U.S. Should Have Cut Down Defense Spending Years Ago
Only Michael Boskin (“Clinton’s Defense Cuts: Risky for the Nation, Bad for California,” Aug. 14), an economist who worked in George Bush’s White House and who helped create the country’s worst post-World War II recession, could possibly describe tiny world-away Bosnia as a “ruthless aggressor” and use such as a rationale for America spending more on the military. That’s Canada to the north, not Bosnia. Even the NRA doesn’t use Bosnia as an excuse for arming.
When will Mr. Boskin realize that California cannot and should not rely on defense to bolster its economy? We should have begun the weaning process years and years ago.
America has spent trillions on “defense” over the decades. Isn’t it about time we realize that we have other tax dollar priorities that need tending to for a change, like education, health, infrastructure?
SAUL DAVIS
Studio City
Get the L.A. Times Politics newsletter
Deeply reported insights into legislation, politics and policy from Sacramento, Washington and beyond. In your inbox three times per week.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
