Entitlement mentality 6.0

Lee Racey (Letters, Village News, 8/2/12) repeats his mantra that the one-percenters pay 40 percent of federal income taxes. Accordingly, I repeat: that says nothing about whether they, or the rest of the wealthy, paid their proportionate share. Between Bush’s tax cuts and tax loopholes for the wealthy, I say they have not.

Bush’s war-time tax cuts were unconscionable. If federal revenue couldn’t cover the costs of his wars and infrastructure maintenance, where’d the money come from to finance the tax cuts?

Here are comments on George Soros, in English. He’s a philanthropist who’s donated over $8 billion to human rights, public health, and education causes. He champions capitalism and democracy, e.g., the peaceful transition from communism to capitalism in Hungary (1984–89).

European nations’ austerity may be an acceptable short-term strategy to stay afloat until financing becomes available.

Lacey asks for one example of a country that taxed and spent its way to prosperity. My answer: America. Two years into Reagan’s first term, unemployment peaked at 10.8 percent. Yes, he cut taxes in 1981 and 1986. But his tax reforms in 1982 and 1984 way overshadowed the cuts and “constituted the biggest tax increase ever enacted during peacetime.” (www.money.cnn.com)

What’s ironic is that despite his slogan “government is the problem,” he continued to increase public sector spending, at the same time bringing unemployment down to 5.4 percent. His handling of the economy – with no austerity – enabled Clinton to later deliver three budget surpluses. And that’s exactly the approach we should follow now.

John H. Terrell