Ending wars might help economy

While Larry Grogan (Fence Post, 2/8/09) is correct in decrying the fact that we have to borrow from foreign countries to pay for the economic stimulus, thus increasing the national debt, it is disingenuous to imply that there is any other choice. And, did Mr. Grogan demand transparency when the Bush administration was borrowing trillions from foreign countries?

After Bush ran through the budget surplus he inherited from the Clinton years by giving tax cuts to the already rich, he borrowed more than $1 trillion in his first term to keep those tax cuts coming while fighting two wars.

Bush was the only wartime president not to raise taxes to fight a war in our country's history. Of course, if he had raised taxes, maybe more Americans would have questioned the wisdom of the war in the first place.

The borrowing continued through the second Bush term, because the wars continued, and the tax cuts continued, and the economy kept getting weaker and weaker.

The Obama administration cannot raise taxes, even if it wanted to, because more Americans are unemployed and not paying taxes.

Our tax base is greatly diminished. No, the only choice is to get money into the economy for Americans to spend, so jobs can be created.

Then, we can worry about paying down the national debt. Mr. Grogan's idea that "someday we will find ourselves in a war as a last-ditch effort to revive what's left of our economy" is a bit far-fetched, since we are already fighting two wars, and they haven't revived the economy.

Maybe the $10 billion we spend a month in Iraq would help revive our economy if spent in the U.S. Ending the wars we already have might work better than starting another.

Diane Niesman

Wheaton