A+ A A-

If we keep spending 40% more than we take in, we all lose

To The Daily Sun,

In his April 15th letter, Mr. Osmer went to a lot of trouble to ferret out people who disagree with the theory behind the "Laffer curve." I applaud him for all his effort. However, I have a few points of rebuttal.

First, in the case of tax reductions under Presidents Kennedy, Reagan, and Bush, the results showed increases in tax revenues occurred when the tax rates were lowered. In Mr. Osmer's original post, he claimed that the Bush tax cuts cost us a loss of $1.8 trillion in tax revenues. However, following the citations provided by Mr. Osmer, I could not find anything to support the findings of the author of that claim.

Next, and perhaps most importantly, is the fact that under both President Bush and his successor, President Obama (who retained the majority of the Bush tax cuts), revenues have steadily increased. However, spending has far outpaced that revenue growth. If Mr. Osmer would go into Forbes and add up the net worth of the list of citizens who are billionaires, he would find that even if the government taxed/confiscated their entire fortunes, we wouldn't get enough money to run the country for a year.

I will say again, this is not a Democrat or Republican issue . . . it is about our country surviving. The old adage, 'If you're in a hole, the first thing you have to do is stop digging,' is what we should be paying attention to. If we keep spending 40 percent more than we take in, we will all lose.

Finally, President Obama is in his sixth year in office. At what point does he become responsible for his actions?

Bob Meade


The Laconia Daily Sun - All Rights Reserved
Privacy Policy
Powered by BENN a division of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Login or Register