The American Spectator

Reader Mail

Don't Mess With Taxes

4.18.05 @ 12:01AM

BLOWING SMOKE
Re: David Holman's No Catholics Need Apply:

Boy, David Holman sure missed the boat in his impassioned defense of a Special Counsel who can find no government waste and thinks that most reports of federal malfeasance are more chaff than wheat. Scott Bloch is in a position to shake up bloated bureaucracies and expose wrong-headed programs but instead is having trouble getting out of the blocks.

The charge of anti-Catholicism is a defensive smoke screen for the head of the office charged with policing against nepotism and favoritism using taxpayer dollars to employ his friends and associates without ever once making a competitive merit-based hire.

The reason we have a civil service is to provide some check against the return to a spoils system. Whatever one thinks about the value of civil service, while it is here, its rule should be enforced even-handedly and with integrity. Too bad, that it ain't happening.
-- Jeff Ruch
Executive Director
Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER)
Washington, D.C.

David Holman replies:
Mr. Ruch appears to concede the substantiated anti-Catholicism charge in dismissing it and falling back on hiring issues. Since Bloch's hires have been quite legal, Ruch lobs only unsubstantiated suspicion. Bloch's critics truly object to his using the prerogatives of his office and not bowing to the bureaucratic establishment. If Ruch were fighting for government efficiency, he similarly would have campaigned against Bloch's predecessor Elaine Kaplan when her office allowed hundreds of cases to accumulate.

THE SELF TAX
Re: Shawn Macomber's Mr. Caesar Goes to Washington:

While the idea of a national sales tax replacing the income tax has appeal, is it financially feasible. If you remove spending for necessities, as Mr. Macomber does, how much money would such a tax generate, assuming a reasonable level of taxation (say, 6 or 7%)?
-- Scott Pandich

Are you serious??

Example: I'm a retiree and live in NYC. I want to buy a new car for $30,000. The Fair tax to the Feds is 20%, so now my new car costs $36,000, my city tax is 8% on the $30,000 so my car now costs $38,400. If the State tax is 3% my cost is $39,100 or at least a 30% increase in the cost of my car. During the same year my roof needs to be replaced at a cost of $15,000 w/ accompanying federal sales tax of $3,000 plus a city sales tax of $1,200 and a State sales tax of 3% or $450 or $4650 total tax. My $15,000 roof is now $19,650. You get my point. With these 2 purchases alone I have been taxed $13,750 and that does not include any major appliance I might have to purchase during the year.

So far my Fair Tax bill is $9,000... my total tax bill for 2004 w/deductions is under $3,000. A no deductions tax bill in a plan like Fair Tax would not even approach the $9,000++ as I've outlined.

If reform is indeed a political and fiscal imperative, by all means, let's give a flat tax a fair chance.
-- Clint Alphen

The obvious concern for politicians, and in particular the Demoncrats, is that they will not be able to count on a consistently increasing source of funds -- what would happen if people decided to save more and spend less -- government taxes would decrease. That is exactly what is needed to begin to turn this country around. Under the current income tax scheme (and it is a scheme developed to steal the hard-earned money of our citizen's by an indirect method so that politicians can transfer it to groups whose votes they expect to buy), they do nothing except take the money, and audit the poor souls who are their victims to intimidate them into allowing government to steal more of what they earn.
-- Patrick R. Spooner
Windham, New Hampshire

Shawn Macomber does an excellent job today of summarizing the compelling arguments for a national sales tax. However, he, like other advocates, ignores a big problem for many of us in joining his support.

Many over age 45-50 have money in banks or investments, which we are saving for retirement, acknowledging that Social Security will be bankrupt, and in any case, not be enough to support a retirement.

All this saved money is the pathetically little amount left from our paychecks AFTER we paid income taxes. If a few years we will be spending these ALREADY-TAXED savings.

Letter to the Editor

topics:
Taxes, Education, Health Care, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Television, Business, Social Security, Catholicism, Environment, Law, Iran, NATO, Oil, Medicare