This is in response to Mr. Michael Karel’s letter which ran in the Friday, Dec. 15 VMS.
I do not understand why “we are going to borrow $1.5 trillion in order to pay for this tax cut.”
Does not a tax cut mean that we, as the tax payers who earn the money in the first place, are just going to keep more of our money and not send as much to Washington?
They are not going to send it back to us, we are not going to send it to them. I think what
they will need to borrow the 1.5 trillion for is so they can continue their spending as usual.
As for previous tax cuts mentioned in your letter, I am not sure about the 2001 Bush tax cut, but I believe that after the 1981 Reagan tax cut, revenues to the government actually increased.
If there was a deficit afterwards it was because our politicians spent more than they took in.
Which, in reality, is why we have such a huge debt.
They have been spending more than they bring in for a long time and I would guess they will continue to do so.
The problem with our debt is not on the income side, we send them plenty. The problem is on the
spending side, it is out of control.
If a debt ceiling can be raised every time it is reached, is it really a ceiling at all?
As for the rich, I love them. They have kept me employed all my working life. The vast majority of them became rich by getting an education first and then working super hard to achieve and advance in their careers.
I do not remember ever being hired by a poor person.
Albert Gonzalez Harlingen