Archive

ShareThis Page
Letter to the editor: More taxes no answer | TribLIVE.com
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: More taxes no answer

Tribune-Review
| Friday, December 14, 2018 10:03 a.m

According to the editorial “Why a tax increase might be a good thing” (Nov. 24, TribLIVE), perpetual tax increases should be accepted as the natural state of things as the cost of government services always rises. But, this theory is based on two false premises that, unfortunately, pervade across our state .

The first is that the rising cost of government can’t be controlled. This is hardly the case. Two major examples are corporate welfare and pensions. Pennsylvania leads the nation in corporate welfare at $847 million this fiscal year. And, we all know Pittsburgh gives a healthy share of taxpayer dollars to big business. Also, our state and municipalities could save billions by making responsible reforms to broken pension systems that are draining our treasuries.

The second is that tax revenue can only be increased by raising tax rates. This is an overly simplified view. Tax revenues naturally increase as the local economy expands and personal incomes and property values rise. The Pittsburgh city government should focus on growing the city’s economy and people’s incomes rather than taking more in tax dollars.

Your editorial calls for fiscal accountability and acknowledges increasing taxes. Fiscal accountability can and should come far before we succumb to raising people’s taxes.

Christopher Smith

King of Prussia

The writer is a public policy intern for the Commonwealth Foundation.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.