As I was getting ready to write about how the Republicans have let the country’s infrastructure collapse, just like the 8-lane Interstate 35W bridge in Minneapolis collapsed yesterday at rush hour, I saw Stephen Crocket’s article on misplaced Republican spending. This got me all riled up about wasted lives and wasted money again.
It is difficult to pick apart the US budget in an itemized fashion, but it is undeniable that the US is spending a massive amount of taxpayers money on the military and secret programs… money that many Americans would most likely prefer to be spent other ways. Estimates of how much the US spends per year on the military, “homeland” security, intelligence agencies and secret projects (like the terrorist surveillance program) can not be accurate, because these figures are not fully public. But the number is between $700 billion and a trillion dollars (1000 billion dollars) per year.
Compare this with somewhere around $28 or so billion for The National Institutes of Health. That means that we spend about 30 times as much money on our military industrial complex as we do on biomedical research into potentially curable diseases.
As General Norman Schwarzkopf once said… if hundreds of thousands of Americans died in a foreign attack, we would mobilize the entire country to fight back. He then said that is exactly what happens every year when hundreds of thousands of people die unnecessarily every year from potentially curable diseases. But instead of putting more money into research, we put it into the military industrial complex.
Dollar for dollar, spending money on NIH saves many more lives than military spending, which actually takes lives, rather than saving them. There is no threat to the US now that is going to take even as many lives as are lost from a single type of cancer, let’s say breast cancer (about 40,000 per year).
Many Americans still have a love affair with the military, as though it were something romantic and majestic, rather than something destructive and harmful, even to the soldiers who serve. Biomedical research just doesn’t have that ability to capture people’s imaginations. But it is one of the most important things we can do with our tax dollars.
The horrific collapse of the Interstate Highway bridge in Minneapolis yesterday highlights the other major victim of our perverse military spending. The infrastructure of the country is crumbling, but we are trying to rebuild Iraq, rather than rebuilding America. The steam pipe explosion in Manhattan, the power blackouts, the repetitive explosions and fires at oil refineries all are symptoms of an aging infrastructure that needs immediate attention.
But as long as we occupy Iraq, we will be spending money that we don’t even have, money that we must borrow from foreign banks and will have to repay with interest, to keep the oil fields of Iraq in US hands. That money should be spent here in the US, on biomedical research, infrastructure, education and to meet other critical needs right here at home. By the way, we spend about 10 times as much to finance the debt every year as we spend on NIH research, just to put the debt in perspective.
To be honest, you shouldn’t write congress about this right now. Right now we need to push for investigations and impeachments, and to get out of Iraq immediately, so unfortunately, these other critical issues need to go on the back burner, at least for now. Just keep in mind that your family members will most likely die prematurely from a potentially curable disease like cancer or heart disease, not from a terrorist attack.
Dr. John Moffett is an active research neuroscientist in the Washington, DC area, who has published articles on the nervous and immune systems. Dr. Moffett is also the author and webmaster of the political opinion website www.Factinista.org, and is a Managing Editor at OpEdNews.com.
I think there is a great deal that could be written on this topic. I hope other witers will write many more Parts.
We definitely underfund the NIH activities and public health in general. It is a shame because the social return for the money invested is huge. Besides, it is just morally right.
by
Stephen Crockett (122 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 110 comments)
on Thursday, August 2, 2007 at 11:40:42 AM
and although he's what *I* would call a moderate (a real moderate, but maybe a bit left of John Dean), he's a straight-up guy with his head screwed on.
I like his phrase "separation of corporations and state". I don't know if he thought that up himself, but he might have --we had talked about framing and language, and his old man is a linguist, so he knows something about how say what he means -- and making what he says actually mean something instead of the deceptive fluff we get from others. If most Democrats were like him I might just forgive the party. :-D
by
Blue Pilgrim (0 articles, 3 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 998 comments)
on Thursday, August 2, 2007 at 4:57:00 PM
OK, let's talk about John Laesch for a moment. He may not
yet realize this, but he is NOT a Democrat. On the 9-minute video, he appears to be a nice idealistic young man, very sincere & well-intentioned. His key line is "Separation of Corporation and State," and he has a class-conscious perspective.
These are nice things, & I personally like them. But they won't win him any friends in the Democratic Party. Let's assume for the moment that he is elected to Congress, running on the stump speech suggested by this video. Very soon, he will have to vote on some bill, and this will inevitably entail taking a pro-corporate or anti-corporate stance. Let's assume he takes an anti-corporate position.
After a few of these votes, if he keeps up the "Separation of Corporation and State" talk, he will attract attention, and Republicans & media will start calling him "anti-business." His own colleagues in the Dem Party will drop by his office and say, "John, we know where you're coming from, but can you do us a favor and take it easy on this anti-business stuff? It's making us look bad, & we're getting complaints from our big donors."
So then John will have to decide whether to cool off the language, compromise on some votes, or to stick to his guns. If he sticks to his guns, pretty soon the media & Republicans will start calling him a "radical," and he will be making all the Dem Party pooh-bahs nervous. In the next election, The R's will run someone against him claiming that he's "anti-business," claiming that he's "far left & practically a communist." He probably won't survive that election.
The bottom line is that the USA is, and has long been, a MERGER between corporation and state, and BOTH parties support this 100%. There's no room in either party for anyone who seriously challenges this well-established orientation. John Laesch will doubtless discover this before too long, and he'll either conform to it, or be drummed out of the game altogether -- quite possibly by his own party.
by
Richard Mynick (2 articles, 3 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 1013 comments)
on Thursday, August 2, 2007 at 7:27:35 PM
with other like him. The winds are still shifting.
There are those who insist on reforming the Democratic party, and this is a good start. If it doesn't suceed then at least he will be there, and will be known, and can run as an independent with a better chance of success. That's especially true if he is good for the people in the district.
The Republicans will call everyone else anit-business and such, trashing people as they always have. That's a given. But will they be believed? We have to have strong garss-roots organizing to oppose that stuff in any case, and that's the alternative channel to the fascist noise machine.
If we get another great depression, then corporate will not look so good, and they won't have the resources they do now either, I would guess. It's hard to predict the future, but we can decide what our general principles should be and go by those, looking for the good to win out in the future.
by
Blue Pilgrim (0 articles, 3 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 998 comments)
on Thursday, August 2, 2007 at 8:00:12 PM
If you heard Waxman and Kucinich in their hearings recently on the killing of Pat Tillman, you'd be surprised that they were so good.
If the Democrats don't get the message from the base that we are sick and tired of business as usual, and I mean "business", then they won't get the votes they need next election. Everyone, even regular rank and file Democrats, along with the leftists, progressives, anarchists and socialists, are sick and tired of corporatocracy. But if you want to get a glimpse of the powerful, elite mindset they are bombarded with every day, try and watch CNBC for a few hours. It'll make your head spin.
by
John R Moffett (78 articles, 14 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 587 comments)
on Friday, August 3, 2007 at 5:25:21 AM
You do not get to label candidates nor define who or what Democrats are. You are not a Democrat. You do not have any idea what real Democrats believe. Most Democrats are strongly opposed to excessive corporate influence.. the candidate and I included.
by
Stephen Crockett (122 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 110 comments)
on Thursday, August 2, 2007 at 8:19:54 PM
Then answer this, Mr Crockett: Why are there NO Democrats
at all, who publicly speak anything like Mr. Laesch spoke in that video? You write that "Most Democrats are strongly opposed to excessive corporate influence." All right then, show us some examples of Democrats explicitly speaking out on the subject of "excessive corporate influence." Show us some examples of Democrats speaking out on the urgent need to downsize the military industrial complex. I bet you can't find a single example of that, except maybe Kucinich.
Did you notice that yesterday, the House Dems decided to withdraw a measure that would have imposed higher auto fuel standards?
You write on a personal note that I am "not a Democrat.... and don't have any idea what real Democrats believe." Actually, I was a registered Democrat for over 30 years. To my great shame and regret, I placed my trust & hopes in these spineless sellouts for over 30 years, before finally recognizing the awful truth about them. // Aside from that, it's altogether possible for someone outside a party to be better able to analyze what that party is really all about, than someone inside it. YOU are a perfect case in point: you're so far inside it, you can't see the woods for the trees. You're a blind loyalist, spreading illusions in a party that actually collaborates with Republicans, instead of opposing them.
by
Richard Mynick (2 articles, 3 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 1013 comments)
on Thursday, August 2, 2007 at 9:00:54 PM
The new deal was very unpopular with businessmen, but FDR got it through anyway. Now all we need to do is put people in power who will continue that effort, and expand it.
Rush Limbaugh likes to say that "FDR is dead, but his policies live on. We [Republicans] are in the process of doing something about that..."
by
John R Moffett (78 articles, 14 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 587 comments)
on Friday, August 3, 2007 at 6:09:13 AM
No, that's legend, not the real history. Actually, the New
Deal had 2 phases. The so-called "First New Deal" (1933-35) was actually very business-friendly, & widely supported by business. The NRA program involved wage controls and price & production quotas which actually strengthened the position of industry, under a guise of populism. The German government at the time (ie, the Nazis, who'd taken office a month before FDR) was so interested in this arrangement that they sent a delegation to the US to study it! // The "Second New Deal" (1935-37) emphasized meaningful social reform (Wagner Act, Social Security, etc). True, many rich people hated FDR, for imposing modest limits on what had been their untrammeled & absolute domination of society. But it's an exaggeration to portray FDR as anti-business. Many sections of business continued to support him, recognizing that he was not trying to destroy them, but rather to apply some temporary restraints to get through the economic crisis without risking serious social upheaval.
You write that "Now all we need to do is put people in power who will continue that effort, and expand it." This is wildly Panglossian. Much of what FDR did has already been undone. The Democrats allowed this to happen, lying flat on their backs (when not actively participating). Regressive taxation, deregulation, undoing Glass-Steagall, etc have already made today's distribution of wealth more unequal than ever before in history. To imply that today's Democrats are in any way like the New Deal Democrats -- this has no basis in reality. Today's D's are full collaborators with the very "economic royalists" FDR famously (though somewhat demagoguishly) lambasted during his 2nd campaign.
by
Richard Mynick (2 articles, 3 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 1013 comments)
on Friday, August 3, 2007 at 9:55:38 AM
I said nothing about giving up, or moving to Canada.
Second, your suggestion that today's Democrats bear the slightest resemblance to the party of FDR, & your happily chiming in to support Dem apologists like Crockett, serve to maintain illusions in Democrats. That's also "not a great solution to our problems." At some point, one must face the reality of what this party is. (See today's Lindorff.)
In just the last 2 days, the Dems have 1) withdrawn proposals for higher auto fuel standards 2) "scrambled" (says the NYT) to expand wiretapping powers 3) protected a tax break for hedge fund managers (see Krugman), and 4) thrown more cold water on impeachment & serious govt accountability.
How much longer do you plan on clinging to illusions in these traitors?
by
Richard Mynick (2 articles, 3 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 1013 comments)
on Friday, August 3, 2007 at 2:25:56 PM
Didn't mean to put words in your mouth, just wasn't sure what your advice was. I give! What precisely would you like me to do or say?
If I say Democrats are just as bad as Republicans will you be satisfied? I don’t see where that gets us.
I read Dave Lindorf, and agree.
If you have a plan, please spell it out. Democrat bashing probably isn’t going to fix the country. The Democrats are spineless, and are not doing what needs to be done. They are doing some minimal things (minimum wage, child health care, ethics reform lite, etc., which would never have happened under the Republicans) but how does saying that they stink like a rotting fish fix things?
I would like to do something more than complain. Can you suggest something that is more productive than complaining about Democrats?
John
by
John R Moffett (78 articles, 14 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 587 comments)
on Friday, August 3, 2007 at 2:45:23 PM
I feel (almost) guilty to keep piling on. // Nonetheless: what you're calling "Dem bashing" & "complaining" is really the important & highly relevant recognition that the Democrats cannot serve as a vehicle for fixing things. It's true that by itself, this recognition does not fix things. However, it's equally true that clinging to illusions in Democrats does not fix things. In fact, it makes things worse, because it leads people down a false path. It raises false hopes, & urges them to put their trust in a party that will betray them.
I told you on Monday in this thread (at 5:38 pm, last para) what I think are 3 types of generally useful actions. Even if I had no positive suggestions at all (after all, it's a very big problem, to put it mildly), it would still be harmful to chirp up happily in support of Dem apologists like Crockett. I think one should not give in, oneself, to clinging to illusions in Democrats; & one should help others to break free from it. The biggest obstacle to building a serious progressive movement is that too many people still have illusions in Democrats. These illusions are not founded on anything solid. They are mostly the product of legends about FDR; and the fact that the D's & R's have collaborated to allow no other choices (which itself shows their real feelings about "democracy").
by
Richard Mynick (2 articles, 3 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 1013 comments)
on Friday, August 3, 2007 at 3:40:58 PM
John & OpEd Readers: The whole Interstate Highway System in this country is strictly for defense purposes. When the legislation was passed in 1956 to build it, it was designated as The Interstate & National Defense Highway System. It's purpose is to move military hardware & troops at very high speeds nonstop throughout the nation. It can be closed down at any time for what ever reason by the president. It was sold to the American people when gas was $.19 a gallon, rail travel was on the decline & flying was expensive (for that time) & still limited. It has done both a lot of good & harm & a book I'm sure a book has been written on that topic. However, the system for the most part, is in the very bad condition. Here in Cincinnati, the I-75 bridge over the Ohio River is 44 years old & will have to be replaced within the next decade. The costs have been estimated at $500 million & up for a new structure. On top of that, the local governments here in Southwest Ohio want additional lanes on I-75 for about 20 miles in both directions, north & south. The costs here could be another half billion! And on top of that, there are still plans to build a new highway I-73 that would link Southeast Ohio & West Virginia with I-75! This would literally be in the billions! And keep in mind this just a very small part of the entire system!
by
iman (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 89 comments)
on Thursday, August 2, 2007 at 7:24:09 PM
Conservative Ideology is the same as Mafia Ideology, it’s all about corruption and death. Both are criminal enterprises that prey on people, and it’s only the scope of the two enterprises that differ. The Mafia sells heroin and Conservatives sell endless war. War is where the BIG BUCKS are made. The Mafia sells euphoria, and Conservatives sell fear, both are destructive, but which is worse?
Collapsing bridges are the least of our Disintegrating Infrastructure, the collapsing standards of living for middleclass Americans is worse. Conservatives have been waging race and class wars for generations, with great success, and they have destroyed our national cohesion for profit and power. Our country and people are being cannibalized by vicious degenerates who greedily eat their own children. Something that even the Mafia doesn’t do.
.
The next thing you hear might be Rush and O’Reilly blaming liberals for blowing up the Minnesota bridge. Don’t laugh, they’ve said worse.
Murdoch is a fascist, his newspapers and networks are fascist, his “Anchors” are fascist, and it’s all fascist all the time.
WTF!
Democratic Representative didn’t notice when fascists started taking over the air waves, when “conservatives” packed the courts and every other agency of government with “good little Germans,” and when the “Decider” urinated on the Constitution and balance of powers we once held dear?
Somebody better step up and tell America what’s happening, because we’ve never been in deeper excrement. We’ve got people in power who are changing our form of government by Crime & Decree, and few of our “Representatives” seem to notice or care.
Americans are not cowards. We’ll fight anybody, anytime for dissin’ us, but someone has to tell us the truth so we know who or what to fight. Right now we have anarchy and paralysis, caused by a dictatorial president and no organized opposition from any of our Democratic “leaders.”
Step up and tell America what’s happening..
by
rabblerowzer (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 227 comments)
on Friday, August 3, 2007 at 9:06:42 AM
