complimentary post

for me, the purpose of the politician is to work for what is best for the body politic.

which, to me, means that they work for what is best for the overall society.

which, to me, may mean that they should do what is best for the most amount of people, even if it isn't the most advantageous situation for some.

which, to me, is not happening lot today.

there are several things that we in america don't do that we could, but at the expense of a few.

mainly, i'm talking about a couple issues that are really important to me.

universal health care. the biggest estimate i've seen for a universal health care system is $100 billion. this may seem like a lot of money, but consider the fact that the defense budget will be close to $500 billion (half a trillion!) this next year. we aren't having a shortfall of resources in this country. we don't even have to go to the completely subsidized programs of canada and europe. i would even be fine with creating a system where the government provides complete health care (medical, dental, etc) for minors, umemployed and social security beneficiaries. this would probably cost well under a $100 billion price tag, and provide good social net.

cost of education. again, money is an important factor. the education department's budget is a mere $30 billion. compare with the defense's near $500 billion, and we have some disparity. increase the education spending to $100 billion, and we can solve a lot of problems. of course, throwing money at problems won't solve them. but providing resources will. $100 billion will build better schools, train more teachers, train better teachers and increase the intellectual level of the american youth. and if anyone argues with me that better educating our children is a waste...well, i'll just have to shake my head and walk away, because--obviously--you are an idiot.

does it make me a bleeding heart liberal because i want to provide--what i feel are--basic services to the general population? well, then get me a bumper sticker then.

also, i make the argument that we should reduce the defense budget. i am not making the argument that we should reduce the size of our standing army. i am not arguing for closing bases. i am not saying let's not do research. but if you increase education by $70 billion and start a uhc program at $50 billion, we can still spend $400 billion on defense and only add $20 billion to the budget (which could be paid for by reversing bush's tax cuts for the rich, but that's another post). by the way, $400 billion is still more than any other country is spending on defense. one way to get out that money is to make better decisions on how the money is being made.
a friend of mine is working in the defense industry. he is working on designs for a plane that physically cannot exist. we are designing a plane that is so technologically advanced, that we don't even have the machinary to build it. but shouldn't we always work to advance our technology? as a big fan of technology to save society, i would usually answer yes. but when our own fighters are the most technologically advanced in the world to begin with, i say spend the money on something a bit better.

like ourselves.