A loyal supporter of John Kerry writes:
... [John Kerry opposes] President Bush's policies on war, the
environment, energy, deficit
spending, and neglect of health,
education and the welfare of seniors, of veterans, and of all but
wealthy private parties (no matter their investment
intentions).
- It is no small matter that the
spending required to move (a) from war fighting to
peace building and (b) from current neglect of America's
environment, energy, health, education, and welfare (of seniors, veterans
and the truly needy), is far
higher than conservatives or liberals
have considered spending? subsequent to the war years 1941-1945.
- John Kerry's choices are clear. He can promise:
- To spend what we must, canceling the Bush tax cut on the
very rich, and accepting a prudent level of deficits in light of the
cost of failure to spend.
- To spend what we must, raising taxes to yet
higher levels within the ability of people to pay (a promise not to be
considered if he would win my vote or the office he
seeks), and accepting a prudent level of deficits in light of the
cost of failure to spend.
- To spend less than we must, but more than Bush would spend
(by canceling the Bush tax cut on the very rich) ? yet avoiding substantial deficit spending for
fear he would be unable to otherwise prevent
unacceptable inflation.
- John Kerry's pointed attack on deficits at a time when they are crucial to
peace and jobs is disturbing. Inflation in a jobs-rich economy can
be prevented by increasing supply and increasing
private savings.
- Unless John Kerry begins to make sense of his proposals in light of the
enormous needs of peace and
jobs, that only federal spending can possibly satisfy,
I may vote for the decisive
spender now in office? and hope to win him away
from destroying middle class America.
John Gelles
|