Tax Cuts Also Mean Cuts To Vital Services

To The Reader’s Forum:

When anyone says “tax cuts” they must at the same time say “service cuts.” Taxes provide for schools, teachers, police, fire fighters, national museums, national parks, medical insurance for retirees and the disabled and our military. So to cut taxes is to cut services we provide to make the lives of neighbors better. What good is it to give one family a tax cut of a thousand dollars but take away health insurance away from other families?

The proposed tax cut bill in Congress would give 62 percent of the amount of tax cuts to the 1 percent — the richest people; it would cut the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 20 percent, so we would lose $1.3 trillion in tax revenue, which is almost equal to the cut in services provided by Medicare (a $473 billion cut) and Medicaid ($1 trillion cut). Has our representative Tom Reed bragged about those cuts when he mentions that middle class people get a tax cut? Why doesn’t he brag about the cut in services? Does he brag that the tax cuts for individuals and families will expire after the year 2025, but the tax cuts for corporations will not expire? Does Tom Reed boast that the estate tax will let the rich inherit more money tax-free by taxing estates worth over $11 million per person (presently it is $5.5 per person) or $22 million per couple (presently it is $11 per couple)? Does he boast that the tax bill will repeal the federal deduction for state and local taxes (and we New Yorkers complain about how high our state taxes are)? Does Reed brag that the tax bill will no long require individuals to have health insurance if they can afford it, which will cause 13 million more people to be without health insurance, and cause a 10 percent increase in health insurance premiums (as said by the Congressional Budget Office)?

The rich and corporations do not need tax cuts because we don’t need a cut in services.

Timothy Hoyer