Advertisement
YOU ARE HERE: LAT HomeCollections

Proposed Tax Cuts Nick Consumers Again

May 03, 2003

President Bush's proposed tax cuts mostly for the upper 1% of Americans, to the tune of $550 billion, on the promise of more jobs, is exactly what it seems -- welfare for the rich. Trickle-down economics did not work for the actor president who played his part, and it will not work in the future -- the reason being that those in the upper 1% will not spend the money; they don't need to.

If these billions in cuts were spread among the lowest 25% the money would almost instantly be circulated in the economy. It would seem that members of a family born with a silver foot in their mouths cannot perceive reality outside of a self-imposed myopia.

Jay Galbraith

Los Angeles

*

Bush spouts tax cuts as the end-all, be-all remedy for the economy. On the other side of the aisle are those who want tax increases as the end-all, be-all. Both are wrong. A free-market economy runs in cycles. Whether operating in times of surplus (remember those?) or deficits, one principle never goes out of style -- fiscal sanity.

There is nothing fiscally sane about a government that gives away money while operating in the red. Bush ran two companies into the ground on his way to becoming president and blames 18 months of deficits on a 2-month-old war (April 25). Sounds like fuzzy math to me.

Douglas Hall

Culver City

*

Bush wants a $550-billion tax reduction to stimulate the economy, with much of it going to the wealthy, most of whom would not spend the money. We should reduce the payroll tax by that amount, on those paying the lower amounts, and every dollar would be spent for essential needs such as food, clothing and housing. More people would thereby be employed to manufacture and service those needs, resulting in a great deal more than the initial $550 billion in the economy.

Hyman Goldman

Los Angeles

*

Why won't our senators and representatives press to eliminate the income tax on the first $20,000 of dividend income earned?

That would go a long way to help folks on a fixed income, encourage investment in stocks of well-managed companies and eliminate the appearance that the current proposal is really designed to benefit the rich.

Rhod Zimmerman

West Hills

*

Day after day, I read about Bush calling for more and more tax cuts. Again and again, I hear the moneyed mantra of the conservative wing of the Republican Party repeating, "It's your money!" Is it?

Is it our money if the only way to reduce the tax burden is to borrow to do so? Is it our money if, in the process of increasing the national debt, interest rates are raised? Is it our money if the majority of people who pay for these increased interest rates are unable to deduct them because they are reflected primarily in credit card debt and increased retail prices? Better yet, is it our money if the reduced federal services that result create higher local tax rates?

Hmmph. Why is it that when the rich get the majority of the tax cuts, the rest of us get the burden of paying for them? But hey, after all, it's our money!

Douglas Sexton

Palm Desert

Advertisement
Los Angeles Times Articles
|
|
|