Listen Get

A 1% Treaty

Keywords

war-on-disease, 1-percent-treaty, medical-research, public-health, peace-dividend, decentralized-trials, dfda, dih, victory-bonds, health-economics, cost-benefit-analysis, clinical-trials, drug-development, regulatory-reform, military-spending, peace-economics, decentralized-governance, wishocracy, blockchain-governance, impact-investing

The world spends $2.72T a year on military forces. If every nation reduces that by 1% at the same time, the balance of power remains identical. No country becomes more vulnerable. Nobody loses a single war they would have otherwise won. You just become slightly less capable of destroying a planet you’re still living on.

That 1% is $27.2B a year. For comparison, that’s roughly what Americans spend on Valentine’s Day. You are currently spending more on heart-shaped candy than on curing heart disease.

\[ \begin{gathered} Funding_{treaty} \\ = Spending_{mil} \times Reduce_{treaty} \\ = \$2.72T \times 1\% \\ = \$27.2B \end{gathered} \]

A 1% treaty is a piece of paper that says every signatory nation redirects that 1% to enable any patient to participate in pragmatic clinical trials for the most promising new treatments. That’s it. That’s the whole idea. On Wishonia, we fought for 12,000 years before we figured this out. Your species has been thinking it over for several thousand years, so you’re actually ahead of schedule.

How It Works

Money goes from the war budget through several boxes with important-sounding names until it reaches someone in a lab coat. Democracy in action.

Money goes from the war budget through several boxes with important-sounding names until it reaches someone in a lab coat. Democracy in action.
  1. Funding: Creates a $27.2B/year revenue stream for the 1% Treaty Fund
  2. Execution: A network of Decentralized Institutes of Health subsidizes patient participation in a decentralized FDA136,137, clinical trials that are 44.1x cheaper than the current model
  3. Governance: Global population via Wishocracy138, with transparent auditable rules and automated fund allocation
  4. Transparency: All research, data, and spending published on public ledger

This Isn’t a Trade-Off

It’s like if everyone in your neighborhood spent their life savings on attack dogs, and then called it a “safe community” because all the dogs are equally vicious.

When every nation builds 1% fewer explosion devices at the same time, you get two good things:

You become safer. The global “you might all die by accident” temperature drops 1%. Fewer chances of someone pressing the wrong button, which happens more than you’d think.

You stop dying from stupid things. That $27.2B pays sick people to try treatments instead of waiting for death.

Fewer bombs means fewer bomb-related deaths and more money for keeping people alive. Economists needed a special term for this obvious idea.

Fewer bombs means fewer bomb-related deaths and more money for keeping people alive. Economists needed a special term for this obvious idea.

Economists call this a Kaldor-Hicks improvement, which is their way of saying “the winners win more than the losers lose, and we’ve decided that counts.” In practice, some weapons manufacturers lose 1% of their contracts. In exchange, they and everyone they love become less likely to die of cancer. Most people consider this a good trade. Defense contractors are still doing the math.

Why Your Most Expensive Things Are Also Your Most Useless Things (A Mystery)

When countries “invest” in military hardware, they’re not buying assets. They’re buying very expensive paperweights that occasionally explode.

Money you spend on food keeps working. Money you spend on missiles sits in a hole waiting to vaporize someone. One of these is considered a smart investment.

Money you spend on food keeps working. Money you spend on missiles sits in a hole waiting to vaporize someone. One of these is considered a smart investment.

A bridge lets trucks drive over it every day, which creates something called “economic activity,” which is when money moves around instead of sitting still. A bridge lasts 50 to 100 years. It makes everyone richer. It’s quite nice to look at.

A missile also sits still, but instead of trucks driving over it, it just… waits. For the day it gets to be a missile. Most missiles never get that day. They just sit in a hole until someone throws them away, which costs more than buying them in the first place. It’s like adopting a dog that you’re never allowed to walk, and it costs $1.5 million a year in food, and if it ever gets out it kills everyone.

Economists call this “dead capital,” which means resources trapped in a form that can’t do anything useful. It’s like converting your house into a pile of TNT. Impressive, but you can’t live in it, rent it out, or do anything except eventually blow it up, at which point you have neither a house nor TNT.

As President Eisenhower put it:

“Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.”

Eisenhower was a five-star General, which means he had five stars. Most generals only get three or four, so he was basically the Michelin Guide of killing people. He personally ran the largest military operation in human history, the invasion of Normandy. And even he thought you were overdoing it.

A 1% treaty doesn’t ask you to spend $27.2B curing diseases. It asks you to redirect $27.2B from the least useful 1% of your military budget to things that make you richer and less dead.

The Blueprint

A treaty is basically a promise between countries. Like a pinky swear, but with more lawyers and fewer pinkies. The thing about promises between countries is that nobody can actually make them keep the promise, because the only people who could punish a country are other countries, and they’re all busy breaking their own promises. Sometimes treaties work (you haven’t had World War III yet). Sometimes they don’t (you’ve had about 200 other wars139). But they’re the only tool you have for getting countries to do anything together besides kill each other.

What Each Country Pays

Every signatory nation contributes exactly 1% of their military budget to the 1% Treaty Fund.

  • USA: $8.86 billion, which sounds like a lot until you learn they once lost $2.46 trillion in accounting errors at the Pentagon140. Not spent. Lost. As in, they don’t know where it went. $2.46 trillion just wandered off, like a cat. And unlike a cat, nobody put up posters.
  • China: $2.96 billion (what they spend on military parades141)
  • India: $835 million (one aircraft carrier’s wine budget)
  • Russia: $1.09 billion (Putin’s shirt budget)
  • Saudi Arabia: $754 million (one prince’s yacht)
  • UK: $686 million (the NHS waiting list is currently longer than some of the wars this money is meant to prevent)
  • France: $563 million, which is what they spend on… well, it’s France, so probably something involving cheese or being disappointed in other countries. The French military has a long and proud history of things I’m not going to get into because this is a book about medicine.
  • And so on…

National Security (Which Is What You Call It When You Spend Money on Things That Don’t Make You Secure)

What actually threatens nations today:

Real Threats (That Actually Kill People)

Diseases kill more people every year than all the wars combined. We decided to keep the war budget though. Just to be safe.

Diseases kill more people every year than all the wars combined. We decided to keep the war budget though. Just to be safe.
  1. Pandemics: COVID killed more Americans than World War II, Korea, and Vietnam combined142. But you don’t have a Department of Pandemics with a $886 billion budget and a flag.
  2. Cancer: Kills 10 million people a year143, which is more than the population of Sweden. Essentially, Sweden is being completely eliminated by cancer every twelve months and nobody’s declared war on it. Well, Nixon did, in 1971. Cancer won.
  3. Heart Disease: 18 million annual deaths144. You are, as mentioned, spending more on heart-shaped candy than on this.
  4. Dementia: Destroying the minds of every nation’s elderly (and sometimes their leaders, which you’d think would speed things up, but no)
  5. Climate Disasters: Making entire regions uninhabitable
  6. Mental Health Crisis: More people kill themselves than die in wars145. The wars have a dedicated budget. The suicides do not.

Overfunded Threats (That Countries Spend Trillions On)

  1. Other Countries Attacking: It happens. It’s real. Ask Ukraine. But disease kills 225 times more people every year, and you’re funding them in the opposite ratio.
  2. Terrorists: Kill fewer people than furniture accidents146. But here’s the part your defense budget doesn’t advertise: military occupation is the primary cause of terrorism. Robert Pape at the University of Chicago analyzed every suicide terrorist attack from 1980 to 2003 and found that 95% were responses to foreign military occupation, not religious ideology147. The group that committed the most suicide attacks during that period was the Tamil Tigers of Sri Lanka: Marxist atheists who invented the suicide vest. Not a mosque in sight. Half of all suicide attackers in the dataset had no religious motivation whatsoever. Your $8 trillion War on Terror148 killed 900,000 people and global terrorist attacks went from about 1,000 per year to nearly 17,000 per year by 2014149. Nearly all of them targeted democracies that had stationed military forces in the attackers’ homeland. You spent $8 trillion making the problem 17 times worse. Your military bases aren’t protecting you from terrorism. They’re the reason it’s pointed at you.

A 1% treaty addresses the real threats. It doesn’t weaken your ability to handle the conventional ones. You keep 99% of your weapons. If 99% of your military can’t handle the job, the last 1% wasn’t going to save you.

Besides, you’ve done far bigger cuts before. After WW2, the US slashed military spending by 87.6% in two years (from $1.42T to $176B in today’s dollars)123. GM went from building Cadillacs to building B-24 bombers, won the war, and went back to Cadillacs. Frigidaire stopped making machine guns and returned to refrigerators. Nobody held a congressional hearing about whether the refrigerator industry could survive without the machine gun contracts. Frigidaire just made refrigerators again. It wasn’t complicated. It was only complicated later, when the machine gun industry hired lobbyists. The economy didn’t collapse. It produced the greatest boom in your history150. Today you’re spending 30.6x the pre-WW2 baseline in inflation-adjusted dollars: $29B in 1939 versus $886B today, during peacetime, with no existential threat requiring it. Your defense industry learned how to make peacetime feel like wartime (see Regulatory Capture). You’re asking to redirect 1% of that.

The disease bar is very tall. The war bar is shorter. We spend more money on the shorter bar. This is called strategy.

The disease bar is very tall. The war bar is shorter. We spend more money on the shorter bar. This is called strategy.

The Rebranding Campaign: From “Weakness” to “Strategic Genius”

Politicians hate looking weak. It’s their biggest fear, right after having to use their own healthcare system.

The same idea looks stupid when called ‘defense cuts’ and brilliant when called ‘biodefense investment.’ Politics is just marketing for grownups.

The same idea looks stupid when called ‘defense cuts’ and brilliant when called ‘biodefense investment.’ Politics is just marketing for grownups.

So you don’t frame this as “reducing military spending.” You frame it as:

“The Strategic Health Defense Initiative”

Instead of ‘you’re spending less on bombs,’ try ‘you’re building a shield against invisible enemies.’ Same thing, better reviews.

Instead of ‘you’re spending less on bombs,’ try ‘you’re building a shield against invisible enemies.’ Same thing, better reviews.

The old frame (“We’re cutting defense by 1%”) is political suicide. The new frame (“We’re building a biodefense shield against the real threats”) is political genius. Same policy. Different adjective. Your species can be manipulated with adjectives. This is simultaneously the most depressing and most useful fact about you.

The Talking Points That Make Hawks Sound Like Doves

For Conservatives: “This protects American lives from diseases, which are basically immigrants that got past the immune system. It’s the Strategic Defense Initiative for the 21st century, except it works.”

One idea, five different sales pitches. Like describing a sandwich as ‘portable nutrition’ to athletes and ‘handheld tradition’ to conservatives.

One idea, five different sales pitches. Like describing a sandwich as ‘portable nutrition’ to athletes and ‘handheld tradition’ to conservatives.

For Liberals: “We’re redirecting the tools of war to the cause of healing. This is how we build a more just and equitable world.”

For Nationalists: “Our nation grows stronger when our people stop dying of diseases we can prevent. A healthy population is a powerful population.”

For Economists: “The ROI on the $1B campaign to pass it is 84.8M:1. On paper, that beats every public health intervention on record.”

For Conspiracy Theorists: “Big Pharma hates this one weird trick that makes medicine basically free.”

For Everyone: “Your mom has cancer. This might cure it. Sign here.”

The Money Flow

The 1% Treaty Fund

$27.2B annually from military budgets flows into the 1% Treaty Fund. An 80/10/10 automatic split divides it before any funds reach discretionary spending:

Allocation Percentage Annual Amount Purpose
Pragmatic Clinical Trials

80%

$21.8B

Patient subsidies, R&D, pandemic prep
VICTORY Incentive Alignment Bond Returns

10%

$2.72B

Perpetual investor payments
Incentive Alignment Bond Political Incentives

10%

$2.72B

Rewards for supporting legislators

Notice what this does: it disentangles money from influence. In current government budgets, the people who provide the money (lobbyists, donors) also control where it goes. Money buys influence, influence redirects money, and the loop is invisible. Here, investors get money (10%). Politicians get career incentives (10%). Neither group touches the 80% that goes to clinical trials. The corruption is capped, transparent, and separated from the public goods funding.

The 80% for pragmatic clinical trials is insulated from investor and political capture. Patients direct trial-participation spending by joining studies, while Wishocracy governs infrastructure and other shared medical public goods, not by a committee of 12 people in a conference room who haven’t had a new idea since 1987. Every human still gets direct say on the part that actually requires collective choice. Yes, even Florida Man.

Watch the money leave the Pentagon and flow through colorful ribbons to labs where people wear goggles. This is called progress.

Watch the money leave the Pentagon and flow through colorful ribbons to labs where people wear goggles. This is called progress.

Year One Projected Outcomes

Only 1.9 million participate in drug trials annually out of 2.4 billion people with chronic disease. With a 1% treaty + a decentralized FDA:

Current With Treaty
Cost per patient

$41K

$929 (44.1x cheaper)
Govt trial funding

$4.5B

+ $21.8B from treaty
Participants/year

1.9 million patients/year

23.4 million (12.3x increase)

The old way: expensive, slow, nobody joins. The new way: cheaper, faster, everyone joins. We’ve been using the old way for 80 years.

The old way: expensive, slow, nobody joins. The new way: cheaper, faster, everyone joins. We’ve been using the old way for 80 years.

The Incentive Structure

Generals keep their budgets, get richer from biotech stocks, look like heroes, make investment profits, and might not die from cancer. Still took us this long to think of it.

Generals keep their budgets, get richer from biotech stocks, look like heroes, make investment profits, and might not die from cancer. Still took us this long to think of it.

The military-industrial complex gets to keep 99% of their budget (still plenty for bombs), pivot 1% to biotech (the health market is growing; the bomb market just got 1% smaller), look like heroes (rare for arms dealers), invest in the fund (VICTORY Incentive Alignment Bonds151 pay 272% annually), and not die of cancer (even arms dealers get cancer). Especially the not dying of cancer part. The CEO of Lockheed Martin has the same cells you do. Those cells malfunction on the same schedule. No amount of missile production has ever cured a tumor.

Lockheed Martin Presents: The F-35 Cancer Killer. Boeing Proud Sponsor of: Not Dying of Alzheimer’s. Raytheon Technologies: Now With 1% Less Death.

They keep their contracts. They keep their profits. They just point 1% of their death machines at actual death.

What Happens If This Actually Works

The Endgame

A 1% treaty isn’t the goal. It’s the proof of concept. I’ve watched roughly 847 civilizations reach this exact fork in the road; the ones still around all started with something like 1%, and the ones that didn’t are geological features now. Once your species gets a taste of “spending money on things that help instead of things that explode,” you’ll want more.

Start with 1 percent. Then 2 percent. Eventually war becomes a hobby and peace becomes profitable. Like quitting smoking, but for nations.

Start with 1 percent. Then 2 percent. Eventually war becomes a hobby and peace becomes profitable. Like quitting smoking, but for nations.

The Ratchet Effect

Public sentiment helps: once cures start rolling out, people want more. “Grandma’s dementia is manageable now. Want to try another half-percent?” But your species has wanted cures for centuries without funding them. Popular demand alone doesn’t move budgets. Money does.

That’s what the Incentive Alignment Bonds are for. Bondholders receive 10% of all treaty inflows, perpetually. At 1%, that’s $2.72B a year split among them. At 5%, it’s $13.6 billion. At full redirection, $272 billion. Every percentage point increase is a direct raise for every bondholder. These aren’t random investors. They’re billionaires, family offices, and institutional funds, people who already have senators on speed dial, media access, and campaign donation budgets. They didn’t buy influence over the treaty fund. They bought a revenue share. But their pre-existing influence over everything else means any politician who tries to shrink or stall the treaty is picking a fight with the richest, most politically connected humans on the planet, all of whom have a quarterly earnings statement explaining why the treaty should be bigger, not smaller.

Scientists cure a disease. People like it. More money flows to science. More diseases get cured. The circle continues until someone remembers they like tanks.

Scientists cure a disease. People like it. More money flows to science. More diseases get cured. The circle continues until someone remembers they like tanks.

The defense lobby built a permanent machine to keep military budgets growing. IABs build the mirror image: a permanent class of wealthy investors whose income scales directly with treaty expansion. Perpetual bonds mean a perpetual financial incentive to lobby for expansion, every single year, forever. Except these lobbyists have better math and a more popular product (“not dying” polls well).

And the politicians on the receiving end of that pressure? They have their own math. The treaty’s 10% political incentive allocation scales with treaty size. At 1%, that’s $2.72B a year funding campaign support and post-office career rewards for legislators who voted yes. At 5%, it’s five times that. A politician who votes to expand the treaty is voting to expand their own campaign war chest and retirement options. A politician who votes against expansion is voting to shrink them. Your species designed a system where politicians follow the money. This just points the money somewhere useful.

More cures lead to more popular support. More bondholder income leads to more political pressure. More treaty funding leads to more campaign support for yes-voting politicians. Three ratchets, one direction. The endgame: countries bragging about their cancer survival rates instead of their missile counts.

For quantitative projections of health and economic impacts, see https://impact.warondisease.org.

Avoiding Treaty Pitfalls

Treaties fail in predictable ways. They all fail for the same boring reasons. Here’s how this one avoids the common killers:

Reservation Games

Countries love to sign treaties then add exceptions that gut them. It’s like joining a gym but reserving the right to never go.

Solution: No reservations permitted. All or nothing. Take it or leave it.

Ratification Delays

Sign with fanfare, take a photo, then let it die in committee forever. Your species calls this “diplomacy.”

Solution: Provisional application. Takes effect on signature. Ratification just formalizes what already started.

Creative Accounting

Reclassify “military” spending as “peacekeeping” or “homeland security” to dodge obligations. This is beige crime: making theft so procedurally dull that nobody investigates. Reclassifying “military” as “peacekeeping” is the bureaucratic equivalent of stealing someone’s car by renaming it “shared mobility infrastructure.”

Solution: IABs make creative accounting self-defeating. Politicians who benefit from treaty compliance have personal financial incentive to ensure their nation’s full 1% contribution flows through. Reclassifying military spending to dodge obligations reduces IAB returns for that nation’s own legislators, the same people who control budget classifications.

Parliamentary Obstacles

Executive signs, legislature refuses to implement.

Regular treaties need Congress to agree twice. Self-executing treaties only need them to agree once. This is considered a dramatic improvement.

Regular treaties need Congress to agree twice. Self-executing treaties only need them to agree once. This is considered a dramatic improvement.

Solution: The treaty obligates the percentage; Congress implements via the annual National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). After Medellin v. Texas (2008), the Supreme Court made clear that not all treaties are self-executing, so the treaty doesn’t try to bypass Congress. It creates a binding international obligation that Congress fulfills through its normal appropriations process, the same way NATO’s spending commitments work. The IAB mechanism ensures legislators have a personal incentive to include the 1% line item every year.

Summary

A 1% treaty is a piece of paper that says “Let’s spend 1% less on killing and 1% more on not dying.”

That’s it. That’s the whole thing.

It doesn’t end war. It doesn’t destroy the military. It doesn’t create world peace.

It just moves the first 1% of your murder budget to your survival budget.

If you can’t agree on that, if you can’t agree that spending 1 penny less on death and 1 penny more on life is a good idea, then you deserve whatever’s coming.

Addendum: The Actual Treaty Text (First Draft)

THE TREATY FOR THE 1% REALLOCATION OF MILITARY EXPENDITURES TOWARDS BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT FOR THE PREVENTION OF HUMAN SUFFERING AND DEATH

(Or: The “Let’s Not Die” Treaty, for short)

WHEREAS, humanity spends $2.72T annually on methods of killing itself;

WHEREAS, this seems somewhat counterproductive;

WHEREAS, diseases kill more people than all wars combined152 and don’t even have the decency to be quick about it;

WHEREAS, we have nuclear weapons sufficient to end civilization 13 times but haven’t cured Alzheimer’s once;

WHEREAS, this is embarrassing;

NOW, THEREFORE, the undersigned nations agree to try a different approach, as follows:

Article I: Each signatory shall redirect exactly 1% of its annual military budget to the 1% Treaty Fund for allocation to pragmatic clinical trials.

Article II: Transfers shall be automatic, immediate, and irrevocable. No “we’ll get to it later.”

Article III: Percentages may increase but never decrease. This is a ratchet, not a yo-yo.

Article IV: Compliance shall be verified by public ledger and independent audits. No creative accounting.

Article V: Non-compliant parties lose access to IAB benefits and treaty fund advantages. Your opponents get what you forfeit.

Article VI: Success metrics trigger mandatory percentage reviews. When it works, we do more.

Article VII: Citizens have standing to enforce via domestic courts. You can sue your own government for non-compliance.

Article VIII: Withdrawal requires unanimous consent of all parties plus 10-year notice. Good luck with that.

Article IX: This treaty supersedes all conflicting domestic law. Yes, even that law.

Article X: Entry into force upon signature by two states. You only need two countries brave enough to go first.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, being of sound mind (debatable) and tired of watching their loved ones die of preventable diseases, have executed this Treaty on behalf of populations who would have executed it much sooner if anyone had asked them.

Signed this day, ____________, in the year of our ongoing confusion.


[Nation Name] “We choose life, I guess”


P.S. - Yes, this includes space weapons. Nice try.

P.P.S. - “Cyber weapons” too. We saw you thinking it.