Tie corporate tax rates to the state of the economy

Now that Donald Trump and Congress have failed at replace/repeal of the Affordable Care Act, they intend to move on to tax reform. The whole “repeal and replace” fiasco seemed to be a thinly veiled way for funding tax cuts for the wealthy and rollbacks for corporate taxes. This is intended to stimulate the economy.

Theoretically, by lowering business taxes and the taxes of the people who own these businesses, more people could be employed and thus taxed to build the economy and lower deficits through growth. This has been done before successfully. But what I have seen over decades is that when recession hits (and we know the American economy is cyclical), the jobs disappear but the tax cuts to the businesses remain.

So, if we are inevitably headed down a road of corporate tax cuts, why not tie them to the overall performance of the economy? Not only does that provide some revenue protection for the government so that deficits don’t artificially rise because taxpayers are laid off, but this gives businesses some “skin in the game” incentives to maintain productivity, spur market growth, maintain levels of employment and find other ways to succeed, or their taxes will go up.

In this way, when things go bad, as they will always do in a down cycle, everyone bears the load. RICH VOLLER Richland

We welcome your opinion

Like the half-billion-dollar tunnel that the Port Authority operates, the quarter-billiondollar Downtown-to-Oakland bus rapid transit connector is a boondoggle, a project to benefit contractors, developers, applepolishing politicians and travel writers rather than the public that pays for it.

The tunnel from Downtown to the North Side was a project in search of a need as shown by the fact that everyone recognizes that riders won’t pay a dime to ride when they can walk to the North Side for free. Similarly, BRT is a project addressing an imaginary need.

Currently, transit riders using the 71s, 61s, 67s and 69s ride nonstop through Oakland and Downtown and back, enjoying a relatively short ride between the two destinations. With BRT, these same riders must exit their buses at the Oakland station to access another vehicle, an inconvenience, especially in inclement weather and for the elderly and the disabled. Obviously, any saving of time from the new system is challenged by this transfer as well.

Have the planners taken leave of their senses? PHIL GALLAGHER

Oakland

I’m a retired care manager for seniors, so my first reaction after reading the March 16 letter “Caring at Home” by Sandra S. Kaplan was how fortunate she was to have the financial resources to care for her loved one at home. She was correct in stating that there are agencies that will provide competent care assistance; however, she did not mention the exorbitant cost of this type of care.

Most of the families I met did not have the financial means to pursue this option, even though this would have been their preference. There are programs that assist folks in obtaining care at home, but unfortunately there are also restrictions, constraints and “red tape.”

This being said, I would still suggest that people contact their local Area Agency on Aging if they are in need of guidance. There are compassionate care managers who can provide resources and support as one navigates though this challenging process. CATHY GAZZO

Wilkinsburg