Not that I'd call Fran Quigley, local peace and hunger lawyer (he lives peacefully and avoids hunger by feelin' dweadfully bad about the hungry and warred-upon) a weasel; it's his words that do the weaseling, gamboling in blood and stolen money like lambs in springtime.
This time 'round, he's irked. Irked at those horrid, horrid war-profiteers, like Blackwater(!)* and Northrup Grumman. Why, (he asks) do you know what they've done? For every U. S. solider, sailor, Marine or airman they've kept armed and alive, we've had to put up with unfilled potholes, with fewer police and teachers and mid-level bureaucrats; we've missed out on extra helpings of government cheese because of -- sob! -- Warbucks! Er, war bucks.
He calls this loss (a loss measured in the lives of soldiers, remember; though he does not) "opportunity cost."
...Pray note that Fran never considers what opportunities were lost by taking that money out of your pocket, nor does he ever propose returning it to you. Oh, hells no. You're a cash cow to him -- just like you are to the current edition of the War Congress; the only diffo is what they want to spend your money on.
Me, I'm an "isolationist" in the manner of Rand: win the war, come home, proceed to buy low and sell high with anyone who'll trade. But that's never been a popular notion; not with the Hard Wilsonians (and haven't they just got a chubbie for world-mending, and look how well it's worked out doing that instead of shootin' the bad guys and goin' home) and not for the Sons of the Red Diaper, either. Both want to rob you blind for the Common Good -- and both bitterly resent when their old foe gets funded. They never see you as anything but a hacked ATM. Remember the "Peace Dividend?"
Next time 'round, remember the do-gooders that got it. And why they're worse than the Department of Defense.
_____________________________
* The astute reader, not being a newspaper columnist or an "international poverty attorney," will be aware they've been Xe since October 2007.
BUILDING A 1:1 BALUN
4 years ago
4 comments:
You give Weasels a bad name with that usage. Liberal scum-back would be a better choice. Weaseling is an honorable and well-respected part of air combat operations since 1965.
Ed
Society of Wild Weasels #2488.
And then there's this weasel...
In a sense he's correct. A penny spent on one thing cannot be spent on another; the very definition of opportunity cost.
What he's missing is priority of spending. Keeping the troops alive and fighting is more important than a velvet smooth ride on my road.
The other thing he seems to be missing is that, judging from the spending, we have not reached an either/or decision point about potholes or military spending. It's the mandatory spending that's eating the entire budget whole before discretionary things like, oh all the stuff Congress is specifically allowed to spend money on in the Constitution can be voted on.
Wanna bet he's got no problem at all with the unmentioned mandatory spending items?
McThag.
McThag, the point you and he both miss is, it ain't Teh Gummint's money in the first place. It's been taxed outta you and me -- and that's the true opportunity cost.
...As for that "mandatory spending," if the Constitution doesn't specifically require it, I'm against it.
Post a Comment