Letters to the Editor
virtue001
Published Letters: 406 Editor's Choice: 1
-
I'm terrified, simply terrified!!!
[Read the article: Telecom amnesty would forever foreclose investigation of vital issues]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Oh my God, you mean the government might actually stumble across a conversation I may or may not have with my brother when we're talking about placing bets on the NFL football this Sunday? -- And just so we can catch some sand ant scheming to take out Los Angeles with a dirty bomb?!!! Why that's unconscionable!!!
-
Stunned?
[Read the article: Telecom amnesty would forever foreclose investigation of vital issues]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Houngan, I doubt you know what that means, really. That and the word "satire" seem to elude you. Watch out, or the next cockroach you shine that spotlight on may be your own humorless self.
-
Paul Krugman? That brilliant economist?
[Read the article: Good times for liberals]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Okay, let me see if I have this straight: Paul Krugman, a former economist so brilliant that he once predicted the Bush's economic policies would produce a total economic disaster, when they have, in fact, brought Americans...
Stocks at an all-time high. An economy poised to grow by 3 percent in Q3 after growing nearly 4 percent in Q2. Highly competitive exporting at a 13 percent annual rate, including a 24 percent export gain to China, a 25 percent increase to South America, and a 15 percent export rise to Europe. Not to mention tax cuts that have fueled a thriving economy, producing $2.6 trillion of tax revenues and bringing the FY 2007 budget deficit to only 1.2 percent of GDP or $163 billion. Then there's the fact that tax collections for 2007 are currently $550 billion above the prior FY 2000 peak. Even spending in 2007 was held to 2.8 percent growth, with domestic spending less entitlement and security actually falling by nearly 6 percent from last year. And, oh yeah, since August 2003, the economy has added more than 8 million new jobs, meaning 49 straight months of economic growth. A new record. And did I mention that the unemployment rate is only 4.7%?
So excuse me if I have a great big belly laugh whenever Paul Krugman"dazzles" me with any future economic "predictions."
-
Wascally?
[Read the article: Telecom amnesty would forever foreclose investigation of vital issues]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]What are you ranting about, Citizen X? Who was talking about waterboarding? And what does "wascally" mean? Have you taken your meds today?
-
Robert Franklin
[Read the article: Good times for liberals]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You make some good points, but our government has been hiring people and buying goods on credit for a long, long time. And although Bushonomics relies, in part, on foreign investors to finance our lifestyles, this, too, was going on well before Bush came ever into power. However, those policies are only part of this administration's total economic philosophy (albeit a large part). But for the sake of argument, let's pretend I buy this part of your argument for the moment, so that I can ask you the following question: If Hillary were to become President of the United States tomorrow, what would happen to the economy we have now in place, if she were to:
1) Let President Bush's tax cuts for top earners expire, meaning she raises the top bracket (for those earning more than $200,000 a year) on income taxes from the 35 percent to which Bush cut it, to the 39.6 percent to which her husband raised it in 1993.
2) Increase the tax on capital gains from the current 15 percent to at least 20 percent or more likely to the 30 percent level backed by most liberals.
3) Repeal Bush's tax cut on dividends, raising it from its current 15 percent to 30 percent.
4) End the planned elimination of the estate tax and reduce the size of estates subject to the tax.
5) Raise FICA taxes levied on the first $97,000 of income to the first $250,000.
I think you'll agree that these five points are hardly outside the realm of Hillary's agenda. And that being the case, what do you honestly think the effect on our present economy would be?
-
Robert Franklin
[Read the article: Good times for liberals]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Unfortunately, you gave me the answer I was afraid you would when you said, the effect would be the "transfer of wealth from the very well-to-do to the poor and middle class." That, my friend, is socialism. Big government. Uncle Sam picking my pocket for what bureacrats, in all their wisdom, have the audacity to call the "greater good" -- like they'd know it if they saw it. (i.e. their famous bridge to nowhere and thousands of other wonderful wastes of time and money). Trusting bureaucrats to tell us how we should live our lives is what ruined old Europe. And I'm not about to let it ruin my county as well. It robs us of our individuality and turns us into sheep, because it assumes we are not incapable of determining what we should do with what we work so hard to earn. Like it or not, America is a capitalist nation, not a socialist one. And that is why the United States continues to have the most thriving, unflappable economy in the history of the planet.
-
Muze01
[Read the article: Good times for liberals]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Offering Mr. Klugman advice on how to "handle" Tucker Carlson isn't really going to help this poor beleaguered soul, whose desperate hopes for the "good times" that lie ahead for liberals are about as bright as he is quick on his feet.
PS: O'Reilly ate Klugman alive, too.