It depends on your point of view

I am interested in the spin that is preparing us for next week's budget. We are being told that the need to increase pensions to aged and other pensioners will be a major driving force in making this a harsh budget. Tax cuts will be lessened or forgone in order to pay for increases to pensions.
Isn't it just as true to say that the commitment to massive increases in military spending are a major contributing factor?
I don't hear our beloved PM or Treasurer saying you will have to forego your tax cut so we can buy more weapons.



(Post 997)

Military Spending

I have been trying to think of something to say about the recent announcement of massive increase in spending for the military. It is difficult to be dispassionate about this, few people are prepared to argue against big military budgets.

But I was reflecting  that it took a while for people to begin to question whether the "stimulus strategy" was the appropriate way to deal with the current economic dilemma. ie. is giving people more money to spend and encouragement to spend it an appropriate strategy to solve a problem that is allegedly brought about   by people overspending!

Is spending more money on military might the best  strategy to end the warring madness of the world?

The dogma that "The price of peace is eternal vigilance" is so unquestioned that it stands more as a testament to our paranoia than our political astuteness.

We think that unless we have a big gun to frighten (probably) the Chinese that they will be down upon us. 

But I would wish to note that I don't see the Chinese queuing up to rape New Zealand, which has adopted a much less strident military policy than our own.

My great sadness is the inordinate amount of money that military equipment, (everything now measured in millions and billions) is glossed over so easily. Yet when we talk about education, health, refugees, third world aid and so on every single drop has to be squeezed out.

(POST 995)