I am responding to the editorial of Oct. 3, “Payroll tax respite teetering on edge of ‘fiscal cliff’.”

I am not a member of the 1 percent, yet, somehow, I benefit from the “Bush tax rate cuts on high wage earners.” How can that be?

In truth, these tax cuts lowered all marginal rates, the lowest bracket the most. In addition, they took millions of low wage-earners off the rolls altogether. The child tax credit was increased from $500 to $1,000. All provided relief to the middle class.

The “payroll tax holiday” does help the middle class, but it also applies to the rich. Why aren’t you also characterizing it as “a tax break for the wealthy”?

And why aren’t you addressing the long-term consequences for the Social Security system? It is, after all, taking money from a system that is already on shaky financial ground. You state that it’s too bad that no one is willing to “sacrifice the health of the rest of the economy to make it permanent.” So you are willing to sacrifice the economy?

I’ve come around to supporting the “fair tax.” It’s based on consumption; the more one spends, the more tax one pays.

Dan Richardson


Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or to participate in the conversation. Here’s why.

Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.