An editorial in yesterday's St. Petersburg Times printed a scathing rebuke of the cuts, and pointed out that although it's necessary "to bring the deficit under control, it's hard to make a case for asking poor people to pay more when rich people are paying less." Just how much less are the rich paying?
An Urban Institute/Brookings Center report on the 2001 tax cuts shows that people with annual incomes of more than $1-million have received an annual average break of $103,000. Further, two new tax breaks scheduled to take effect in January will allow them to pocket $19,200 more each year.
Gee, I doubt families making $1 million will have to worry about heating their homes or feeding their children without those tax cuts, but apparently Bush and Congress see it differently. Forget about a refresher course in ethics, how about a course in doing what is morally right? Or, as the editorial puts it:
As to the values implied by such priorities, the president might want to listen to some voices in his faith-based community. A collection of church leaders, including the Rev. Frank Griswold, presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church USA, recently wrote:
"Some contend that these (tax) cuts will stimulate the economy and improve life for all Americans, but we believe that stocking the rich man's larder is a peculiar strategy for getting Lazarus more food. Not only does this policy rest on dubious economic assumptions, but it asks the poor to pay the cost for a prosperity in which they may never share."
No comments:
Post a Comment