More gas for the fire

The Washington Times Weekly - - Letters To The Editor -

How are Pres­i­dent Obama’s lat­est eco­nomic pro­pos­als dif­fer­ent from all of the other un­work­able plans that he has served up over the past three years?

Specif­i­cally, to what ex­tent would the additional rev­enues that might re­sult from rais­ing in­come taxes on high earn­ers and a va­ri­ety of fees on ev­ery­one off­set the $1 tril­lion­plus an­nual deficits that have be­come the norm un­der this pres­i­dent, as­sum­ing of course that they were all spent for that pur­pose?

And how could they all be spent on deficit re­duc­tion when the pres­i­dent is propos­ing to in­crease the short­fall sub­stan­tially with a $447 bil­lion “jobs bill” and when it is go­ing to in­crease steadily on its own be­cause of the de­mands of un­re­formed en­ti­tle­ment pro­grams, the costly im­ple­men­ta­tion of Oba­macare and the fund­ing of other new ini­tia­tives? Isn’t there some dou­ble or even triple count­ing go­ing on here?

What has changed since De­cem­ber when the pres­i­dent told us that rais­ing taxes at a time of high un­em­ploy­ment and ane­mic eco­nomic growth was a very bad idea, that it will di­min­ish funds in the pri­vate sec­tor that would other­wise be in­vested to cre­ate new jobs? Is the econ­omy sud­denly boom­ing again? Have I missed some­thing?

Does the pres­i­dent re­ally be­lieve that this stim- ulus, aka jobs bill, will suc­ceed when the last one, which was twice as large, seems only to have then made mat­ters worse?

Where will he find the elu­sive shovel-ready jobs this time? If they are al­ready there, why didn’t he fund them be­fore? If they are not, how long is it go­ing to take to go through the typ­i­cally multi-year plan­ning, per­mit­ting, bid­ding, lit­i­ga­tion and bu­reau­cratic fool­ish­ness pro­cesses?

Speak­ing of bu­reau­crats, when is he go­ing to do some­thing about rein­ing in the hordes of govern­ment reg­u­la­tors whose op­pres­sive ex­cesses in the ap­pli­ca­tion of his mis­guided poli­cies are sub­stan­tially re­spon­si­ble for the suf­fo­ca­tion of our econ­omy?

Fi­nally, why is the pres­i­dent so re­luc­tant to pro­vide the de­tails of these mea­sures, es­pe­cially the par­tic­u­lars, if any, of his spend­ing cuts, so that we can try to un­der­stand what ap­pear to be their many flaws and at­tempt to rec­on­cile their mul­ti­ple in­con­sis­ten­cies? Why does he in­stead of­fer up only slo­gans, sound­bites, gen­er­al­i­ties and ad hominem at­tacks on dis­senters to­gether with de­mands that his pro­pos­als be en­acted im­me­di­ately? Aren’t we once again be­ing asked to “pass the bill so (we) can find out what’s in it”? Barry C. Steel Phoenix, Mary­land

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.