In a recent letter, it was stated that the solution to job creation lies in government spending. Two facts stand in the way of that statement.

In the days of Coolidge, a tax and spending cutter, the unemployment rate was 4 percent. In the days of Hoover and then Roosevelt, taxes and spending were increased with a resulting significant increase in unemployment.

In fact, the day Pearl Harbor was attacked, unemployment stood at 16 percent. After almost 10 years of Rossevelt's "priming the pump," the unemployment rate was still at record levels. In fact, Roosevelt's treasurey secretary stated all of this spending had not improved a lot of people and that there was now tremendous debt. President Obama is also doing what Roosevelt did, with similar results. Stimulus spending has never worked and never will.

On the other hand, when Reagan replaced Carter and his over 9 percent unemployment, he reduced taxes from 70 percent to 28 percent (top marginal rate) unemployment decreased to under 5 percent during his eight years in office. Twenty-one million new jobs were created — the largest peacetime job expansion in history. Also, government revenues more than doubled during his presidency. Yes, there were still deficits, but that was because Congress would not reduce spending.

All these facts are out there. I can not see why anyone would choose the Roosevelt-Obama path when it always brings poverty to the general public.

Gordon Christiansen