FeaturesReleases to the MediaElection Information,

ReferendumsMeet the Candidates,

Opinions Letters of EndorsementDistrict Maps

Features

Releases to the Media

Previous articles

Election Information

Referendums

Meet the Candidates

Opinions

Governor of Cook County?     Send a link to a friend

To the editor:

I grew up thinking that Springfield, being centrally located in the state of Illinois, was the capital. Now all of a sudden, we have a governor who wants to place some state offices in Chicago. Is this right or fair, and especially to people some 360 miles [away] at the most southern part of the state.

Also, is he not the first governor who refused to live in Springfield where he belongs? Is his "family" so much better that they cannot live in Springfield? A mansion is in Springfield for him; is it not good enough? How much tax money is being wasted on his constant traveling from Chicago to Springfield? Perhaps Cook County should become a state of their own, and let the rest of Illinois be a state.

This is ridiculous. The Senate and House should do something about this, or perhaps the voters of Illinois can handle it at the next election. This, however, would be an action too late. It appears that Chicago and Cook County have a governor, not the state of Illinois.

J.M. Presswood

Lincoln

(posted 2-16-04)

BOTANICA
Florist & Delivery

100 E. Cook St., Mt Pulaski

(217) 792-3868

click here to order flowers
Tuesday - Friday 9am -4pm, Sat  9am - 12
closed Sunday & Monday

 

Lincolndailynews.com

is the place to advertise


Call (217) 732-7443
or e-mail

ads@lincolndailynews.com 

 

 

Who pays the most taxes?     Send a link to a friend

This is an election year. We will be hearing all the good things the candidates will do "for the people" if they are elected. We must remember it is "the people" who will be paying the bill, while the politicians take the credit. The promises may not be in the best interest of the nation, but they have an appeal to groups of Americans that produce blocks of votes.

The rich are receiving some hard hits from the politicians who preach redistribution of the wealth. The definition of "the rich" fluctuates greatly, depending on the politician's audience. This past summer I ran across the following statistics, on the Internet, that were credited to the nonpartisan Tax Foundation.

The top 1 percent of taxpayers account for 37.5 percent of the income tax collected in America, while they account for only 21 percent of total income.

The bottom 50 percent of taxpayers account for only 4 percent of income tax collected while they account for 14 percent of the total income.

From which group do you think job creation will come from? Does it make sense to continue to increase taxes on the top 1 percent each year and yet expect these same people to reward us with new or expanded business or industry?

Believers in big government continue to be successful in expanding government, until today the federal expenditures have reached $2.2 trillion and growing.

In 1900 a person would have had to work only 20 days to pay all of their taxes; in 1950 it had increased to 88 days; in 1980 it was up to 109 days; and by 2000 it was up to 120 days, according to the Tax Foundation.

During the past three years Tax Freedom Day has been rolled back to 109 days, due largely to the 10-year Bush administration tax cuts passed in 2001 and accelerated in March 2002.

 

[to top of second column in this article]

While tax-and-spend proponents tag the 2001 tax cuts as serving only the rich, it appears they are having the desired effect on the national economy.

Despite the tax cut critics, the fact is that whenever tax rates have been cut, economic growth has bounced back and the unemployment rate has declined. When President Kennedy's proposed tax cuts were enacted in the early 1960s, the lackluster economy shifted into high gear, and by the end of the decade increased tax revenues led to a balanced budget. When President Reagan cut tax rates in the midst of the 1981-82 recession, the economy recovered so strongly that tax revenues rose by nearly $400 billion over his presidency. When congressional leaders talked President Clinton into signing a capital-gains tax cut and other tax incentives, the stock market shot up to record highs, and the economy took off and federal revenues skyrocketed, yielding budget surpluses. Since the Bush tax cuts were accelerated in March 2002, all economic indicators are up, stock markets have bounced back, jobless claims have fallen, housing sales are setting records, retail sales are climbing, and consumer confidence is rising again.

I agree with those who believe the government bureaucrats do not need more money -- they just need to spend more frugally what we give them -- and that socialism is not the direction they should be taking this country with their redistribution-of-wealth tactics through the tax code.

Citizens for Justice, Inc.
Lester C. Van Bibber III
President
Lincoln

(posted 2-16-04)

 

Letters of Endorsement

The Lincoln Daily News publishes letters to the editor as they are received.
 The letters are not edited in content and do not necessarily reflect 
the views of Lincoln Daily News.

Lincoln Daily News requests that writers responding to controversial issues address the issue and refrain from personal attacks. Thank you!

District Maps

Click on images to see larger maps

County board:

[to top of second column of maps]

State representatives:

Back to top


 

News | Sports | Business | Rural Review | Teaching & Learning | Home and Family | Tourism | Obituaries

Community | Perspectives | Law & Courts | Leisure Time | Spiritual Life | Health & Fitness | Teen Scene
Calendar | Letters to the Editor