In re: Bob Jacobs' statement of July 23 that any federal budget surplus should be used to "fix" Social Security, Medicare and the military before even considering the GOP-proposed tax cut, I would suggest that he and others of like opinion spend at least as much time familiarizing themselves with the details of the GOP budget proposal as spent memorizing the emotionally-charged buzzwords and catch-phrases currently being circulated by the loyal opposition.
What Jacobs ignores is that the Republican plan pays down the national debt more than any competing proposal, and firmly establishes iron-clad protection for both SSI and Medicare, but only for those who truly need it, not a one-size-fits-all giveaway to seniors like Warren Buffet and Ross Perot. If partially privatizing a taxpayer-funded subsidy allows several million Americans to actually profit from their wise choices, why should he begrudge them this option?
A couple of things need be noted here to put Jacobs' remarks in their proper light: A tax cut is for tax payers; and, the more taxes you pay, the bigger your tax cut. Sounds fair, doesn't it? According to published government reports, the top 5% of US taxpayers currently pay over 50% of all income tax. That means the rest of us, that's 95%, pay the remainder. Now, which group do you think is going to get the bigger break, and is that justification for bitter class envy and stingy resentment?
Lastly, in his parting shot against the inner workings of the greatest democracy in the history of civilization, Jacobs excoriates government lobbyists as ominous representatives of commercial interests... oblivious to the fact that, in defending his position, he cites a newsletter by the AARP, the single most influential advocate for the healthcare and insurance industries, neither of which are hardly not-for-profit ventures. It would seem, according to Mr. Jacobs' logic, that what's good for the goose, is a GOP boondoggle for us ganders.