With the approach to the "fiscal cliff," there is a lot of talk about the desire to avoid cutting the Defense budget. On its face, this appears to be concern about the fighting men and women in Afghanistan and other dangerous places, but it's really concern about defense contractors. I don't think the Republicans really care about the people serving in the military. Very few Republicans (or Democrats) in the House or Senate served in the military. But they do care about their contributions from defense contractors, and about jobs in plants in their home districts. Because of their concern about their home districts, the government had to change the whole procedure it uses to close military bases, because if handled the normal way, no base would ever be closed. It's almost the same thing with defense contractors; every congressman wants to funnel money home to his defense contractor. Hence, the frequent congressional mandates to build weapons systems that the Pentagon doesn't want.
So, I am not too concerned about all the furor about saving the Defense Department budget; it's really about saving elections for incumbent congressmen and senators. The bottom line on jobs is serious, but why should we be more concerned about keeping jobs at defense plants than anywhere else? We need more jobs in computer companies, too, in airlines, everywhere. Why should defense contractors get special consideration? Because they give lots of money to the reelection campaigns of people in Congress. It's all about the money, not about patriotism.
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Sleaze on Wall Street
I was struck reading Michael Lewis' book Boomerang about how sleazy Wall Street salesmen are. Basically they are worse than used car salesmen, but are selling stuff worth billions. Lewis says one of the main problems the Germans ran into during the 2008 economic crisis was that they believed the salesmen. He says reports a conversation with Dirk Rothig, a German banker, talking about the German Landesbanks:
"The people in these banks were never spoiled by any Wall Street salesmen. Now there is someone with a platinum American Express credit card who can take them to the Grand Prix in Monaco.... He has no limit.... All of a sudden a very smart guy from Merrill Lynch shows up and starts to pay a lot of attention to you. They thought, 'Oh he just like me!'"
At bottom, he [Rothig] says, the Germans were blind to the possibility that the Americans were playing the game by something other than official rules. The Germans took the rules at their face value; they looked into the history of triple-A-rated bonds and accepted the official story that triple-A-rated bonds were completely risk-free.It's a shame that America has become such a corrupt country, while the Germans seemed to have maintained their moral standards. Perhaps their terrible failings during World War II have made them more moral today, while our relatively easy course through WW II made us less concerned about our morals. In particular Wall Street appears to have become a snake pit that has attracted some of the lowest types of humanity.
The Rewards of Military Service
I've decided there are relatively few rewards for military service beyond those of any other job. If the pay is good and you are not getting shot, then it's as good as any other government job. But any idea of patriotism or idealism is out the window. There is a lot of talk about the importance of those serving in the military, but I don't think most Americans believe it, or even if they claim to believe it, they don't act on it. Companies tout giving jobs to veterans, but it's not because they really care about veterans; it's because it's good publicity for the company.
If there is any psychic benefit to military service, it is only for the person who serves. He or she can be personally proud of serving and protecting the nation but don't expect anybody else to share in that feeling. With the rise in income inequality in the US, soldiers are not protecting their own homes and families so much as they are being paid to protect the enormous wealth of the few at the top of the pyramid. Neither Romney, nor any of his five sons served in the military, but they are willing to pay some poor, dumb redneck to go shoot some Afghans for them.
Things have changed for the better. Veterans returning from Vietnam, like me, were reviled as psychotic baby killers. After 9/11 there was a genuine increase in patriotism and a desire to protect the US from another, similar assault. The diversion into the war in Iraq, which had nothing to do with 9/11 tended to waste that feeling and discredit the service of those who volunteered after 9/11. The military is still more respected than it was after Vietnam, but the spirit of 9/11 is mostly dead.
If there is any psychic benefit to military service, it is only for the person who serves. He or she can be personally proud of serving and protecting the nation but don't expect anybody else to share in that feeling. With the rise in income inequality in the US, soldiers are not protecting their own homes and families so much as they are being paid to protect the enormous wealth of the few at the top of the pyramid. Neither Romney, nor any of his five sons served in the military, but they are willing to pay some poor, dumb redneck to go shoot some Afghans for them.
Things have changed for the better. Veterans returning from Vietnam, like me, were reviled as psychotic baby killers. After 9/11 there was a genuine increase in patriotism and a desire to protect the US from another, similar assault. The diversion into the war in Iraq, which had nothing to do with 9/11 tended to waste that feeling and discredit the service of those who volunteered after 9/11. The military is still more respected than it was after Vietnam, but the spirit of 9/11 is mostly dead.
Keystone Pipeline
The Keystone pipeline is mostly out of the news now, but it's still an important issue. Romney brings it up occasionally; Obama tries to hide it under the rug. Obama is wrong on this issue. The real debate is about use of fossil fuels, not possible pollution from the pipeline. The pipeline itself will have little environmental impact. There are many pipelines crisscrossing America. Most don't leak, and if they do, it's not the end of the world.
The complaints about possible pollution of Nebraska's aquifer is a red herring. Environmentalists just want to break America's dependence on oil. Because they pipeline makes oil cheap and easy to use, they want to stop it, not because the pipeline itself will pollute. Environmentalists argue it would be easier and safer to build a pipeline to the Pacific and ship the oil to China. If the Chinese burn the oil, the world gets the same pollution, but America gets none of the benefits.
It's fine to have a debate about the use of fossil fuels, but it should be a straightforward debate, not one obscured by fake, legalistic arguments about an environmental impact statement for an oil pipeline.
The complaints about possible pollution of Nebraska's aquifer is a red herring. Environmentalists just want to break America's dependence on oil. Because they pipeline makes oil cheap and easy to use, they want to stop it, not because the pipeline itself will pollute. Environmentalists argue it would be easier and safer to build a pipeline to the Pacific and ship the oil to China. If the Chinese burn the oil, the world gets the same pollution, but America gets none of the benefits.
It's fine to have a debate about the use of fossil fuels, but it should be a straightforward debate, not one obscured by fake, legalistic arguments about an environmental impact statement for an oil pipeline.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)