The costs of war falls on the backs of the poor and elderly.
The cost of the Iraq war is now approaching the cost of the Vietnam war. While one could speak at length about the wasted resources in Iraq, this is not necessary given all of the great articles available from various sources both online and in print (CBS story on wasted resources). In this short blog I want to highlight the impact this waste has had on the poor and elderly in America, as illustrated by the President’s newly proposed budget.
The 2.9 trillion dollar budget includes 100 billions dollars for the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, on top of the 70 billions dollars already allocated by Congress. This money is surely needed, given the current surge in Iraq and to battle what appears to be a strengthening Taliban resistance in Afghanistan. Where will the administration find the resources needed to pay for these ongoing conflicts?
The answer is both troublesome and problematic. Instead of asking Congress to repeal Bush’s tax cuts for households in the top 1% of the income bracket, the administration decided that the elderly and the poor should shoulder much of the burden. The new budget calls for 66 billion dollars in cuts to medicare and medicaid over the next five years (article).
This move by the administration implies that tax cuts for the wealthiest individuals in America, should be placed above social programs to assist the elderly and the poor.
The graph above highlights this fact. The 66 billion dollars that the administration is aiming to cut from medicare and medicaid would not be necessary if the tax cuts for the top 1% were repealed.
The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are our wars. The majority of the American population supported both wars during the initial stages and therefore we all should shoulder the burden. The administrations proposed budget directly implies that the wealthy should be exempt from this process, and the poor and elderly should burden the costs.
This is not ethically nor logically acceptable. In our flawed democracy (all are after-all) the wealthy hold political office, have more influence over policy, and overwhelmingly dominate the focus of economic and social institutions. Logically, it is safe to say that they should burden the costs of these wars equally to those being held responsible today… if not more.
It’s going to be surprising if this aspect of the budget makes it through the Congressional process given the Democratic majority. However, the very fact that the administration proposed it is troubling, and further highlights their disconnect with the American public. The costs of war should not be placed upon the poorest and most vulnerable Americans in favor of tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans.