Frank Thomas commented on Robert Reich's blog:
Problem is that the Dutch see directly returns on their higher taxes in improved state-of-art infrastructure and excellent social-nets that are in general cost and quality effective. If there are defects or inequities, these are immediately flagged in this small, highly dense country and are pro-actively corrected as soon as possible after extensive multi-party discussions and compromise.
The problem is that there is a sizable minority of reactionaries in the US, the followers of Rush Limbaugh, Fox news and right wing talk show hosts who want to return to the glory days of the 1950s when the US was top dog in the world. WE'RE NUMBER ONE is their mantra. They don't want to live in peaceful cooperation with the rest of the world. They want to tell the rest of the world where to get off.
The "We're all in this together" ethic of the Dutch and other countries is replaced by the "Every man for himself" ethic of the US. There is no pragmatism in the US, only wounded pride and venality. Obama is doing his best to turn this country around, but he's fighting 30 years of right wing mind sets. Right wingers even object to Michelle Obama planting a vegetable garden on the lawn of the White House. When Reagan took the solar panels off the roof of the White House, they all cheered.
Sun Tzu in "The Art of War" said that the best way to overtake your enemies is without even firing a shot. This is happening before our eyes as the Chinese have overtaken the US economically, effectively turning the US into a client state. The role of Europe in providing adequate safety nets for its citizens while not investing heavily in weaponry has had somewhat the same effect ironically. The Europeans do not have the same fear of terrorism evidently that the US does. Why else are they not sending a whole lot of troops to Afghanistan? It's as if they're saying "well, if you (the US) want to waste your money on military adventures, go ahead, but we'd rather spend ours on the welfare of our people."
As Eisenhauer said, and I paraphrase, every dollar spent on weapons of war is a dollar not spent on the welfare of our people. The rest of the developed and developing world is essentially killing us without firing a shot just by living prudently and pragmatically, investing in sound economic systems and building societies based on rocks while the US has built a society based on sand as Obama has said.
US politicians are all making over $250,000 a year so they will see a tax increase under Obama's plan. Rush Limbaugh makes more than $250,000 so he will see a tax increase. Is it any wonder that these guys are against raising taxes on the rich? Republican politicians and a lot of Democrats are only in politics or "public service" for the money. They go through the revolving door back and forth between lobbying and "public service." Public service is prologue to lucrative lobbying work. Greed is the driving factor. Little wonder then that "pragmatism and prudence" in watching out for the American people have little if anything to do with politics in America. Lobbying and campaign contributions control the flow and dynamic of what gets done in Washington.
Obama's heart is in the right place, but one man can only do so much when arrayed against the enormity of the swarm of lobbyists and big money interests that are being threatened by his trying to turn around the ship of state. Defense contractors stand to lose billions if Obama and Gates have their way. Is cutting the defense budget prudent and pragmatic? Yes, of course but it threatens the financial and economic interests of defense contractors, and they have tons of money and swarms of lobbyists. Congressmen who were looking forward to enriching themselves by representing wealthy corporate interests are now thwarted by Obama's plans to reduce their influence in Washington. Power and money are chagrined by plans to use money and power to better the lot of average Americans by building a society based on a rock. They stand to lose and would rather see the society built on sand so they can get a private piece of rock for themselves.
Meanwhile, while the rest of the world builds their houses on rocks, the US, despite Obama, continues the process of building a house on sand. Obama is working at the margins, but he is limited by trying to do only what he considers doable and realistic. It's not realistic to slash the defense budget, only to eliminate the most obviously wasteful and useless programs.
While the US spend hundreds of billions on useless military build-ups and rapidly becomes a client state of China without China even firing a shot, Europe plods sensibly ahead. US hubris and longing for the good old days of top dogsmanship is exploited by the Limbaughs, Hannitys and Becks while the American public takes out its frustration by "teabagging"?
Also posted as a comment on Robert Reich's blog.
