On January 12, I posted "It's The War Economy, Stupid!", which argued that our economic meltdown was directly related to the war in Iraq. Back then I tried to explain that the sub-prime mortgage crisis was but the leading edge of a much broader problem with the credit markets, aggravated if not precipitated by the fact America had gone to war after cutting taxes and without making provisions to raise revenue to finance our foreign adventure. It gave me no satisfaction (nor did I get any credit) when the editors of The Nation published a similar article two months later making much the same points as I had that was entitled... that's right: "It's the War Economy, Stupid!"
The Nation complained that the candidates had not linked "war spending with our economic woes", and that John McCain's long term ideas on Iraq threatened to balloon our national debt well beyond a conservative estimate of $3 trillion. In the electoral contest ahead of us, McCain will suggest that Barack Obama's promise to withdraw from Iraq threatens a disaster. He will also lead the GOP drumbeat to paint Obama as a tax-and-spend Democrat who will only make life miserable for all Americans, while McCain would make permanent Bush's tax cuts.
I have news for America. Remember those Bush tax cuts that John McCain now believes should be made permanent? You are actually still paying that same amount, but we're not calling them "taxes". And while conditions are already dire for many, those payments are not going to the US Government to pay for the war, healthcare, education, college education, veterans benefits, or rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure. None of it.
No, you are actually paying more than they said you would "save" on taxes to... the countries from which we import crude oil. And 40% of our imported oil comes from Saudi Arabia, Nigeria and Venezuela.
If you're interested in my methodology, here's my calculation. The cost of crude oil has gone from $32.21 on January 21, 2001, the day Bush was inaugurated to $131.38 this week, that's up to 400% over the past seven plus years. In the ame timeframe, the cost to buyers in Europe of the same barrel went from Euro 34.15 to Euro 85.21 just under 250%. So Americans pay 150% more relative to Europeans compared to 2001.
Now some will argue that this difference is the result of a major devaluation in the dollar. But the weakness of the dollar is a reflection of our economic and political mismanagement. The fall in the dollar's value is tied to global perceptions that the US has practiced reckless fiscal as well as monetary policy while conducting two wars and becoming globally less competetive. As for the reality of pricing, that is based on where you live and which economy you are embedded in. So if you are Joe Blow in Podunk USA earning dollars, you pay in dollars, while Jan Jansen in Kabouterstad NL earns Euros and pays in Euros. And Joe's effective increase is 150% greater than Jan's.
This means the relative cost to America is equivalent to $51 more per barrel than to Europe. And since we import 9.618 million barrels per day, that works out to $179 billion/year, or $588.81 for each American man, woman and child (or $2355 for a family of four). And the Bush tax cuts? Well that came to $1 trillion dollars over the first 6 years, which works out to an average of just over $548 per person per year (or $2192 for that family of four). And of course you know that the wealthy received a disprorportionate share of those "cuts". That means in the end most Americans have ended up paying far more in "taxes" to foreigners than the Bush and the US Congress "cut". And the candidates cannot begin to explain this fact cause they're too busy looking for "whitey" tapes and explaining "fist bumps".
wizinit is the nom de guerre of a veteran diplomat who is a fan of the late columnist Art Buchwald and comedian Andy Borowitz. If you would like to be notified whenever wizinit posts serious analysis or political satire, click here to join Food Tasters For Obama.