"There ain't going to be no money for nothing if we pour it all into Afghanistan," House Appropriations Chairman David Obey told ABC News. "If they ask for an increased troop commitment in Afghanistan, I am going to ask them to pay for it."Taxing our elite to raise billions to pay for a war? My good man, the only word for that is class warfare. Sure it makes good sense, is deficit neutral, and forcing government to pay for our military shenanigans by taking it out of all of our pocketbooks with a big bolded line on our paycheck that says "WAR TAX!" would actually force this country to pay attention to things politicians do in their name, but these are also the reasons it will never pass. Instead it will be relegated to the "too good an idea to ever be made into a law" pile with single payer health care, comprehensive financial sector regulation, and a "No Texans" policy in government.
Comparing Afghanistan to Vietnam, Obey said that both were long-standing civil wars and that, in each case, the United States found itself with an unreliable partner on the ground.
"On the merits, I think it is a mistake to deepen our involvement," Obey said. "But if we are going to do that, then at least we ought to pay for it. Because if we don't, if we don't pay for it, the cost of the Afghan war will wipe out every initiative we have to rebuild our own economy."
"If we have to pay for the healthcare bill, we should pay for the war as well," Obey said, "by having a war surtax."
So, nice try Mr. Obey, you came up with a good idea that makes a lot of sense and seems to have some support. Unfortunately it makes a little too much sense, as well as forcing hundreds of members of Congress to confront their absolutely hypocritical double standard on deficits and spending. So sadly the halls of Government will echo with people laughing at you and calling your idea "gay". But it was a nice try, Dave, it was a nice try.
No comments:
Post a Comment