End tax holiday for wealthy to pay down U.S. debt
The federal shutdown was caused by the radical slashers of the Tea Party who demanded that we eat all the seed corn of research, infrastructure and education. A coalition of moderately slashing Democrats and Republicans sidestepped the radicals to end the shutdown. The budget deficit has shrunk to $800 billion.
The greatest source of waste in the budget is the $800 billion a year for interest on the $16 trillion national debt. If there were no interest payments, the budget would balance.
Therefore, I demand a dedicated 10 percent surcharge tax on the gross income of the 10 percent of wealthiest taxpayers to reduce the national debt to $2 trillion. It would have the added benefit of forcing Congress to balance the budget immediately, as being in the black is the only other way of reducing the debt. Although additional spending cuts and taxes would be needed to balance the budget, the dollar would be strengthened and Social Security saved.
The Republican lie of supply-side has been a trillion dollar con game. Rather than the high growth rates of the capitalist utopia promised, we got the worst recession in 80 years, throwing 15 million Americans out of the middle class.
The wealthy have enjoyed an unprecedented tax holiday for 30 years to the detriment of all others. The successful high tax rate policies of the 1950s and 1960s (ample seed corn) grew the middle class from scratch.
Allen T. Kelley
Just plain stupid
Sen. Ted Cruz is my hero. It's great to see one Republican with enough intestinal fortitude to stand up to what is right; to do what he was elected to do; to be the representative he is supposed to be and stand up for the people.
Some of these wishy-washy Republicans like. Sen. John McCain might as well join those idiot Democratic leaders, Sen. Harry Reid and Rep. Nancy Pelosi. There is no way these two could pass a mental evaluation. Then there is President Barack Obama acting like a dictator instead of an elected president.
Now this Obamacare boondoggle is another disaster forced upon the American people who don't want it. But then El Numero Uno, Obama the Magnificent says who cares; we are going to have it anyway. If it's so great why did Congress want to be exempt from it? But Obama fixed that; taxpayers will pay 75 percent of their premium. So now he will probably do the same for the unions.
I question the mind-set and integrity of these people who vote for the likes of Reid, Pelosi, Sen. Chuck Schumer and Obama. They have to be ignorant or just plain stupid.
Follow the money
An entire neighborhood of beautiful, classic and desirable housing stock was razed for Rupp Arena and the Lexington Convention Center. Where has that gotten us but looking to finance a $300 million bill and a dearth of desirable housing in that area?
About the proposal for a new city hall, Mayor Jim Gray says that "We're looking to the private sector rather than asking taxpayers to foot the bill," but would you expect any different from the former CEO of a construction company?
A good indicator of the private sector is seen in the CentrePointe site: the ground's not yet broken and it's gone from a 35-story mixed-use development ready for the World Equestrian Games of 2010, to a 19-story, multi-building construction and the last architectural firm pulling out in September, exactly when the Webb Companies had announced that construction would begin.
In a strictly economic sense a new city hall might make sense, but economics always prioritize short-term saving and externalization of costs. Another ugly modern building, built not to last but with cost savings as the only driver, will only get us further down the road this country's already languishing on.
If cost savings were the true economic driver we would not be involved in a constant state of war, we would not have the highest per capita prison population in the world.
You know what's going on when you follow the money, and it's not what it's going towards, it's who's getting it.
Christian L. Torp
Bring on the facts
National health care. What a great idea. President Barack Obama says it will work for the vast majority of the American people. And if you like your health plan you can keep it.
Then how could it be that, for instance, a 59-year-old couple will have to pay for maternity coverage that they don't want or need? That's an expense that they had chosen not to incur but now have lost that choice. The insurance company says it is because of the new mandated minimum coverage. I've heard that the cost to some previously insured has gone up 400 percent. How is this possible and how is it better for the American people? Some companies are apparently dropping coverage altogether.
One month later the web site still is not up and running. How is it possible that the president and White House senior advisors did not foresee the challenges of the new health care sign-up process that resulted in only six, yes, six, people successfully signing up on the first day?
I would like to see more news coverage of the facts around this issue. For example, how many families are able to keep their preferred policies? Is it a vast majority, as the president promised?
Please stop reporting the tit-for-tat political blows as our "leaders" try to throw each other under the bus and spend your news gathering resources on bringing us the facts.
I am a Republican conservative who is a Republican by default and a conservative by conviction. I believe in the two-party system and I could never be a Democrat for at least the following two reasons: they promote socialism and condone abortion after six months.
Being opposed to Obamacare, I know that my motives are at least as noble as those who support it. My motives are also to improve health care for all and to take care of those who cannot take care of themselves. Our disagreements are in the methods used to achieve these noble ends.
I have difficulty believing a president who used lies to promote his agenda. He asserted frequently over the last five years that Obamacare would not result in anyone losing his health care plan, period, and his doctor, period, and would result in an average saving of $2,500 per year, period.
Also, there is every indication that Obamacare is designed to eventually lead to socialized medicine, which does not bode well for the future.
Obamacare was a massive piece of legislation where about 5 percent of the popular items, such as precondition, were known, and the other 95 percent were unknown. I believe that it is unethical to vote for a law when you only know about 5 percent of what is in it, and that those who do so should be impeached because they are doing a disservice to this country.