Reinhardt: "Who's Paying for Our Patriotism?"

[Inland]

Who's Paying for Our Patriotism?

By Uwe E. Reinhardt

Monday, August 1, 2005; Page A17 Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/31/AR2005073101080.html

"At most, 500,000 American troops are at risk of being deployed to these war theaters at some time. Assume that for each of them some 20 members of the wider family sweat with fear when they hear that a helicopter crashed in Afghanistan or that X number of soldiers or Marines were killed or seriously wounded in Iraq. It implies that no more than 10 million Americans have any real emotional connection to these wars.

"The administration and Congress have gone to extraordinary lengths to insulate voters from the money cost of the wars -- to the point even of excluding outlays for them from the regular budget process. Furthermore, they have financed the wars not with taxes but by borrowing abroad."

Reinhardt, whose son is a Marine officer currently serving in Afghanistan, then makes the common argument of economists about cost and demand: when one isn't paying the full cost of something, one tends to want more of it.

The elites and 90% of America are being purposely sheilded from a cent of the cost and a pinprick of the wounds brought on by this war. It's by design: Bush knew from day one that this war would, at best, be tolerated by the American people and made sure that the entire burden would be borne by a small, relative poor, and extremely selfsacrificing few, and not borne by the electorally important many or the elites.

Rather, Bush's five week vacation tells America:"See, nothing about this war is ever going to make one whit of difference to YOU. Even with things going like crap, I don't let the war spoil my vacation, it hasn't cost me my job, I'm not paying higher taxes, I'm not worried about my kids, and neither should you. Just let me handle it, and your participation will be limited to voting republican and putting a mag ribbon on your car."

Of course, that message isn't meant for Reinhardt's son in Afghanistan or the national guardsmen serving another year in Iraq; their lives are going to be ruined there or when they get back with their halfassed medical care and shitty pensions and destroyed families. But they don't have cable and won't see our President playing today's round of golf anyway, right?

[theshadow]

1. Bravo!! eom

[Dudley_DUright]

2. Now watch this drive

:mad:

[phantom power]

3. I think that figure of "20 family members" may be low.

People don't just have family, they have friends and acquaintences. It may not be exactly the same emotional impact, but if some guy who worked in your office gets killed, it makes you think too.

And however big this demographic is, it will soon enough become the source for a stream of Paul Hacketts.

[Inland]

4. I don't think 20 is okay.

Remember that enlistment is concentrated by town and family and in rural areas. Cousins overlap. High school buds have the same set of friends and acquaintances.

I think twenty is a pretty good guestimate of the people personally suffering on a daily basis on average..