Letters to the editor

Mar. 21, 2013 @ 07:05 PM

Fund housing rather than military bases

The March 21 letter by G.E. Woodlief states that, “due to the nature of warfare today, we could close at least a couple of large military bases in the country without jeopardizing our national security.” 

I would agree, and add that we could also close just about all, if not all, of the approximately 1,000 military bases our taxes maintain outside our country. Why are they there, if we are not trying to control other countries, i.e., function as an empire? What other country has even one military base on U.S. soil? 

An article dated March 13 discussed the sequester's effects on the Durham Housing Authority, which must now take Section 8 rental vouchers out of circulation after former clients turn them in, denying housing assistance to about 187 Durham families, reducing by 7 percent the number of vouchers in circulation and refusing them to people on its waiting list. The sequester is expected to cost DHA about $3.5 million.

So we have money for 1,000 military bases in other lands, but we don't have money to help our neighbors keep roofs over their heads. Does this make sense? Sen. Hagel, Sen. Burr, Congress members Price and Butterfield, are you doing all you can to change this bizarre distribution of our tax dollars? 

We are still the wealthiest country in the world. Why can't we curb our insanely voracious “defense” budget, and instead house, feed, and provide health care – including mental health care – for everyone who lives here?

 

Joan F. Walsh

Durham

 

Cut tenure throughout state government

Sen. Phil Berger (R-Greensboro) has introduced a bill in the General Assembly that would eliminate tenure for teachers.

I have no problem with eliminating tenure for teachers, but he didn't go far enough.

I think that ''tenure'' should be eliminated for ALL government employees. I believe that all government employees should be limited to 10 years at any government agency, or program. Also there should be term limits for all elected officials.

 

Chuck Mann

Greensboro

 

Tax cut surest way to see savings

Rep. Paul Leubke (D-Durham) points out that the sales tax expansion is a tax cut, benefiting disproportionally the wealthiest. I urge him to suggest his own proportional tax cut.

North Carolina - like our nation - is a wealth-making machine - built, secured, and energized by all of us workers, volunteers, neighbors and families. 

We deliver a secure, vibrant, and stable U.S.A., where fortunes can be made and preserved. Those benefiting most expect higher taxes on their income beyond what nearly everyone else earns. The rest of us expect just a real chance to get ahead and improve our lives.

Every dime of taxes on the first dollars we earn keeps us from getting beyond just scraping by, to a time when there is a little extra to save.

That's why a tax cut, wholly in the bottom bracket, is the surest way for us to save for home, health, education, and retirement. It's a no-cost-to-business pay raise for everyone - rich, poor and those in between.

Everyone's a job creator. Tax cuts should go first to see that all taxpayers 1) keep more of the first dollars they earn, 2) are free of taxes on what it takes just to get by and 3) pay the lowest possible tax on the next dollars they earn so there's a real chance to get ahead.

Luebke should insist that the fiscal effect of every proposal to reduce or shift taxes should be measured against this one.

 

Douglas Johnston

Raleigh