what I sent as an idea for the Obama administration: the one percent solution

[Lerkfish]

this is an idea I've come up with many years ago. Let's see if he likes it enough to at least consider it. I sent it on a link someone provided here to send him ideas...
-----------

Lerk's One Percent Solution:

For every dollar spent on military hardware, let's set aside one penny to go into a fund to subsidize think tanks and programs for avoiding military conflict around the world. Bring together the greatest minds, like we do to create more efficient weapons, and try to create more efficient conflict resolution strategies. Let's start with the US, but let's expand it to every country that has to pitch in one penny per dollar.

The difference between this and the UN is that the ENTIRE purpose of this consortium is to arrive at peace through proactive means, to actively identify areas of conflict and determine the best methods of defusing those conflicts.

Over time, if implemented correctly, the pennies we spend will make the dollars we spend less necessary.

--------------

that's my one percent solution: what do you guys think?

[mmonk]

1. When the money and influence for peace equals that for war, we'll

have a chance of being a peaceful country.

[Occam Bandage]

6. That's a bit simplistic.

"War" and "peace" are not lines in the Federal budget. You could try saying "all defense spending is pro-war," but I don't think that the pure science research backed by the Pentagon is pro-war, nor do I think that such things as veterans' benefits, the National Guard, the Army Corps of Engineers or new fuel tankers put us on the warpath. Then you have to get into things like peacekeeping efforts by the armed forces. If, say, the Army were to intervene in an African genocide, would that count as pro-war, or pro-peace?

Pro-peace spending is even harder to define. Programs like Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security undoubtedly increase social stability (and thus "peace,") but since those combined far outstrip military spending, that would defeat your hypothesis. Think tanks and conflict-resolution programs are nice, but aren't resource intensive. Foreign aid can be useful, but depending on allocation can make bad situations even worse.

[Lerkfish]

2. self-kick

[Lerkfish]

3. shameless second self-kick

[Overseas]

4. It is not for lack of knowledge that wars are perpetuated.

We have peaceful alternatives. We have the Department of State and our diplomatic corps that work earnestly to find peaceful solutions and prevent war.

It is when presidents abuse their power that our country is most often pushed into war. Like CHeney encouraging Bush in his desire to be a war president to pretend Iraq had something to do with 9/11.

But I do admire that guy who teaches nonviolent conflict resolution in the school systems, Colman McCarthy. He's been interviewed on CSpan a few times about his programs. Here's a link to the Wikipedia entry on him:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colman_McCarthy

[Occam Bandage]

5. I don't think that starting up any more think tanks would solve anything.

Wars do not occur for lack of suits publishing papers.

[Lerkfish]

7. you make a valid point, but I'm saying that until we try this, we won't know

the status quo is to spend everything on weapons to essentially invest in conflict, which makes us seek out conflict to justify the investment.

I'm only suggesting that if we INVEST in peace, there exists a greater possibility of achieving it.

saying it will not work and refusing to fund it certainly guarantees it will not work.

[Occam Bandage]

8. Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of tying certain types of spending to the defense budget.

I think that putting cash towards things like drilling and purifying water wells, providing cell-phone service and portable electricity generators to impoverished areas, funding microloans, and increasing (unconditional) support for NGOs like Doctors Without Borders would all vastly improve America's image while laying the seeds of peace and stability across the world.

[Lerkfish]

9. now see, that would be in line with what I'm suggesting.

:)

[theboss]

10. Well, DC certailnly needs more think tanks

I have no earthly idea what this would achieve aside from some squishy good feelings.

[Lerkfish]

12. think tanks is just part of it

I am suggesting an investment in finding ways to reduce or avoid severity of conflict.

some may say I'm a dreamer.

[theboss]

11. Explain to me how conflict resolution would stop the madness in the Congo

I would like to hear it.

[Lerkfish]

13. my point is invest in PREVENTING conflict from happening in the first place

I'm not suggesting abandoning our current strategies, I'm saying to invest one penny per dollar to find new strategies.

otherwise, we'll never leave this rut of military solutions to every problem.


simply saying something may not work is not a good enough reason to refuse to attempt it, if its potential success outweighs its cost.

[theboss]

14. Tell me the likelihood of success

Maybe show me an example of success in a small program first.

Spending money on a pipe dream strikes me as poor governance.