One of many traits I appreciate in old friend Murray is her clarity
Dear editor and citizens of the northern Crescent City (because you all already identify with the other “Crescent City” in turmoil):
I have known Kathryn Murray for more decades than either of us would volunteer to identify. Or count. But we would both answer truly if pressed for decades or dates.
Her city of choice (which was Eureka’s loss) was to move to your coastal city. The decision was made to accommodate her family, her commitment, her dedication to making everywhere around her a better place.
One of the many traits I appreciate in Kathryn’s modus operandi is her clarity. As in clear.
We will continue, as a company, to raise money for your city. But if there is a true argument against any City Council person, please let us know.
John and Teresa Porter
Benbow Hotel & Resort
More taxes to fund entitlements is not a solution to budget woes
Having read the Aug. 5 Coastal Voices pieces on the budget/deficit/debt ceiling issue, as well as the follow-up letters, I am left with the usual question: Do the writers have any solutions that will actually work?
Sybil Saxelby (“Deficit can be traced to Pres. Bush”) appears to be taking the side of a big government which doles out ever-larger entitlements to broader and broader segments of society in the hope that they will spend the money and stimulate the economy. While that appears to be a reasonable line of thought, it has been shown time after time to have one major and insurmountable obstacle. That is, that all the recipients of the dole have to be satisfied with what they receive.
Roger Gitlin (“Battle over spending has just begun”), on the other hand, appears to favor smaller government, with less regulation, and lower taxes. His solution has several, but not insurmountable, problems as well. In his system there are winners and losers. In such a system there is no government intervention and we are dependent on the system’s winners to help the losers, which doesn’t always happen. His system also depends on self-regulation where the government must stay out of the way for it to work properly. It is something that politicians loathe to do.
Of the two systems, only Mr Gitlin’s has any hope of working for any length of time. Recent events, our own country included, have shown that people receiving entitlements are never uniformly satisfied with what they receive from a large government. Even governments such as the United States simply do not have the ability to cover all the costs.
Doubling the average tax rate on those that currently pay taxes in this country will not even cover this year’s deficit. It is simply not possible for everyone in this country to have everything they want and to be rich. In this light it should be clear that Ms. Saxelby’s solution is a non-starter and has the potential to do great harm to this country. I suppose the real question is whether Ms. Saxelby, the current administration, and Congress, both Republicans and Democrats, have the political will to back away from an economic system that has no possibility of long-term success.