Afghanistan and the arithmetic of austerity by Amy Goodman

[PA Democrat]

Wisconsin, Indiana, Ohio, Idaho ... these are the latest fronts in the battle of budgets, with the larger fight over a potential shutdown of the US government looming. These fights, radiating out from the occupation of the Wisconsin Capitol building, are occurring against the backdrop of the two wars waged by the US in Iraq and Afghanistan. No discussion or debate over budgets, over wages and pensions, over deficits, should happen without a clear presentation of the costs of these wars – and the incalculable benefits that ending them would bring.

First, the cost of war. The US is spending about $2bn a week in Afghanistan alone. That's about $104bn a year – and that is not including Iraq. Compare that with the state budget shortfalls. According to a recent report by the nonpartisan Centre on Budget and Policy Priorities, "some 45 states and the District of Columbia are projecting budget shortfalls totalling $125bn for fiscal year 2012."

The math is simple: the money should be poured back into the states, rather than into a state of war.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/mar/02/usforeignpolicy-iraq

[Octafish]

1. The numbers don't lie.

Unlike the political class.

[PA Democrat]

2. The two elephants in the room that few politicians want to talk about::

raising taxes to increase revenues and cutting defense spending.

[deutsey]

3. Just imagine if we had an independent news media in this country,

one that everyone had easy access to as they way do to FOX, CNN, and the rest of the alphabet soup of lies.