The article says spending borrowed money on war doesn’t crowd out other economic goods. But of course it does. How money is raised and how it is spent are sepa

The article says spending borrowed money on war doesn’t crowd out other economic goods. But of course it does. How money is raised and how it is spent are separate issues. You can say borrowing is ok, or not, for any given level. But what you can’t do is spend the same money on massive military activity, with little hold over value, and that same money on investments that increase productivity for a generation, like targeted education, research and infrastructure. Whatever you spend a dollar on, you have “crowded out” the alternative. And saying well you can borrow more isn’t a valid point. You just have more money, but you are still choosing one thing or another with every dollar. (In characterizing military activity as not an investment I am not addressing the case of wars that preserved our and our allies freedom, but the disastrous discretionary ones of the new century.) HOW you spend money is always a trade off, no matter where the money came from.