Home | About | Donate

How America's Wars Fund Inequality at Home


How America's Wars Fund Inequality at Home

Stephanie Savell

In the name of the fight against terrorism, the United States is currently waging “credit-card wars” in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and elsewhere. Never before has this country relied so heavily on deficit spending to pay for its conflicts. The consequences are expected to be ruinous for the long-term fiscal health of the U.S., but they go far beyond the economic. Massive levels of war-related debt will have lasting repercussions of all sorts.


Unlike “domestic” program funding that requires endless analysis and debate, miiltary industrial media infotainment complex (MIMIC) taxpayer funded corporate welfare is carte blanche and often done “off budget”.


This is one of the most important pieces that CD has run in a long time. It clearly explains how it is mathematically impossible to have anything but austerity domestically while pursuing a Permanent War Against Humanity. If “progressives” continue to ignore this reality, they continue to remain irrelevant.

Clearly, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez gets this fundamental political-economic relationship as she describes in this interview with Jeremy Scahill. And again, I publicly acknowledge that I missed this earlier on. IMO, she’s the real thing.


And a critical mass (probably majority) of the population always buys in because we must “support our troops.”


I have always been repulsed by the “support our troops” propaganda and I have never forgotten the Viet Nam era mantra: “what if they had a war and nobody showed up?”

Buffy Sainte-Marie’s 1965 UNIVERSAL SOLDIER lyrics said it all.


Nice analysis.

There are elements that could be added. They are likely omitted because they are difficult to document in the careful way that Savell has laid this out. And they do not in any way contradict her point.

War does not oppress poor and middle class people in the United States only because it drains funds and creates enormous debt, but also because it directly damages all sorts of support systems at home and abroad, though not equally, and because it consolidates power in the hands of people broken and blind enough to kill for money.

These are not simply the arms brokers, though of course that is one contingent. charge enormous prices

Let us recall first the basic business model of the CIA as has now emerged in the occasional scandal over the last decades and that has been laid out in depth by Douglas Valentine, among others.

The CIA exchanges favors with “operatives” inside of various countries, principally the United States, to penetrate mostly bureaucratic organizations to get information and retain control over actions and policies.

A well documented example that attracted a lot of journalistic attention before it was brushed under the rug was the 1980s’ Contragate, in which .a team including Oliver North ran arms and drugs to pay mercenaries who bombed schools and mined harbors in Sandinista Nicaragua, where a successful revolution had ousted a US-friendly dictator.

Of course the prices of the drugs in question was kept artificially high because US “law enforcement” systematically suppressed competition while particular favored traders were green-lighted to pass by a network of bribes and intelligence penetration of American customs, immigration, and law enforcement agencies. These agencies are laced into what amounts to a grand protection racket, largely without the knowledge of individual operators.

We may know that something of this sort remains in place thirty years later because the Karzai brothers quietly became the world’s leading suppliers of opium since the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan, because the Obama administration oversaw coups in Ukraine and Honduras, armed Mexican narcos routed billions of dollars into ISIS to destabilize Syria, and because US military events are regularly accompanied by the “loss” of unaccounted trillions of dollars.

This environment is created by what many involved actually regard as the “security” effort. Unthinkable quantities of dollars come and go, the only impediment to their movement being the relative loss of faith by the population–by which I include, in this instance, heads of state and so forth, since many the faith of many such people as well as consumers is necessary to make a currency remain valued.

None of the artificiality in that means that the suffering when the artificial dollar artificially falls will be anything but real.

But all this leaves us with an economy sustained by the convenience and artifice of international bankers in which extortionists engage in enormous violence and charge horrific prices for the products of plants that could be grown all over California hillsides.

The wars and the acts of war that are not called wary all support a managed extraction system. One small part of that is that they do indeed draw from social programs, since this international community is little willing to extend its lies to the actual production of products or systems to support human beings–and because the work of people who might otherwise do good is drawn into the horrors of armed service and “intelligence” mayhem.


Why Americans Vote ‘Against Their Interest’: Partisanship


The Republicans love to run up deficits - the higher, the better. It allows them the specious talking point of ‘responsible governing’ by demanding we get our fiscal house in order! Since pet projects like defense and tax cuts are always on the menu, it means they’ll have to - you guessed it - take it out of our collective hides.

So, bring on the balanced budget amendment cry those financial grown-ups. Who couldn’t be for responsible money management? Afterall, family households must not fall too far in debt and neither should the government. What a crock of shit.

BBA is a euphemism for cutting earned benefits and the majority’s collective share of wealth they helped produce. I’d be happy to go along with their twisted scheme if they agreed to cut the military budget in half and tax unearned (great name) income, such as capital gains, the same rate as regular income.


The treasure flows as freely as the blood


A Michigan State University economist, Mark Skidmore ran an audit and determined the Army failed to provide adequate support for $6.5 trillion in spending. For one year, 2015!

The entire Army budget in fiscal year 2015 was $120 billion, unsupported adjustments were 54 times the level of spending authorized by Congress.

He did the audit with publicly available records. Many of which have now been removed from gov’t websites. His group says they found a total of $21 trillion in unauthorized spending.

Google it!


The wealthy are profiting from our wars. We need to make them pay for them by increasing the marginal income tax rate to 75 per cent where it was when Ronald Reagan lowered it to 28 per cent…