Email letters, Dec. 8, 2011
Everyone should have skin in the game
Who decides what is the “fair share” for each of us in paying income taxes? If there are no huge deduction dodges for any of us beyond, perhaps, home mortgage interest, it would seem that a straight 10 percent of income from everyone might be the same “fair share” for all. Or whatever percent the supreme decider, whomever that may be, will decide is “fair.”
But each of us in the great unwashed out here must have some skin in the game to claim an interest in our government. That approach should wipe out the complaints of the 99 percent since the 1 percent will be paying much, much more than they.
But wait, Tom Friedman, he of the New York Times, has laid out just how Obama can get re-elected. One step would be to embrace his own Simpson-Bowles deficit reduction findings. They seemed to have spread the pain around such that no one was raped. But no, Obama will not do that for whatever reason.
Friedman also got around to “fair share” with Obama offering “a plan in which the wealthy have to pay their fair share and more, because they’ve had a great two decades. But everyone, including the middle class, has to contribute something.” Wow. Now we would penalize success? In the interest of being polite, I would offer this comment: Horse feathers. But at least he sees everyone with some skin in the game.
Liberals created banking crisis
It is unfortunate that Joel Prudhomme’s letter to the editor about Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae was full of inaccuracies and liberal talking points.
Part of my job requires me to work with lenders and mortgage brokers on a regular basis. Many have stated to me that they were required by the federal government to give loans to people regardless of the income or credit ratings. This was done as stated by people like Barney Frank, Maxine Waters and Chris Dodd to help low income people buy homes.
These government representatives also ignored the coming problem and blocked all efforts to make any reforms to either Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae before it became a crisis. It doesn’t surprised me from the contents of Mr. Prudomme’s letter that he is a supporter of the Occupy activists.
AP stories should be discounted
I agree with Janet Blackman’s Dec. 7 letter to the editor that the stories in The Daily Sentinel written by the AP cannot be trusted to tell the truth. This is not a new observation and most of us have learned to discount most of what the AP says.
GEORGE E. CORT
Spending must stop
I was amazed in the Dec. 7 column when Bill Grant quoted Bruce Bartlett who said, “The only policy that will really (create jobs) is an increase in appregate demand. … Spending by households, businesses and governments ...”
They must both be more affluent than the majority of us who must quit spending when we have nothing to spend. We don’t have the luxury of borrowing money to pay for things we don’t need and can’t afford and then ask the rest of the country to pay for them.
When will this government realize that we must quit spending. I just heard on the news today that the interest on our debt costs every living person in the United States $120 per month. This is ridiculous and must stop.
Those who died at Pearl Harbor should be remembered
Year after year when the Pearl Harbor anniversary takes place there is never any mention of anyone local that died on that terrible day when the Japanese struck. I believe it to be a sad day when we don’t mention these long forgotten heroes who died serving our country.
A few years ago, I brought this to the attention of Sentinel reporter, Gary Harmon, with which was a waste of time. I think about how our own are forgotten so many years later, especially those so far away as Pearl Harbor.
I am sure there are many from across the Western Slope who are forgotten these days. My hope is that some day these lost lives in Pearl Harbor will be publicly remembered here locally. As I write this today I remember a Mesa resident that is entombed in the USS Arizona, Leo Heely. God Bless.
More money won’t fix any problems
Once again so called “independent” Dennis Herzog tells us how smart he and his friends are and that they just can’t understand how the dumb people of this community are unwilling to part with more of their money in the form of higher taxes. I guess when you come from the camp that believes that it is the government that makes Mesa County a great place to live it is easy to understand why Mr. Herzog and his intellectual friends are so baffled. If we would only spend more money we could prevent a great educational disaster from happening here in Mesa County is what they would have us believe.
First, let us remember that we were already paying more in taxes than we should have been thanks to Bill Ritter and his back-door mill levy freeze which raised taxes on homeowners. Second, why do progressives (and I use this term in the contemporary political sense) like Mr. Herzog equate more money in taxes to a quality education? Does this mean that the kids currently enrolled in School District 51 are not getting a quality education?
President Obama and the Democrats have regularly used a similar ploy to say that the world will collapse if a certain piece of legislation is not passed. This tactic is getting old. If the kids are the number one priority then we as a community should find a way to educate our children the best we can with the money available. I realize that this is easy to say but much more difficult in reality to accomplish.
If the school district continues to operate as it always has, why would we expect the results to be any different just because there is more money? If we had been told that with this extra money our kids would receive a measurably improved education the election results might have been different.
Religious decorations are missing in area stores
I generally pay little attention to the claims that our culture is squeezing the sacred meaning from Christmas but after this season, I’m inclined to agree. I wanted to purchase some Christmas tree ornaments with religious meaning; things like stars, angels, crosses, etc. I have visited every store I can think of in the valley. I went first to Hobby Lobby, thinking I’d easily find what I wanted there, but left disappointed. I then went to Target, Walmart, Kmart, Big Lots, Family Dollar, Partyland and a couple of downtown shops. All I found was a bunch of gaudy, secular junk. So, heads up merchants. I spent no money on decorating this year, though I was willing to. I’d like to buy local, but I can only find what I want online. Maybe next year.
Dave Kearsley’s latest redundant offering – “Electing new president will revitalize growth” printed on Dec. 7 – epitomizes the not-so-subtle sophistry that permeates the flawed logic of Republican apologists.
Even if Dave’s assertion as to the currently unprecedented magnitude of government spending is accurate, it is logically fallacious to insinuate that mere association (with President Obama’s tenure) establishes causation (by President Obama’s policies). To then speciously assert that changing Presidents will magically “revitalize growth” entirely and conveniently ignores the disastrous but ideologically-driven policies advocated by Republicans, and their on-going and destructively obstructive partisan opposition to genuinely sustainable economic recovery.
Moreover, Dave’s very use of the term “unprecedented” necessarily implies a relevant historical context – which he (like most Republicans) self-servingly obfuscates.
In fact, at the time, the most “unprecedented” increase in federal deficit spending was perpetrated by President Ronald Reagan, under the guise of what was accurately dubbed “voodoo economics”.
Then, the most “unprecedented” period of economic growth and job creation in our history occurred under the higher marginal tax rates during the Clinton Administration – generating a budgetary surplus for the first time since Teddy Roosevelt was President.
But then, the next most “unprecedented” increase in deficit spending was perpetrated by Dubbya – who mindlessly (even after 9/11) reduced tax rates and revenues (rather than apply the surplus to reduce the national debt), while funding two wars and the Medicare prescription drug benefit with money borrowed from Saudi Arabia and China.
Recently, when the non-partisan CBO validated the likely effectiveness of President Obama’s policy proposals – and discredited Republican “alternatives” – Republican congressional “leaders” questioned the veracity of the CBO (which Republicans had created to “score” legislative proposals).
So, to my memory, the last honest Republican was President George H.W. Bush – who raised taxes because it was in the national interest, even though it cost him reelection.