Illegal Immigration Bill

I’m confused about the Senate’s version of the (illegal) Immigration Bill, also known as the “let’s reward the 12 million illegals who have violated our laws by illegally entering our country” Bill. Democrats, real and closeted, tell us of the great benefits of having these folks here to do the work “that Americans won’t do.” I understand that to mean mostly low paying jobs with no benefits. These people who pay little or no income taxes, end up using more tax dollars in food stamps, Medicaid, and other social programs. Most of them send their earnings back to their native countries. How does this help our country?

It helps the dishonest, corrupt politicians who pushed for this, and who see these people as future constituents. Since the Democrats can’t get legislation passed to let felons vote, these mostly uneducated laborers who speak little or no English, are the next best thing. These will be the next mindless Lemming vote for the Dems. This is simply another transparent ploy to increase the size of government even further. We’ll have millions of uneducated, low paid, workers straining our welfare system. Who do you think will be paying the bills?

Tony Moschetti
High Point, NC

May 26, 2006

Counterpoint

Andrew Brod’s attack on tax cuts, at least Bush’s tax cuts, employs the favorite tool of those who wish to distort any issue, including tax cuts or oil company profits. Brod tells us that most of the money is “given” (another favorite misused term of the distorters, who think that us being able to keep more of our own money is government “giving” us something.) to the very wealthy, while of course omitting the pertinent fact that the wealthy also pay most of the taxes. Being a brilliant college professor, surely he knows that the largest percentage decrease went to those in the 15% bracket, which dropped to 10%, a 33% decrease in taxes for lower waged workers. The top bracket was dropped from 39% to 36%, a 6% decrease. Brod feels the need to explain to those of us not as brilliant as he, that someone making a million dollars would keep more of his money than someone making $40,000, despite having a significantly smaller decrease in their tax rate. To those in the lowest bracket a 33% cut is rather significant, though I doubt Brod actually discusses economic policy with anyone in that bracket. This tactic is also favorite of the oil company demagogues, who tell of the billions in profit that Exxon-Mobil earns, while omitting the fact their NINE percent profit is about half the eighteen percents banks earn, and almost exactly the same as the “low profit” food and beverage industry earns.

Brod also says that investment income, particularly dividend income (people like Brod hate investment income earners), benefits only the wealthy. He stated that those of us regular folks earn only about ten dollars a year in such income. That means the $550 capital gain, and dividend payment I received a few weeks ago from one of my funds must have been a mistake! His “fair and balanced” lecture included his take on the AMT, instituted in 1969, and unchanged since. He then criticizes Bush for not having repealed or changed the AMT. The theme remains constant. The problems caused by the AMT are Bush’s fault. Though Brod was but a tyke at the time, I’ll bet he robustly applauded JFK’s famous tax cutting speech, when Kennedy said it was necessary to cut tax rates to increase revenues to the Treasury. Of course Kennedy didn’t start an unpopular war…. oops! Almost forgot that one.

Tony Moschetti
High Point, NC

May 2, 2006