One example of critical thinking and the proposed budget

One example of critical thinking and the proposed budget:

I’m going to lob a bold idea out there that the president’s budget proposal directly opposes much of his bluster about making the US safer and try to convince you without making this too long.  But first, let me say that I’m a tremendous supporter of the military and of our brave veterans.  I can be persuaded that they could use an increase their budget to continue their difficult and dangerous work to the best of their ability.  I can also see that we have a problem with our national debt and can be persuaded that we need to make difficult cuts to try to bring that under control.  What you can’t convince me of, however, is that drastically reducing funding for the state department, scientific research, environmental protection, endowment for the arts, public broadcasting, and so on, as a method to pay for a stronger defense in our current situation is remotely a good idea.  How in the world anyone can say that it’s more important to spend money on building nukes instead of supporting agencies that aim for peaceful resolutions and scientific research that is the backbone of our safety and advancement is beyond me.  Speaking on a grand scale, I know this president feels the need to ‘win wars again’, but even if that is a goal, we don’t live in the 1940s anymore and you can’t win by might alone.  Science, technology, and diplomacy are, at the very least, just as important.

If you’ve read my other blogs, you should know where I stand on the EPA and climate change and the potential damage by those delusional enough to not believe in the seriousness of pollution and CO2 emission.  For my Pittsburgh friends, where I grew up, do you remember what the city and surrounding areas looked like 30-40 years ago?  Do we really want to go back to that?  Without regulations and advances in this area, we face a serious health problem.  But, I’ll leave that topic along with the plethora of other problems with the proposed budget for now in favor of taking a different tack.

The president has said numerous times that he is the man to take steps necessary to solve the drug crisis and take a hard stance against violence in inner cities, which are very serious issues actively pervading our country.  What does this have to do with his budget?  If he took the time to actually study the best methods of doing so, he’d realize that he could likely reap huge gains on this front, as well as helping the economy, by increasing funding to the arts, sciences, and public education, to name a few, and will likely cause harm by cutting them. 

Here’s where I’m going with this: There has been plenty of evidence showing the benefits of social structures that substitute the high that people get from drugs or gang affiliation with programs that build skills that interest and excite those involved.  People are different and what works for one might not work for another.  However, the concept is the same and it works whether that program be athletics, the arts, sciences, or any other topic that interests those in a certain area.  It sounds like common sense, and it really is.  Your brain chemistry literally changes with this type of involvement, while at the same time resulting in important life skills.

There are many articles detailing this, but a great one that I’ll recommend if you want to read more was in the Atlantic:  https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2017/01/teens-drugs-iceland/513668/  This is not a new idea.  Back in 1992 a group out of Denver started programs along these lines.  Drug education wasn’t working so they tried a drastic approach where they didn’t mention the word ‘treatment’ but instead said, “we’ll teach you anything you want to learn: music, dance, hip-hop, martial arts…”. 

To greatly shorten the tale, I’ll jump to the fact that Iceland got wind of the programs and decided to implement the concepts on a large scale.  The idea is to combat the underlying reasons why people start doing different types of drugs, join gangs, and deal with stress, by setting up alternatives without being too obvious about it being an anti-drug program.  Iceland had one of the worst and most prevalent drug problems in the world at the time and went all-in for this approach.  I’m somewhat oversimplifying it in favor of brevity, but the major change was that state funding for organized sport, dance, music, art, and other clubs was drastically INCREASED.  Also, these programs were location specific due to the fact that various areas had differences in interests.  What worked in one area might not in another, which makes perfect sense.  The results are extreme and show a complete flip in that they now have the CLEANEST living teens in the European countries.  To cite numbers referenced in the article of those in the prime age-range, the differences in those that have been drunk in the past month went down from 42% to 5%; those that have ever used cannabis down from 17% to 7%, and those smoking cigarettes down from 53% to 3%! 

Okay, so now that we see direct evidence about how these programs have been able to help combat drug use, it’s not a jump to realize that crime rates would be reduced, especially violent crime.  And, as expected, Iceland has one of the lowest levels of crime in the world.  Go ahead and compare with the US.  Good, the next level, then, would be to realize that this will have a direct positive impact on the economy – more people with better education, getting good jobs, much less health care costs, more people with experience in a variety of disciplines, and so on. 

I’ll leave it there rather than diving into further details, which would be fun to do.  But, hopefully I’ve made you think a little bit.  You must dig past the surface and solve underlying problems that span multiple issues.  As it stands now, I feel like someone watched Kevin Kline’s character in the movie Dave where the stand-in president slashes the budget and thought they could do the same thing – but without the good reasons or understanding. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZARAldXlSyA). 

With a little foresight and an understanding of psychology, science, and the arts, we can continue to combat the most crucial issues facing us today and affecting our future.  With the proposed cuts, we likely do the exact opposite.

So, let me ask you again:  why do we need that money to build a stronger nuclear arsenal instead?