Weapons of Mass Destruction
The U.S. Federal Government should establish a foreign policy limiting the use of weapons of mass destruction by considerably increasing the funding to (1) prevent access to weapons of mass destruction by rogue states and terrorist groups; (2) prevent the use of such weapons, given access; and (3) minimize harm. To maximize the impact of this spending the additional funds should be payable across all significant activities in a way that satisfies the economic principle of equimarginalism: The last dollar spent on any one activity should add just as much to our safety and security as the last dollar spent on any other activity. Further, the United States should engage in a multilateral agreement with other countries that share these goals. Relying on the economic principles of specialization and comparative advantages will maximize the impact of these international efforts. What is the Equimarginal principle? This is a fancy term that economists use for a condition that must hold if we are maximizing the results of our efforts. Suppose we want to maximize protection against the risk from weapons of mass destruction. Then the principle says the last dollar spent on any one activity must add just as much to protection of our h
Then the last dollar of spending on one activity must be providing us with a greater return that the last dollar spent on some other activity. Iran, Iraq and Libya are reportedly developing nuclear weapons. 01)#India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea are known to have nuclear weapons. The Plan for establishing a foreign policy limiting the use of weapons of mass destruction had 3 parts. At least sixteen countries have active chemical weapons programs. It comes from people who are hostile to Western values and our way of life. To replace that much vaccine now the government will have to spend $600 million for something we could have had for a mere $250,000 in storage costs. (John Parachini, US Government Spending to Combat Terrorism: Chart and Analysis)# We are spending too little relative to other spending to protect our health and safety. As weapons of mass destruction multiply they become increasingly available to people who will misuse them. For example, a typical rule of thumb for federal regulatory agencies is: the risk is too high if the odds of losing a human life are greater than one in one million. For more than 20 years we have been debating whether we should spend less than $1 million to make potassium iodide available to people who live near nuclear reactors. 5 billion is spending specifically for Weapons of Mass Destruction-related efforts.
Common topics in this essay:
Federal Government,
Mass Destruction,
Chart Analysis#,
Service August,
Oklahoma City,
Soviet Union,
Mass Destruction-related,
Budget October,
United Rely,
Domestic Product,
weapons mass,
weapons mass destruction,
mass destruction,
spent activity,
dollar spent,
dollar spent activity,
national security,
chemical weapons,
september 11,
level safety,
spending little relative,
little relative,
increase level safety,
maximize impact,
biological chemical weapons,
|
Acceptance Essays
