Page 1464 - 1970S

comes ro $17 billion yeady out of a
$200 billion coral income.
In fact, rhese rwo bi llion membcrs
of rhe world's "silenr majoriry" earn
less money each year chan che resc of
che world spends on arms alone! In
orher words, if war were abolished,
rhese cwo billion people could more
chan doubie cheir personal yearly
income. But rhar's a big · '¡F" - !11
rhe world's "blood money" were used
for rhe good of rhe poor rarher chao
for wars on chei r soil.
All but cwo of che fifcy-six wars
since 1945 have been foughr on che
soil of poor narions - Korea, Viet–
nam, Jordan, Syria, Egypr, Sudan,
Biafra, Bangladesh, and Israel, ro
name a few. The cosr of rebuilding
sharrered economies and devasraced
landscapes musr be added ro che cruel
riche spenr in supporc of rhe milicary
machines which wreak chis havoc.
Only che Uniced Scares. among
major nations. has remained vircually
uncouched by an invading or occupy–
ing army for mosr of irs 200-year
hisrory.
Even rhough che Uniced Srares has
not suffered che direcr economic cur–
ses of war, cherc are more subde - ycr
equaHy desrrucrive - economic coses.
In irs ascenc from a pioneer economy
ro a developing economy ro an
industrial power ro world leader, and
now ro irs declining srages, che
United Stares has suffered all rhcsc
"secondary" economic curses
beguearhed by war.
From Jeffersoo to J ohoson
The W ar of 1812, for example, saw
rhe firsr grear increase in spending by
che young nation of America. Gov–
ernmenr spending had previously
-during Presidenc Jefferson's years
-averaged $8 million per year
(which is spenr every 15 minutes by
roday's central governmenr). Bur dur–
ing Presidenr Madison's war years,
governmenr spending leaped ro $35
million per year.
During che nexr 50 years of
"expansive peace," che nacional debe
vircuaHy disappeared. and Federal
4
spending never ropped $100 million
for any given year - until che Civi l
War of che 1860's.
The War Becween rhe Sraces, how–
ever, pushed annual Federal spending
inro an immediare renfold increase,
making Lincoln rhe firsr bi//ion-dollar–
budger Presidenc. Since chen, che
nacional debe has been a permancnr
fixn1re in che Uni red Srares economy.
The ensuing fifcy ycars of balanced
budgers and relative peace (alchough
che American Indians would not call
rhac period a "gcnerarion of peace")
were followed by Wodd War l, in
which Woodrow Wilson's govcrn–
menr spent ncarly twice as much
money in eighr years of officc as al/
other Presidmts had spenr in che
previous 125 years (despire che facr
rhar only 1 Ví of Wilson's eighr years
were spent waging a hoc war in
Europe). Wilson's budgers wcrc rhe
first ro break che S10-billion-per-ycar
barrier. This barrier was not brokcn
again - dcspire aH the rcpurcdly
excessive Ncw Deal spending - unril
1942.
Buc che world's mosc deadly and
cosdy war of all rime, World War ll,
broke all cconomic records. The
budger deficics of 1943, 1944. and
1945 ser che all-rime record for
budget deficics: over S50 billion in
red ink each ycar, for a 3-year coral of
$1 63 billion. America is srill payi ng
dearly for chose chree major deficics.
Following World War II, Presi–
denr Trumao conscienriously rried ro
reduce Federal spending, buc che
"unconrrollablc expenses" of World
War U (mainly vererans' benefics and
interese on che war debr) insured
heavy Federal ourlays for decades to
come. Any efforrs ro engincer a
budger surplus usually ended in a
recession. Such recessions affiicrcd che
United Sraces in 1949. 1954, 1958,
1961, and 1970. Each of rhcm fol–
Jowed a budger s11rpius year.
Due co new combinations of linan–
cial pressures. Presidenr T ruman spenr
more Federal money in his ncarly
eight ycars in oflice than Presidcnr
Franklin Roosevelr had spenr in his
rwelve years of che New Deal and
World War Il. In addirion, direcc
war efforrs in Korea accountcd for
four consecurive fiscal )'ear deficirs
roraling over S20 billion.
Afrer Korea. during che decade
from 1955 ro 1965, rhe nacional debe
reached a fairly scablc pcacerime
plareau of jusr over $300 billion, vir–
tually aU of it an inhericancc from
pase wars.
Enrer Viemam
Since 1965, however, che Vietnam
War has cosr che Unired Srarcs gov–
ernmenr a phenomenal $128 billion.
Hardly by coincidence, rhe nacional
debr in rhose same six years incr<..~sed
by a similar amounc - $116 billion
ro reach irs fiscal 1972 levcl of $433
billion.
In february 1972 Presidenr Nixon
announced Federal deficics rocaling
$90 billion for fiscal years 1971, 1972,
and 1973 - rhe largesr deficirs sincc
1943-45.
Thc "61-billion-dollar qucscion"
facing America is chis: "Was Vietnam
che culprit in chis skyrockcring
nacional debe?" And, if so, a second
''64-billion-dollar quesrion" is ' 'Whar
would America's economy be like
roday if chere had been no Vietnam?"
The "128-billion-dollar answer"
(chac is che cose of the Vietnam War
so far in hard cash only) ro che ques–
tions is casier ro give chan onc might
expece.
Yes, che Vietnam War is respon–
siblc for about 90 percenr of che huge
increase in che U. S. nacional debr
since 1965. The answer ro che second
quesrion, chough more complcx, is
also clear. Ir is hard ro imagine rhat
such a livid nighrmare as Vietnam is
mercly a bad dream. and not an eco–
nomic realiry. lf rhe Viernam War
had not been provoked by Hanoi,
chances are chere would have becn no
wage and price concrols (Phase l or
Phase II), no devaluarion of rhc dol–
lar, no "lirsr rrade deficir since L893."
and no severe siege of inflarion or
unemploymenr.
This may sound Jike an over-
PLAIN TRUTH November 1972