Where the money goes
Sir: I was first interested, then surprised to read the ex-Editor of Time's account of Edmund Wilson's "discovery" of the uses "to which the Government put the tax money," and his horror at finding that "most of the money was spent for defence,"
Despite the natural credulity which must be afforded to anything said by the ex-Editor of Time Magazine, I decided to look up the relevant statistics in my 1972 Whitaker's Almanac, for Britain only spends about 13 per cent of her budget on defence, and "most" seemed an awful lot for the United States.
It appears that in 1970 the total tax receipts amounted to 193.7 billion dollars, and in 1971 to 188.3 billion dollars. The amount spent on defence was, in 1970, 80 billion dollars, and in 1971 77 billion dollars. In other words, the proportion of tax receipts spent on defence in the US was in 1970 about 41 per cent of the total, and in 1971 about 40 per cent of the total.
However, if you look at the total income tax receipts, there is indeed a correspondence between the two sums; thus, in 1970 the total IT receipt was 90 billion dollars, and in 1971 it was 86 billion dollars. So was Edmund Wilson justified in thinking that most of his taxes went towards napalm and germ warfare?
No. In 1969 social welfare expenditure in the US was 112 billion dollars, and has risen steadily ever since, although my Whitaker's Almanac for 1972 doesn't have any more up-to-date figure than that. There was therefore no reason why Mr Wilson should not have gladdened his heart with the thought that his money was going to social welfare, or, come to that, towards the US's budgetary deficit, which in 1971 was the awesome total of 23 billion dollars, and all in a good cause — at least, from the point of view of a hard line socialist like Mr Wilson. Wherever he is now, I hope this thought comforts him.
Anna Branwell The Seggin; Eyton, nr. Leominster
Previous page
