9-9-9 plan further burdens the poor

In response to “An unlikely Cain-didate” (Oct. 11 issue):

(Herman) Cain’s 9-9-9 plan is a horrible idea. First off, there is little to no evidence it will help with the budget problems. There is a debate raging about this, but some economists think it will actually make the budget deficits and debt even greater. This means more cuts for the poor and the service they desperately need (Government statistics released last month showed that 3 million people were saved by government programs from living below the poverty level). A flat tax is regressive, hurting the poor and benefiting the rich. This is even more evident in the fact that he wants to get rid of capital gains taxes, yet wants to leave one exemption, for charitable donations, which are made predominately by those that can afford to give, the wealthy (though, I will admit a lot of this money goes to private services that help the poor, but not all of it). I don’t think the exemption should be gotten rid of, but it does seem odd to me that it is the only one mentioned that would be kept. Also, a 9 percent national sales tax is going to hurt the poor too, and slow down consumption (i.e. — consumer spending, which makes up 70 percent of the economy). You can give all the tax breaks you want to the rich and the corporations, but as long as the poor and middle class are being squeezed (and screwed over), there will be little demand for goods and the economy will not recover. Trickle down economics just simply doesn’t work. As one commenter to an article on CNN.com said about the plan, the 9-9-9 plan must be one to make 99.9 percent of the population poor.

— Patrick Thomas Sullivan, undergraduate

Economy won’t be solved by government spending

In response to “A case for economic patience” (Oct. 11 issue):

As in all cases, you are entitled to your opinion; something I tell my students. However, your opinion should be backed up with solid, researched facts. Unfortunately, your article is short on facts. More specifically two economists were just awarded the Nobel Prize for their research debunking Keynesian thinking. No, government overspending is not the solution; rather it is the cancer of recovery. Further, you might study the Great Depression and the New Deal to see how government spending and policies prolonged the Great Depression. It took WW II to start the recovery from the misguided policies of New Deal thinkers — and most of them were Keynes followers.

— William Bowen, executive-in-residence, Department of Economics