Opinion | What to Do About the Growing National Debt?


To the Editor:

Re “America Is Dwelling on Borrowed Cash” (editorial, July 9):

Republicans gained’t increase taxes; Democrats gained’t reduce spending. Politically, each events must compromise.

However income as a share of gross nationwide earnings is effectively beneath the place it was earlier than the Reagan years, and the distribution of earnings is extra skewed towards the upper-income brackets than it was earlier than World Conflict I.

We don’t want compromise; we want some new blood and considering.

Daniel Mahoney
Andover, Mass.
The author is a retired financial advisor.

To the Editor:

I’m in full settlement along with your editorial concerning the pressing want to scale back the nationwide debt. A discount is essential for our nation’s long-term monetary stability and future generations’ well-being.

Nevertheless, I respectfully disagree along with your implication that lowering taxes solely results in diminished authorities revenues. Over time we have now witnessed situations the place tax reductions have really stimulated financial development, leading to elevated authorities revenues. By permitting people and companies to maintain extra of their hard-earned cash, tax cuts can incentivize funding, job creation and total financial exercise.

Whereas accountable fiscal administration is important, it is very important acknowledge the potential optimistic influence of well-designed tax reductions. Balancing the discount of the nationwide debt with strategic tax insurance policies can foster financial development and in the end contribute to a more healthy monetary future for our nation.

Dave Berry
Dayton, Ohio
The author is a retired licensed public accountant.

To the Editor:

Advising that “Republicans should settle for the need of accumulating what the federal government is owed and of imposing taxes on the rich” defies political actuality. Any G.O.P. Home member who takes this path will face a main problem and possible defeat, guaranteeing no answer.

The one method to take care of this downside is to elect a Democratic Home majority in 2024 after which forge a compromise with Senate Republicans who’re nonetheless in a position and prepared to take part in governance. Urging elected officers to vote for their very own demise just isn’t a path ahead.

Eric R. Carey
Arlington, Va.

To the Editor:

Re “What Makes Barbie Barbie” (Sunday Types, July 16):

Again within the ’60s, Barbie was not only a doll however an vital a part of my childhood. We didn’t have some huge cash in these days, and a $3 Barbie was reasonably priced. My sister and I might spend Saturday afternoons with our Barbies and our creativeness.

We dressed our Barbies in stunning garments and gave them particular voices so they might discuss to one another. We gave them make-believe careers, ambitions and adventures. By way of this play, my sister and I bonded in a really particular approach. And I can always remember the unimaginable pleasure I felt when my father got here dwelling with the Barbie Dreamhouse.

My Barbie was by no means uncared for on the backside of a toy chest.

Judith Eisenberg Pollak
New York

To the Editor:

Re “Officers Finish Preferences for Alumni at Wesleyan” (information article, July 20):

As a 1970 graduate of Wesleyan with the identify John P. Wesley, I’m inspired by the college’s choice to put off contemplating legacy as a consider figuring out admission.

I used to be the primary member of my household to attend the college, and I’ve no proof of genealogical connection to the founding father of Methodism, John Wesley, for whom the varsity was named. The identify affiliation in all probability didn’t harm my admission probabilities, although.

My son, John M.P. Wesley ’06, had each the identify connection and the legacy standing via his father. We’re each grateful for no matter fates or components opened the door to attending Wesleyan, a useful springboard to purposeful lives and expanded views.

Nonetheless, we agree it’s previous time to take legacy standing out of the admissions equation. For its position in fashioning a various, inclusive, achieved and educationally dedicated scholar physique, a powerful case might be made for affirmative motion as acknowledged by a string of Supreme Courtroom choices, earlier than its latest excessive rejection of precedent.

Absolutely the goal of affirmative motion stands on a lot firmer equitable footing than the preservation of the elite’s legacy connections. We’re happy with our alma mater for its principled choice, and assured that it’ll retain its status of offering an distinctive studying expertise and a group of change-makers for college kids of many backgrounds, monetary means and guarantees of accomplishment.

John P. Wesley
Brattleboro, Vt.

To the Editor:

Re “The Curse Stalking Girls’s Soccer” (Sports activities, July 19):

Has anybody thought-about that one of many causes of the A.C.L. harm epidemic in girls’s soccer is the referees’ tolerance of violent and dangerous play?

As a fan of ladies’ soccer, I’ve witnessed three situations of gamers being forcefully side-checked and ending up crumpled on the grass (or turf) with a torn A.C.L.

The foundations must be re-evaluated. Hip-checking and different forceful maneuvers must be analyzed as potential threat components for heartbreaking, probably career-ending knee accidents.

Susan Doherty
Woodside, Calif.

To the Editor:

Re “On the Entrance Line of a Conflict Over Bullfighting Traditions” (Spain Dispatch, July 13):

After I learn the headline, I assumed it was going to be a narrative about ending the merciless “custom” of animal torture as spectator sport. As an alternative, the main target was on whether or not it was demeaning for entertainers with dwarfism to carry out at bullfights.

Bullfighting just isn’t a sport or an “artwork.” It isn’t a “combat”; it’s a ritualized slaughter during which individuals appear to be entertained by watching an harmless animal being injured and bloodied on the way in which to being stabbed to loss of life.

The argument over whether or not comedy acts by people with dwarfism is degrading to these with disabilities is incongruous when the issue is a lot deeper.

The query is: Why do individuals purchase tickets to see savagery and brutality inflicted upon helpless victims?

Carol Kraines
Deerfield, Ailing.

To the Editor:

Congratulations to Jason Horowitz for this effective article. I’ve seen “The Popeye Bullfighter and His Dwarf Sailors” carry out on a number of events and have marveled at their ability and bravado. The audiences have at all times handled them with respect and dignity — extra so, the truth is, than spectators on this nation typically deal with our skilled athletes.

Congratulations additionally to the native officers who discovered a approach across the nationwide ban in order that the Popeyes might carry out. These women and men could also be small in stature however their hearts are large and their braveness is immense. They’re true artists and deserve the proper to point out the general public their artistry.

Morgan Smith
Santa Fe, N.M.