From LaVern F. Isley
Monroe
There's part of the Chicago Tribune editorial of September 18 I agree with and parts that I don't. The part that said "when first George W. Bush tax cuts passed in 2001 the Congressional Budget Office was projecting a $5.6 trillion surplus for the following ten years." I agree. So the Democrats left President George W. Bush with a good surplus and the top tax rate was 39.6 percent. Shortly after President George W. Bush took office, federal income taxes were lowered with the top rate being 35 percent. I quote: "Now it's forecasting a $1.3 trillion deficit in 2010 alone. So, if we don't want to keep selling our soul to foreign governments and going deeper in debt, we're going to have to raise the income tax back up to 39.6 percent and vote on it before the fall election. Then we'll know if Republican Rep. John Boehner was right in the first place because raising the taxes on the top 2 percent with income over $250,000 is really saying that we're returning to the 39.6 percent which is "based on ability to pay." This would really take the burden off us 98 percent of taxpayers in the middle class. A well-respected Republican Green County Board Member said that anytime the federal government lowers federal income taxes, the burden just gets passed down the ladder where it raises our property taxes. Even if the Democrats lose on the issue of extending the tax cuts for the top 2 percent in the next couple of weeks, they would be on record and we'd have something to vote for. Did President Bush's tax cuts in the last eight years help or hurt the economy? Does the trickle-down theory help the economy or do they just take the jobs overseas? I read that if you give the money to the working class, they're going to spend it a lot faster because our needs are basically the same as those of the wealthy- food, clothing and shelter. This issue should have been on President Obama's agenda right from the start and I think the reason it wasn't is because he reappointed President Bush's Federal Reserve Chairman, Ben Bernanke, which was a big mistake. I like the appointment of Elizabeth Warren to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau because what I read about her, she's a real fighter for consumer issues and it's important that the individual, was well as government, get out of debt.
Monroe
There's part of the Chicago Tribune editorial of September 18 I agree with and parts that I don't. The part that said "when first George W. Bush tax cuts passed in 2001 the Congressional Budget Office was projecting a $5.6 trillion surplus for the following ten years." I agree. So the Democrats left President George W. Bush with a good surplus and the top tax rate was 39.6 percent. Shortly after President George W. Bush took office, federal income taxes were lowered with the top rate being 35 percent. I quote: "Now it's forecasting a $1.3 trillion deficit in 2010 alone. So, if we don't want to keep selling our soul to foreign governments and going deeper in debt, we're going to have to raise the income tax back up to 39.6 percent and vote on it before the fall election. Then we'll know if Republican Rep. John Boehner was right in the first place because raising the taxes on the top 2 percent with income over $250,000 is really saying that we're returning to the 39.6 percent which is "based on ability to pay." This would really take the burden off us 98 percent of taxpayers in the middle class. A well-respected Republican Green County Board Member said that anytime the federal government lowers federal income taxes, the burden just gets passed down the ladder where it raises our property taxes. Even if the Democrats lose on the issue of extending the tax cuts for the top 2 percent in the next couple of weeks, they would be on record and we'd have something to vote for. Did President Bush's tax cuts in the last eight years help or hurt the economy? Does the trickle-down theory help the economy or do they just take the jobs overseas? I read that if you give the money to the working class, they're going to spend it a lot faster because our needs are basically the same as those of the wealthy- food, clothing and shelter. This issue should have been on President Obama's agenda right from the start and I think the reason it wasn't is because he reappointed President Bush's Federal Reserve Chairman, Ben Bernanke, which was a big mistake. I like the appointment of Elizabeth Warren to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau because what I read about her, she's a real fighter for consumer issues and it's important that the individual, was well as government, get out of debt.
