias, bias that may actually be because of his economic conclusions, the collection and presentation of data is interesting.
Our founding fathers recognized the media's role in this process. Yet, recently we see much of media has been consolidated under the umbrella of large corporations leaving its independence and motives to often be suspect. And, leaving its substantiveness seemingly less important than ratings and advertising revenue. Or as I've quoted President Kennedy below:
"Without debate and without criticism no administration and no country can survive.........that is why the Athenian lawmaker Solon decreed it a crime for any citizen to shrink from controversy. And that is why our press is protected by the First Amendments. The only business in America specifically protected by the Constitution. Not primarily to amuse and entertain. Not to emphasize the trivial and the sentimental. Not to simply give the public what it wants. But to inform. To arouse. To reflect. To state our dangers and our opportunities. To indicate our crises and our choices. To lead, mold, educate and sometimes even anger public opinion......And it means finally that government at all levels must meet its obligation to provide you with the fullest possible obligation.........."
Do you really embrace what President Kennedy said? It is a crime for you to not be engaged in shaping the future of your government and your society. A crime not to demand that government work on your behalf. A crime not to challenge the status quo if it is morally wrong.
With that, public radio and television journalists at DemocracyNow.org interview Nobel Prize winning economist Professor Joesph Stiglitz. Professor Stiglitz has written a book that pegs society's total costs of the Iraqi War at $3 trillion. We have been told giving healthcare to all Americans might cost $80 billion annually. Discounting the future cost of money, that is probably enough money to prepay one hundred years of health insurance for every American. Or twenty years of health insurance and enough money left over to give a free college or trade school degree to every American that currently doesn't have that education. Remember, war gives purpose to the state and is to the detriment of the sovereign.
Stiglitz also believes the driving force behind the economic problems in the U.S. are the expenditures associated with this war. I don't agree with that position. I am substantially confident the more appropriate perspective is that the war spending has delayed this crisis and made it substantially worse. And, left the U.S. with less economic options given the public debt the war has created.
Now, you may support current policy efforts or you may be against them or you may be in the middle. I'm not posting this in support or opposition of anything. I'm posting this because a noted economist has done substantial research supporting an economic position. And, that position is unique and thoughtful.
We do know government spending does not create wealth. Money taken out of the private sector is a drag on investment and wealth creation. That is a fact. You might consider this with Paulson's plan that will most likely cost the American taxpayer over $2 trillion if executed to its full extent over the coming years. Government involvement in the solution to this crisis is a foregone conclusion but the framework proposed is likely to have the most dire economic consequences of any option available.
A 45 minute interview with Professor Stiglitz is available in multiple video and audio formats including MP3 download. Putting aside what I see as obvious bias, bias that may actually be because of his economic conclusions, the collection and presentation of data is interesting.
<< Home