If Bush does this, I just might vote for him in 2004

old habits die hard - huh?

 

Dude - that's like, welfare or something. What's the chance of neocons going for that? Unless its some workfare program where we make them knit rugs for 40hrs a week or something.

On the other hand, I'm sure Iraqis will get a significant tax cut compared to last year. Maybe that's why they're cheering.

 

Mike, you curmudgeon, DJ's post was actualy funny.

This idea, of course, stands in stark contrast to what the Bush team has tried to get away with so far with regards to doling out benefits to its stakeholders which doesn't bode well for either ideas like this or our ability to "wage peace" against a world now rightly cynical of Bush's motives.

My question is how we will use funds to foster democracy in Iraq given its current lack of a diverse array of viable political parties. Are we going to create a real democracy with many competing voices or a wholly-owned sham "Tweedle Dumb/Tweedle Dumber" system like we have here?

Also, any bets on how long it will take the Saudis to begin funnelling megabucks to any fundamentalist Islamic parties, assuming our occupation regime allows such parties to exist?

 

Well Dave, I think we have a parallel situation happening here in the states, that we could look to for advice on what do with the oil money. Most Indians that live on reservations with highly profitable casinos receive fairly large compensation checks each month. I know that each member of the Tribe that operates the Mystic Lake casino in Minnesota receives thousands of dollars in checks each month from casino profits. Their only problem has been that they usually do not have to work at all anymore, and are content just to get that check each month. Causing a large amount of stagnation in the population.

Segroves may know a little bit more about this type of thing.

 

Cynical liberal I may be, but it doesn't strike me as a good idea to be giving away money for nothing. As opposed to state-sponsored welfare or support of a tiny minority of exceptionally poor (like here in USA) - a look at Saudi arabia where they distribute immense wealth to just about everyone has not exactly led to an ideal society.

Many "middle-east experts" have said that S.A. is experiencing a problem as its pampered youth grow up and have no jobs. Some of them seem to have sat around cafes/mosques all day and listened to poisonous teachings.

I guess I just don't see a load of benefit to seting up a similar system, as opposed to spending all the $ on infrastructure reconstruction (hopefully with local subcontractors, who then bring $ into the local Iraqi economy, so others go into business providing them with luxuries and necessities).

Isn't that capitalism? And if a lefty like me sees that, what's the chance of ardent capitalists to embrace an alternate system?

And I like the new name Mike - I'll remember it if I ever need a puppet.

 

And the current Bush cronyism strategery helps our efforts exactly how, Mr. Dances-with-hawks?

Even with Bush putting us in a big hole, winning the peace isn't "impossible" IF changes are made to Bush's usual m.o. of crony capitalism. The sad thing is that right now, that "IF" is looming mighty large.

Mike, the Saudis didn't just start their shenanigans in 1991. They were supporting terrorism long before that when Saddam was still our buddy.

Also, if the USA starts trying to use Iraqi oil to lower world oil prices, it may put pressure on the Saudis but it will also feed the cynics who believe that the war was about oil in the first place, wouldn't it?

 

Considering all of the pain that the Iraqi people have been through, I fail to see how anyone could be against this plan. The only real questions are:

-- What's the split between infrastructure and direct payments? This is peledre's point and it's a valid one, but I don't see this as a reason not to do it. The program won't throw off enough money to make the entire country sedentary, but even if it did who are we to complain? If nine million people get enough cash from their natural resources and don't have to work, that's the sort of problem that the other six billion residents on this planet would gladly have.

-- How could you possibly end this 5 or 10 or 15 years from now once the "reconstruction" phase is completed? It's like ending Social Security in this country -- if people get it for free now, they will want to get it later as well.

 

Anyone but Haliburton

Who was building Saddam's palaces?

Seriously though, it's not like Iraq has no infrastructure now. Who built it and who maintained it? Who has been running the oil wells for the past 12 years?

Are you saying that nobody in the entire country of Iraq is qualified to do these things or at least serve as partners in a conglomerate?

 

Re: Anyone but Haliburton

The U.S. hasn't really had a good record of rebuilding countries in the last 40 years. I think the last time we did ok was with Germany and Japan. Can we take any lessons learned from the Marshall Plan and the reconstruction of Japan and apply them to the current situation? Much of the capital needed to mimic a "Marshall Plan" type reconstruction of Iraq could be taken from Oil Money, and be administered on behalf of the Iraqi people by a third party, be it the U.S. or someone else.

 

This idea in the NY Times OP/Ed comes directly from what they do in Alaska. They set up this fund in the 70's and now every Alaskan gets a check once a year. I am not sure about the particulars though.

 

> The Oil will end eventually

Iraq will be the last place on earth with significant oil. It is really useless to plan 10-15 years down the line in that place.

What happens to Iraq's national oil company is the signal to what happens to the oil. If the company is slowly dissolved and US companies take over (putting just the standard royalty of 7% in the Iraqi reconstitution fund) then we know the Iraqi's were had.

 

Simple solution?

Faith based initiatives.

It solved our problems here, right?

 

Yeah, let the Saudi Wahabbi Muslims help. Now there's an idea.

 

I know you hate "fixed your posts", Mike, but this just had to be done.

[edit] to add: a party that gets much of its support from religious fundamentalists and is strongly ideologically opposed to any form of public action that does not directly benefit the richest 0.01% of the nation. [/edit]

 

Mike, the nature of economic theory states that we will never run out of oil, it will just become scarce enough so that the price of it will raise to a point where we will find alternative forms of energy, and will then have no use for any remaining oil.

 

F5 refreshes the page? And I've been right-clicking all these years....

 

Actually, FBI (hey, what an interesting acronym) has not (yet) been implemented by the US govt.

Believe it or not I am not against faith-based initiatives in theory. There are lot of decent church-sponsored social groups out there that could use the money. But the first time that the US Govt doesn't approve the Church Of Satan Soup Kitchen grant request, it should go to the Supreme Court.

 

Just doing my part for the war effort