Gabriel Campanario, The Seattle Times
The Seattle Times should not have published the column by Richard S. Davis [“Gov. Inslee’s capital-gains tax idea is dead on arrival,” Opinion, Jan. 28]. Why?
All tax increases or spending cuts adversely affect someone. All the column does is provide the details specific to this case.
The problem is that Davis does not provide an alternative. Extending this logic results in all taxes being eliminated and all spending increasing without limit. If that sounds ridiculous it’s because it is.
Most Read Opinion Stories
- Tim Burgess: Seattleites respect SPD and desperately seek a return to order | Op-Ed
- The Seattle Times editorial board's 2019 primary election endorsements | Editorial
- Why no one should call undocumented immigrants 'illegals' | Op-Ed
- Russell Wilson: Together, we can cure pediatric cancer | Op-Ed
- We’ve lost our way | Horsey cartoon
If Davis had proposed an alternative, a different tax that would raise the same amount of revenue, or cuts to the governor’s budget that would equal the lost revenue, we would have a basis for judging the soundness of his argument.
Without one, we have the old saying, “Don’t tax you. Don’t tax me. Tax the fellow behind the tree.” But even the fellow behind the tree is missing. This kind of thing is why budgets at all levels of government are the mess they are.
Patrick J. Russell, Seattle