Letters about the debt debate have abounded over the past few weeks. Here are 10 more:
Hedge fund manager John Paulson made $5 billion last year. House Speaker John Boehner and the tea party believe he deserves preferential tax treatment. They want us to believe all federal revenue increases are bad and that all tax reductions will increase jobs. They are so committed to this they will allow our government to default before charging hedge fund managers income tax on their income.
On the state level, budget cuts directly put 31,600 out of work while the private sector generated 28,900 jobs. Unemployment payments go up; consumer spending drops.
Hedge funds seek short term share-value increase by forcing layoffs, reduced R&D and maintenance. Boehner and the tea party say this is okay.
Paulson’s company employees gave John Boehner’s campaign fund $61,950 in June, 2011. Have you asked your elected representatives who is watching out for you?
Bill Brooks
Cary
-----------------------------------
The tea party is insisting on a balanced budget amendment. Republicans have run up the majority of the national debt. Now they want the government to live within its means just like regular people. First, regular people wouldn’t go to the boss and ask for a pay cut, just like cutting taxes reduces government income. Taxes are at the lowest since World War II. Second, borrowing is essential to growing wealth. If people were not allowed to borrow to buy homes, cars, etc., they would rarely ever be able to afford those purchases. I learned this in Economics 101.
Since Republicans refuse to raise any additional revenue, come Aug. 3 if no deal is reached, we’ll know exactly what it's like to have a balanced budget. I wonder how many people will like what’s happening?
Jim Riley
Youngsville
------------------------------------
If the United States defaults, Congress and the president should be the first ones not paid. In the real world, they would be fired, but I guess we’ll have to wait until the 2012 elections to do that.
Tom Waring
Raleigh
------------------------------
Following President Obama's call to contact our members of Congress regarding a balanced approach to solving the debt crisis, email contact with House and Senate members was impossible; the House and Senate websites were temporarily down, most likely because millions of citizens like me were trying to send the same message at the same time:
I support a balanced approach to addressing the federal debt and budget problems. Tax increases are needed, as well as spending cuts that are fair and across the board.
Tim Wildfire
Durham
-------------------------------------
Our nation is at serious risk of falling into another recession that will make the last one seem like a small bump in the road. The so-called tea party Republicans are blocking any bipartisan compromise that could help invigorate an already sluggish recovery and keep us from defaulting on our debt obligations.
They were not elected to hold a gun to the heads of other Republicans and, in effect, every other citizen just because they can't have their way. They were elected to represent the people of their districts and help run the government, but they are failing in this task.
I cannot believe that a majority of tea party supporters want our country to fall into another, deeper recession by defaulting on its financial obligations. If they do, then we are in for a disastrous future with a misguided and misinformed electorate sending like-minded people to Washington.
It is time for the tea party Republicans to stop playing political games, step up to the plate and do what is right for our nation, for all citizens of our nation.
Sam Worley
Raleigh
--------------------------------
We all need to be calling our representatives to support the president with his budget proposal. I’m very upset thinking about the bait and switch tactics of the speaker of the House.
How easy it is to blame the current president for the problems left from the past one – namely the Iraq war and the hundreds of billions it has cost our country, $2 billion a week!
Someone is going to have to pay for this, and just cutting back spending is not going to do it. No one wants more taxes, but President Obama’s proposal is about taxing only the top 5 percent and those who have gotten tax cuts (like the oil companies making billions lately).
I just don't understand why the Republicans are so against this, unless they are being pressured by the oil companies and super-rich to completely avoid these taxes.
So those Republicans not in the top 5 percent have nothing to worry about. (I do, because I am in that percentile – but I don’t mind paying my fair share.)
Carolyn Aaronson
Durham
---------------------------------
In reference to William H. Chafe’s July 16 Point of View article “Under Clinton, the budget balanced” and to a supporting letter of July 31 (“Showing surplus”):
The error in both is they presume the debt held by the public is the total debt of the federal government, which is not the case. There also are intragovernmental holdings or the Social Security and other trust funds. One must add them together to have the Total Public Debt Outstanding or, on July 28, 2011, $14,342,865,885,306.46.
The Total Public Debt Outstanding under Clinton did not decrease, as extra Social Security collections were used to reduce the debt held by the public but the same amount was added to the Social Security Trust Fund or intragovernmental holdings, resulting in no reduction in the total debt.
I repeat, the U.S. Total Public Debt Outstanding has increased every year since 1957 including every single one of Clinton’s eight years in office.
Tom Hauck
Pittsboro
----------------------------------------
My advice to the Republicans: In the future, do nothing about debt. It's a sure loser. If you don't immediately succeed, everyone will complain. If you eventually succeed, everyone will complain that there's nothing to complain about. Then, at the very least, you'll be just like Democrats, except dumber.
Robert Payne III
Raleigh
---------------------------------------------------------
America is deeply in debt. We're cutting back on things like education and Medicare payment rates to doctors to reduce this debt. Yet we just won't increase taxes on those who are "making it." Some would have us believe the enemy is "big government." Yes, there is no doubt that big government is bad.
But perhaps the enemy is also ourselves. We are, personally and collectively, desperately clinging to the American Dream. Our American Dream is to "make it." Our belief is that one day each of us could be rich, or at least "comfortable." (Some studies have shown that those who make more money think they need even more money to be comfortable, an unattainable dream.)
When we blame only big government" for our debt we are blaming ourselves for our existence. We need adequate government. (And those who are able have a responsibility to pay for it.) We need investigative journalism that is vigorously and prominently reporting on the big profits of individuals and companies that are making it. We need our leaders to declare, Well reduce our own taxpayer financed income, accept higher taxation for ourselves, and increase taxation on those who have made it, to reduce the debt and pay for adequate government.
Paul K Shaub
Raleigh
---------------------------------------------------------
It's something that any college student who puts their paper off until 3 a.m. the night before its due knows too well - work expands to fill the time allotted. If we allow 5 hours to finish a task, we will complete it in 5 hours, though we might not get the result we desire. Yet this principle has also taken hold of the United States government for far too long, with consequences far more devastating than a simple bad grade.
Our government procrastinated a deal that would reduce the national debt for an entire decade, finishing a deal that saved our country from economic collapse at the last possible minute. It's like a student who puts off a paper every night until the night before it's due, when he has no choice.
No one even likes the end result of the deal. But, in the end, the consequences of NOT having a deal were too great. So everyone has swallowed their pride and voted "yes" just to get something done.
College students frequently get away with this, as one grade is fairly insignificant. But is this really the way to handle our country's economic future, something infinitely more important?
Kevin Fox
Carrboro
---------------------------------------------------------
