To the editor: Contributing author Veronique de Rugy, arguing for a extra fiscally accountable authorities, states, “Nor are new taxes an possibility” (“Enormous budget deficits are the new normal,” Oct. 15). However she fails to notice that probably repealing the tax cuts for the rich is “an possibility.”
She doesn’t point out whether or not or not lifting the cap on Social Safety contributions is perhaps an possibility. She ignores whether or not or not taxing capital beneficial properties and dividend earnings at peculiar earnings charges is an possibility.
Certainly, the one possibility De Rugy approves of are decreasing advantages to employees however not the rich. De Rugy wants a wider record of choices.
Brian Sheppard, Tarzana
..
To the editor: I get pleasure from studying De Rugy’s op-eds. She is sensible, topical and persuasive. And he or she comes throughout as an actual conservative, not a partisan.
However like many conservatives, when introduced with a finances deficit, she at all times goes for chopping entitlements first. By no means thoughts that the nation has a deficit as a result of it’s spending an excessive amount of and wishes extra income. This drawback is confronted by numerous households and companies. What they do is to chop bills and attempt to get extra earnings with new merchandise or a second job.
How about elevating earnings taxes? Simply taking certainly one of her entitlement examples, the “payroll” tax; has anybody requested why there’s a tax on labor and never on passive funding earnings?
Extending the bottom to all income may even enable for a discount within the FICA price. And if the bond market perceives that the federal government is admittedly addressing the deficit, the price of debt would lower, a double dip.
James Manifold, Claremont
