A Sensible Alternative (A repeat of Vol. VIII, Art. 26)

The internet, like a flea-market, has millions of items available and visitors never leave empty-handed. We didn’t leave empty-handed today, either. We found this bit of logic appropriately titled “A Sensible Alternative”. In a way, it says what we’ve been saying. Only better. It reads:

“Although Iraq has not attacked us, our administration, for reasons not yet revealed, intends to pulverize that unfortunate third-world country, and the cost to the American taxpayers is estimated to be somewhere between 0 billion and .25 trillion.

“But ask yourself this question. Why is it that money is forthcoming in abundance for war but not for the peaceful development of our country? Why is there no help for the needy, the homeless, the elderly? Why is there widespread unemployment? In a split second, however, billions are made available for warfare. No one has ever explained that to us. Or maybe they know that it would never occur to sheep like us to ask that question. Well, I’m asking.

“There are more than a million young men and women now serving in our armed forces and none of them know what the future has in store for them. They, as well as all young Americans, are entitled to a peaceful and productive future, however. Consider this scenario, if you will, as an alternative to the program of war and terror that our administration has embarked upon. In place of uniformed robots ( because that’s what our children are forced to be), one million newly employed young civilians, with averaged earnings of ,000 per year, would require a total payroll of only billion per year … a far cry from the cost of this upcoming war. Hundreds of business entities could be established to employ these young people and to restore economic dominance to our country. (Our decision-makers have already transferred our manufacturing capabilities to foreign countries, remember.) The cost of such economic redevelopment would be a drop in the bucket compared to the amount now being appropriated for the horrors scheduled for the world. We simply need to redirect the “funding” from munitions manufacturers and the armed services into more rational endeavors.

“Is there a chance that these newly-founded and newly-funded endeavors wouldn’t show a profit? Maybe. But did anyone ever show us the “bottom line” of the U.S. Army or the U.S. Navy or the U.S. Air Force? And what about the Government itself? If deficit-spending brings about the kind of growth we’ve seen in our lifetime, who needs a profit? Instead of withdrawing “taxes” from payroll checks, let’s put our “taxes” into payroll checks. And remember, we’d be turning out goods and products that would be building society, not destroying it.

“Ten years guaranteed employment for the above-mentioned one million employees amounts to 0 billion dollars, a figure much lower than the initial cost of our militaristic plan of world domination. We could refer to this revised program as our peaceful plan of world domination, because the output and overall achievements of this talented and properly trained and educated group of young people would do wonders for our staggering economy, and the ripple-effect would benefit the entire world.

“On the other hand, the reverse ripple-effect of this upcoming conflagration will bring death, disease and terror upon our children and our children’s children. The cost for this self-imposed national disaster will prove to be incalculable, and our children and our children’s children … those who survive … will hold us responsible. You might also consider this; our young people now under arms will not be looked upon as war heroes. Instead, they will be vilified by future generations. No one wants that.

“For starters, let’s disarm Bush. Then we can listen to men like Walter Williams and Thomas Sowell. These are just two of the many, many qualified and scholarly men who should be steering our ship of state.

“We don’t have too much time to act, so make yourself heard. Your voice will also have a ripple-effect.


“Commander Fid”

Good work, Commander! As we stated above, we tried to convey this message on a number of occasions:

• Vol. IV, Art. 18 — “Just think …” If U.S. taxpayers had the right to determine the future of our shipbuilding industry … there are about a dozen good reasons why our shipyards would be building most of the world’s container ships.

• Vol. VI, Art. 27 — “Paying through the nose …” What we thought would be a great way to lower the cost of manufactured goods for U.S. consumers has turned out to be the dumbest set of strategies our politicians, economists and logisticians have ever proposed.

• Vol. VII, Art. 2 — “How times have changed …” Of the 5,150 vessels delivered to the Navy in the years 1941 through 1944, more than 3,000 were cargo ships. But we can’t build container ships now?

• Vol. VII, Art. 22 — “Millions for defense, but not one penny for tribut(aries)…” Here we quoted Mr. Ian Williams of the Asia Times. He advised our legislators that “more should be done on port security. And the solution is simple. Stop pouring hundreds of billions into occupying Iraq and fomenting terrorism, and spend a fraction of it on port security”. We ended by adding this parenthetical statement; [That’s what he said, and he’s right. And we should spend the other fraction on our congested transportation system. The “funding spigot” needs some new direction.]

• Vol. VII, Art. 23 — “Economics 101 …” Right after $ 65 billion was requested from Congress for war-making purposes, we reasoned that, with that kind of money, hundreds of container ships could be built in revitalized U.S. shipyards. The ancillary benefits to U.S. citizens would be almost incalculable. [Please read these commentaries again.]