What’s behind the price of a soldier’s gear?

Author: Bud Deraps

People's Weekly World Newspaper, 11/01/07 14:36

As our wars drag on with no end in sight, new technology is enabling more of our wounded troops to survive, and naturally, survival comes with added cost.

From World War II to the present, the cost of outfitting a soldier went from $170 to $17,000. It’s expected to reach $28,000-$60,000 in this decade. Every life is indeed precious, regardless of the price, but let us look at what’s behind the price.

Ever since President Eisenhower coined the term “military industrial complex,” most of us are aware of the huge profits war can provide for the weapon makers. How many of you are aware of the “prison industrial complex” (PIC)? Do you know the two complexes have now joined together to share in the rich profit bonanza?

The PIC, one of the fastest growing industries in the nation, is a network of public and private prisons, military personnel, politicians, business contacts, prison guard unions, contractors, subcontractors and suppliers, all making huge profits. And what makes all this profit possible?

First is the huge increase in private prisons. In the mid-1990s there were only five in the country. There are now over 100, with 62,000 inmates. In the next 10 years, they expect to hold up to 360,000. Once they build them, they cannot make good profit unless they fill them, so laws are being passed to imprison more people on lesser charges. Over 70 percent of inmates are there for minor, nonviolent drug-related offenses and the most minor infractions can result in long sentences.

Our 2 million-plus prisoners represent one-fourth of all prisoners in the world, a half million more than in China which has five times our population.

According to the Left Business Observer, the federal PIC produces 100 percent of our military helmets, ammunition belts, bulletproof vests, shirts, pants, tents, bags and canteens.

Thirty-seven states have legalized the contracting of prison labor by private corporations, allowing them to operate in state prisons. Just a few on a large list are IBM, Boeing, Motorola, Microsoft, AT&T, Dell, Compaq, Intel and Target. Between 1980 and 1994, PIC profits went from $392 million to $1.31 billion.

In privately run prisons, workers receive a little as 17 cents an hour for a maximum of 6 hours a day ($20 a month). The highest paid are in Tennessee, where they are paid 50 cents an hour in the most skilled positions. In federal prisons, they can earn $1.25 an hour for an 8-hour day.

They are told they are being paid to learn skills for if and when they are released.

It is reported that some sweatshops in Mexico have closed down and moved across the border into prisons where they can benefit from not only slave wages, but no health or unemployment insurance, vacation time, sick leave, overtime pay, or strikes to settle. Some companies are even returning from China and Southeast Asia to prisons here where they can save not only on labor, but transportation costs as well. A deal they cannot refuse!

Organized labor is starting to get very upset and vocal as prison labor becomes more welcomed by industry and more oppressive to all workers.

I am convinced our European competitors would never stoop to this level.

Bud Deraps is a retiree in St. Louis, Mo.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fantastic! A marriage of the Prison Industrial Complex and the Military Industrial Complex. This is the beginning of a utopia for the ultra right. Private military companies and private prisons can lobby to get higher sentences for minor offenses, so they'll have more cheap labor (read: slave labor) in their prisons. Military equipment becomes cheaper, so the cost of war is cheaper, and we'll just keep on invading countries based on the endless "War On Terror" so the transnationals can steal more resources for more massive profit.

I fear that someday the only options for a job will be: prison guard, soldier, or inmate. To stop that from becoming a reality, we must fight against the ultra right and the transnationals that are destroying our planet. The only way to defeat these thieves is to end capitalism and bring power back into the hands of the people through socialism.

water is a human right, why is it so elusive?

Privatizing water has taken the world by storm. How many people would rather pay for cases of bottled water than take it from their tap? How many communities are deprived of water because a corporation moves in to contain and sell their water? The situations are similar to what happens here in the US and what is happening across Africa. The greatest new commodity essential to life in the world is a bottle of water. This is no more evident in the US where we are so caught up in the corporate farce that we prefer the tastes of different waters - or so we think. Here is also comes with the idea that it is safer, cleaner, and healthier to drink bottled water as opposed to tap water. ABC news presented a special on the myths of bottled water. The leading expert, used by the bottled water companies, said that there was no reason to say either tap or bottled water was better than the other. The also conducted a taste test with NYC tap water and five other bottled waters, including the top selling, french Evian. Tap water ranked fairly high at #3 with a bottled water and Evian ranked at the very bottom as the least good tasting water sample.

What is wrong with this picture? In the US we would rather pay five dollars for a gallon of water than drink the great tap water that is virtually free? How can this happen when there is such a huge scarcity of water in the world. Over 1.1 billion people in the world do not have access to clean, safe water to drink. We are talking about any drinkable water at all - but we would rather complain about taste and healthiness. In 2002, the Copenhagen Consensus determined that it was a government's responsibility to ensure the right to water for all citizens. Sadly this has not been the case in far too many developing countries. So if the public sector fails to ensure the right to water, can the private sector fill the gap?

From Reason Magazine: "Contractors often drive tankers to poor districts, selling water by the can, in which case the very poorest of the world's inhabitants are already exposed to market forces but on very unfair terms, because water obtained like this is on average twelve times more expensive than water from regular water mains, and often still more expensive than that." Many times whole water supply and treatment systems are sold to private corporations. However, well many times privatization creates a price increase for a minority of people already connected to an ineffective government water system, a greater number of people without access to water are served. There are plenty of examples to argue both for and against water privatization. In the long-term, as with most development policies, when privatization is implemented correctly with the majority of people in focus then it works as a positive. Many activists de-cry water privatization as an evil and it can be. The new fear is the great "corporate water grab." Just as with oil, policies need to be created to make sure the needs of people are met, not just business interests. In many African countries it is too late and privatization has taken a negative toll on the poor's ability to access water.

As far as bottled water, just stop buying it. This drives up the cost of water and its increased privatization as well as created more pollution. Re-use a water container and drink the beautiful water from your tap.

From the When not in Africa. . . blog.