To the editor: The collaborating writer Josh Hammer takes a very used page of the right -wing play book in his comments on the fiscal challenges of the United States government (“Doge was a good start. Trump needs to boost even more for real fiscal change.” May 30). Celta the apparently indefensible government expenses and uses them to erroneously characterize the efficiency cuts of the government department that are already damaging government services and scientific research funded by the federal government. The $ 175 billion of alleged cuts that Ballyhoos amounts to less than 5% of the $ 4 billion (a median estimates of $ 3 billion to $ 5 billion) that could be added to the national deficit if the tax cuts of President Trump extend in 2017.
Why does Hammer not even mention the revenue side of the deficit equation? Defenders of cutting extensions claim that it is necessary for economic growth. The previous cuts, which mostly attacked high -income taxpayers, failed to contribute significantly to growth. How many times do we need to learn that Art Laffer was wrong about the tax cuts paid through economic growth? Trump's tax cuts ignored by hammer fuel the deficits to which it claims to oppose.
Daniel Stone, Los Angeles
..
To the editor: Doge was a good start? Do we forget when they fired hundreds of nuclear experts in the country and tried to fight to hire them? What happens when these computer geniuses did not know how to read data and thought there were dozens of millions of dead people who collected Social Security? Or when “accidentally” cut the relief of the USAID ebola? If you handled such a bad business, they would say goodbye immediately.
It is curious how people obsessed with “efficiency” and “fraud” are only concerned about programs that help citizens and never with shameless corruption. State medical insurance? Much cheaper and more efficient than private insurance. Medicare Advantage, the massive draw for private insurers? Quite waste but never in the so -called locking of conservatives. Republicans always complain about “fiscal responsibility”, but an easy way to save money would not be to give billions in the tax cuts to billionaires. If you want a government that works efficiently, you must finance it and customize properly, do not firing at random and surprise when it turns out that these people did something important.
Kyle Kramer, Los Angeles
