Week Two: Part One: Budget Basics

Women and the U.S. Budget makes a terrific holiday gift, especially for those in your circle who are not already deeply involved in the struggle for peace and justice. The relatives and associates with whom I shared Women and the U.S. Budget last season seemed to get most worked up by Chapter 2. I think this might be because the discussion about the historical evolution and rationalization for an income tax alludes to one of the deepest contradictions we face as peace activists in the current political era. Ironically, the folks most ideologically in favor of a strong military are often the very same folks who vote for candidates to promise to cut taxes. As Midgely points out, the whole point of income taxes, historically, has been to fund the military. So this seems to be potentially powerful piece of information, though information that’s tough to put to effective use. As a starting point for this week’s discussion, I’m wondering how others are working with this important historical insight today. I appreciate the reminder regarding tax resistance—a tactic I remember allying myself with at one time. Today, however, I am more likely to be arguing for the opportunity to pay more taxes if more taxes is what it takes to sustain robust public universities or universalize a single payer health care system. In other words, in a political discussion I am unlikely to concede that cost is valid deal killer when evaluating the potential for developing public goods that benefit everyone. From this current stance, it becomes harder, I think, to articulate tax-based arguments against increases in defense spending. I’d like to know how others are negotiating these waters.

Does military spending benefit everyone? I'd like to see trends over time in military spending in the U.S. Right now, I can see why we'd need it. But during times when we are not at war or on the brink of it, is military spending just as high?