Spending government money does not create jobs Dear Editor,
Rep. Dunshee claims that lowering someone’s taxes that doesn’t have a job will not give that person a job, then maybe Mr. Dunshee needs to get a lesson in the American economy. The job bill he put forth will create short-term construction jobs by spending our tax money. I say you spend our tax money, create a temp-job, and take money from a business that could use the money to create a permanent job. Spending government money doesn’t create jobs, investing in our small businesses creates not only jobs but a robust economy. Rep. Dunshee’s plan just furthers our “nanny state” mentality. We want to see our neighbors do well and we want to do well, but we cannot stop everyone from failing. While it is tough to lose a job, we are responsible for ourselves and cannot look to taxpayers to bail us out. Todd Welch Everett Fourth graders learn lessons on money and giving Dear Editor,
Last month, Mrs. Majors’ fourth grade class at Highland Elementary learned a great lesson about how they could make money work for them to help others. They had received a donation from the children’s museum for $10 with instructions that they could spend, save or make more money with it. So, they had a competition with other fourth grade classes to see who could turn their $10 into the most amount of money. After a vote, they decided that all the profits would go to help those in need in Haiti. They got busy selling Valentine pencils during each lunch that would be delivered with a personal Valentine message to students and staff on Valentine’s Day. That $10 turned into $109 to make a difference for those in desperate need in Haiti. Thank you Mrs. Majors and your students for making a great choice and a positive impact.
Monika Kristofferson Lake Stevens National health care will cost taxpayers billions Dear Editor,
We still have time to stop one of the most outrageous scams ever pulled on a country by their own government. Am I talking about another Iraq or Afghanistan? No, I am writing about our health care solution currently being forced on us. No matter what side of this you are on, you really need to study where this exact solution was tried before, not over in Europe or even Canada, but here in one of our own states. Let me paraphrase from a local report. Massachusetts has deployed the same scam years ago. The result? It’s exploding the budget, already $47 million over budget for 2010. This fiasco will cost taxpayers more than $900 million next year alone. It’s costing a fortune, the average premiums are the highest in the nation and rising. They also spend 27 percent more on health care services, per capita, than the national average. Those costs, contrary to the promises, have been going up faster than nearly everywhere else. It’s also distorting the marketplace, the governor is talking about imposing price controls. He’s suggested going to a system where doctors get a fixed amount of money per patient—and then that’s it. Which means it would become in your doctor’s financial interest never to see you again. All this damage to the taxpayers, the insured and the responsible business owners . . . and for what? The percentage of uninsured Bay State residents has gone from around six percent to around three percent. And almost 50 percent of you want this for the rest of the country? Why doesn’t our President mention Massachusetts in any of his pitches, you should ask him. I already know why.