Obama Goes Without but Saves Little

While many Americans are saving and living on the verge of poverty, the U.S. still has some money to spare for scientific research that investigates, for example, why three in four lesbians are overweight.

It is not only Germany that has to save; the U.S. has to as well. Millions of Americans who are employed by the state now only work four days a week and are accordingly being paid less. This is having a negative impact on consumer spending and domestic demand, which in turn has consequences for the labor market that is –– or rather, was –– on the verge of recovery. Given this situation, President Obama has decided to set an example by taking a 5 percent pay cut to “share in the sacrifice being made by public servants across the federal government,” from the tour guides in the White House to the armed forces of the Army, Air Force and Navy.

Obama receives an annual salary of $400,000. Five percent of this is $20,000, so he will be left with $380,000. That is not all that much, although he and his wife Michelle earned good money in the last few years: $5.5 million in 2009, $1.7 million in 2010 and $790,000 in 2011, which is more than enough for them to have accrued some savings.

The “poverty line” for a family of four in the U.S. is $23,000 a year, which is slightly more than the amount Barack Obama is giving up. But the numbers reveal little. For $23,000 you cannot even rent a closet in Manhattan. A family in Nebraska or Idaho could live off of $23,000, provided they are part of the 47 million Americans who receive food stamps to use at their local supermarket.

$423,000 for Research on Condoms

On the other hand, it seems the U.S. has unlimited resources. The National Institutes of Health is financing a scientific study that investigates the reasons three out of four lesbians are obese, to the tune of $1.5 million. The National Science Foundation is spending more than $380,000 on a study about the development of the genitalia of male and female wild ducks.

The study is about “sexual conflict, social behavior and evolution.” Until now, only chefs and foodies have wanted to know whether duck or drake tastes better. Indiana University has been given a grant of $423,000 from the Department of Health and Human Services to carry out a field study about the obstacles in the use of condoms.

If these are the research projects that are being funded with public money, they speak against the need for strict austerity measures. Then again, some people may want to know why three in four lesbians are overweight or how the genitalia of male and female ducks developed throughout their evolution or what to pay attention to when putting on a condom.

They are highly relevant questions because they revolve around a central theme of human existence: sex. The Americans have also unintentionally demonstrated how to save without short-changing research and science: It is just a question of priorities.