2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: I'm Canadian, moderately "left", and I say this bluntly. [View all]MADem
(135,425 posts)They believe that they will never get sick, they don't want to pay for "those people" (especially the dusky and/or non-Xtian) when they get sick; they are "hardworking" while those "others" are "freeloaders."
They just don't CARE about "the long run." They think "insurance" is something that a fat guy with greasy, thinning hair rips them off for--they think their car will never crash, their house will never burn, no relative will ever need an organ transplant. And if any of these things DO happen, why, GAWD will provide. They'll put a big jar down at the diner, they'll raise money at the church, and if it's a medical issue, why, they'll just walk away from the bills.
Having been inside the Defense Department "structure" and seeing how things work, it will require an army of accountants (and I'm not kidding--we probably need to actually offer commissions to accountants, give them strict oversight instructions, and have them report to a four star "accountant" in the Pentagon--and this is OUTSIDE the "logistics" chain of command completely) to even get a handle on "overspending." The three hundred dollar screwdriver sounds great on the news, something to point at and wail about, but all around the services there's a shitload of waste going on at the unit and command levels. It's not just the BIG MIC--it's the little MIC, too, the local MIC. I am NOT an accountant, but every command I was ever at where I had enough rank to put my paws on the cash, I was able to cut/slash/burn and re-allocate. I never gave the money BACK, of course (that would be INSANE given the way the current structure is), but I saved money and re-applied to other, better things. I wasn't quite a legend, but I was damn good at it. I'm not the only one who knew how to play this game--but the trick is to make the game unnecessary. You can't do this with 'civilian' accountants--there's something about the UCMJ that encourages purity of performance. It's not a guarantee, but it's helpful.
In any event, the MIC won't go gently into that good night, either. Eisenhower was right--the military-industrial-CONGRESSIONAL-complex is a problem. And the biggest problem is CONGRESSIONAL. Even the purest of the pure can--and are--co-opted. Pork for your state? Just look the other way; make an excuse that "everyone is doing it anyway." The system is rigged so that everyone gets a taste, everyone is "in on it," and everyone--particularly those involved in appropriations (and all money is allocated from the House)-- is invested in keeping the con working for as long as possible. So, you've got 435 clowns in the House, all "in cahoots" and you've got 100 other assholes in the Senate, cheering on the system, investing in the corporations through "blind" (cough) trusts, watching their children and spouses get fat paychecks from these bums, and touting the "benefits to the state" for engaging in this long con game. The system most certainly IS rigged, and it's the "lawmakers" -- not those evil MIC guys (who only do what they can get away with)-- who have done all the rigging. Even the so-called "purists" (and I look at my own party with this very jaundiced eye) are every bit as guilty as "the other guys." All Congress has to do is Just Say No. But they won't --why? Because part of that pork--aside from the outright graft and the campaign donations-- is JOBS. And JOBS bring VOTES. It's a vicious cycle.
We've got a cadre of people who are going to fight "social programs" tooth and nail, too--they don't want "the gubmint" telling them they have to pay to help others, and that's how they see it. Frankly, I think gun control is an easier fight--and that's going to take forever. I doubt I'll see that in my lifetime to any meaningful extent.
The way to approach these problems, though, isn't to demand "revolution." People are uncomfortable with that--they reject that "To The Barricades" shit. They don't go for the fist-shaking, demanding, hot-breathed rhetoric. It gets their back up. It invites push-back. Better to go round back, slide in the back door quietly, sneak on in and have a quiet seat at the table, and chip away, bit by bit, at the infrastructure. When you do things INCREMENTALLY, people tend not to notice--look at the Patriot Act, after all!
The way to approach this is the same way you would eat an elephant--one forkful at a time. It takes longer, certainly, but the job gets done, eventually. And the results stick.