Quote:
Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna
There's been much debate about the cost of the various healthcare reforms being considered and the effect they may have on the national debt. The latest "scoring" by the Government Budget Office that I've seen of the latest round of proposals would cost about $600 billion over a ten year period.
Just a thought on what other government expenditures might be cut in order to pay for this critically important domestic social program...what about the costs of continuing the wars in Iraq and now back in Afghanistan again?
We've had major deployments of our younger generation to that region of the world for almost a decade. More than 4,000 have been killed and almost 50,000 badly injured.
|
I have no problem discussing heath care reforms, costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, social spending, but I get upset when the deaths of our soldiers is used as a argument to reduce spending. These are different subject altogether. To use one to argue the other is wrong.
To loose the life of one person, soldier or civilian is tragic to our country, to their parents, siblings, children and friends. Whatever their position in life, be it sailor or sewer worker we grieve for their loss. To make military spending seem worse by counting numbers of soldiers dead and wounded is a disservice to their life and position.
If numbers of people dead is the reason for political spending look around here at home. 2-3 thousand children die each year from child abuse. 18 thousand disabled by near fatal physical and mental abuse, buy their own parents and guardians. Soldiers at least died serving their country, knowing what they signed up for, dieing for our rights and freedoms. Honor them, respect them, but don't reduce them to an argument for social change.
Their numbers have been small but their sacrifice immeasurable in perspective to their cost to society. A cost worth bearing.