This is the first ethics grab-bag in seven days, a record. I missed several historical dates with ethical import, none more notable than the 1914 Christmas Truce, which Ethics Alarms has discussed several times. It is remembered, for the most part, with dewy-eyed nostalgia: British and German soldiers on opposing sides at the Western Front, defying orders from superiors, pretended the war didn’t exist and left their trenches, put their weapons and animus aside, sang carols, shared food, buried their dead, and perhaps, depending on which source you choose to believe, even played soccer against each other. Awww. Somehow I couldn’t remember if I had ever fallen for this malarkey, so when I was considering writing a “Bah, humbug!” Christmas Truce post on December 25th, I began by checking the Ethics Alarms archives. The last time Ethics Alarms took up the topic was in 2020, and the post concluded in part,
I was moved to write about this event after reading one article that said that it demonstrated “the importance of choosing to see past our momentary hatreds.” How does it demonstrate that? The “truce” saved no lives; it didn’t shorten the war, lead to more mercy and compassion, orpromote understanding. The victors in the First World War still enacted such punitive measures against the Germans that it seeded World War II.
Soldiers who operate under the delusion that warfare is a noble pursuit tempered with honor and mutual respect are deluding themselves. The idea is to kill people, and to end the war as quickly as possible. The “Christmas Truce” was incompetent and naive.
1. “Where have you gone, Ross Perot? Our nation turns its stupid eyes to you…” Congress got together to pass a wildly irresponsible 1.7 trillion dollar spending package, so it is now officially clear that neither party is paying any attention to the National Debt. What the hell. they’ll all be dead before it triggers a financial catastrophe, so why should they care? The public will keep voting for them, because the schools don’t teach basic mathematics skills, and nobody understands economics including economists. America’s debt has now reached 31.3 trillion dollars. Boston Globe business and finance reporter Jim Puzzanghera pointed out last week that this level of debt represents a “rapidly growing death spiral” for our nation. Actually, the level of debt thirty years ago threatened the same death spiral—that was when Ross Perot ran for President with a campaign infomercial in which he explained with simple charts why federal spending was out of control and eventually the U.S. would regret it. A lot of Americans got the message, too–but they’re all dead or senile now.
The federal government has to pay interest on the debt; it will pay nearly $400 billion in interest in 2022, and that figure is currently projected to climb to about $1.2 trillion over the next decade. The GDP now is virtually the same as our national debt. The interest on the debt will equal more than 3% of the nation’s entire economic production over the next decade. The CBO projects that figure will eventually surpass 7%, and the CBO’s record lately suggests that the real figure will be higher. The Bipartisan Policy Center think tank told Puzzanghera that a debt like that is like termites in your home’s porch: “They’re working away at it, you don’t see them, but one day you step out on that porch and you go through it.”
Except that our elected leaders do see them. They just don’t care.
Continue reading →
Ethics Alarms 