Gail Gitcho, Boston
The writer is communications director of the Romney presidential campaign.
●
I found outrageous the Aug. 8 editorial making an analogy between suggesting that Mitt Romney had paid no taxes and Joe McCarthy’s accusing people of communism. It is obvious that Mr. Romney has only to produce his tax returns to turn the table on Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid and clear himself of the accusation.
By contrast, McCarthy’s subjects had no easy defense, and many of them suffered job or other serious losses as a direct result of the accusations.
Bob Simon, Reston
●
I question the logic of Dana Milbank’s Aug. 8 op-ed column, “Romney’s game of Tiny Tower.”
On the assumption that Mitt Romney broke no laws in preparing his tax returns, it is neither unethical nor unfair for any taxpayer to try to minimize his or her tax liability.
In fact, tax avoidance (in contrast to tax evasion) is as American as apple pie. If the ethical standard is whether a taxpayer pays the maximum amount of income taxes he or she could conceivably owe, I doubt that any taxpayer would pass this test.
Under Mr. Milbank’s reasoning, it would be unethical and unfair for a taxpayer to reduce his or her taxable income by claiming a mortgage deduction, contributing to a 401(k) plan or even making a charitable contribution, since doing so, in Mr. Milbank’s words, “exploit[s]” the system “at the expense of less wealthy taxpayers” who cannot avail themselves of the same benefits. That Mr. Romney is able to take advantage of tax avoidance strategies of which most of us can only dream is a matter of degree, not a question of ethics or fairness.
Bennett L. Ross, Cabin John
Perhaps if articles such as “Is silver spoon just a red herring?” [Style, Aug. 6] explained how the system is rigged, Americans wouldn’t be so accepting of the ever-widening gap between the uber-rich and the rest of us. According to Jacob S. Hacker and Paul Pierson, the authors of “Winner-Take-All Politics,” the expanding chasm hasn’t happened because the upper-upper class deserves its riches, it’s the result of federal tax policies.
Over the past three decades the top 1 percent — the 99.1-to-100 percentile — has pulled away from everyone else. Its average inflation-adjusted, after-tax income — including dividends, capital gains and other benefits — more than tripled from $337,100 in 1979 to more than $1.2 million in 2006 — up a whopping 256 percent. The upper 1 percent now makes five times more than those in the 95 to 99 percentile; the figure used to be only twice as great.
Inequality is now worse in the United States than in other affluent, industrialized nations, even though the gap here in skills, as measured by years of schooling, is smaller. At the same time, social mobility here has stagnated.
Who makes government tax policy? Nearly half the members of Congress are millionaires, and they all rely on millionaires for contributions. It is clear whom they represent.
Elliott Negin, Washington
●
Did Eugene Robinson write his Aug. 7 column, “The war over tax returns,” with tongue in cheek? We all realize that the left merely wants to see Mitt Romney’s tax returns so it can pick them apart for political reasons.
Mr. Robinson is correct in one comment, that “common sense” will do. And common sense tells us full well why the left wants to see Mr. Romney’s taxes: anything to divert attention away from President Obama’s failed policies.
Herman Gritz, Silver Spring
Loading...
Comments