To the editor:
Any credibility the letter writer of Dec. 26 might have had was lost with his "spiteful Republicans still having to deal with a black President in the White House" statement.
"Soaring debt" and uncontrollable spending is absolutely our country's No. 1 problem. Euphemisms such as "investments" are correctly translated as "spending money that the government hasn't got." The government has no money of its own and never has - period. The gold in Ft. Knox is all committed.
The writer's incongruence is re-established in the last paragraph which states that larger tax revenues resulted when some of the dollars spent on the interstate highway system resulted in more revenues. This implies that more was sent back than was "invested." Maybe I missed something? Think about it.
I'm no history whiz but there was something intuitively disturbing about the content of this letter. The writer neglects to mention that President Eisenhower found the right combination of low taxes and balanced budgets that allowed the economy to prosper. In fact, Eisenhower's main economic goal was balancing the federal budget.
While Eisenhower did try to strengthen the U.S. economy, the normally thrifty populace was introduced to the credit card in the 1950s. Numerous suburbs sprang up outside major cities with swimming pools, thus abandoning depressed urban and rural neighborhoods. Today, we still have mortgages "under water."
The Daily Mining Gazette welcomes letters to the editor from readers.
Letters should be signed and include name, address and telephone number. Names will not be withheld and letters should be no longer than 400 words. No personal attacks. Writers are limited to one letter per month. The Gazette reserves the right to edit letters for length, as well as for spelling and punctuation.
Mail letters to: Letters to the Editor, The Daily Mining Gazette, P.O. Box 368, Houghton, MI 49931. Letters may also be e-mailed to email@example.com or submitted on the Gazette's Web site, mininggazette.com, by clicking on "Submit News."
No, we can't go back and resurrect prosperity. Maybe ECON 101 should be explored again to expose the something-for-nothing syndrome that plagues our country. (Keynesian economics?) The government's false and disingenuous sense of helping the poor is unfortunately preventing them from ever succeeding financially.