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
- Secret meetings via text: Hold Seattle's leaders accountable | Editorial
- Get I-405 flowing: Complete 16-year-old master plan now | Op-Ed
- As Florida chokes on red tide, governor denies environmental malpractice | Froma Harrop / Syndicated columnist
- The difference between a youthful indiscretion and a serious crime | Leonard Pitts Jr. / Syndicated columnist
- Unite to save the wild landscapes that define us as 'Westerners' | Op-Ed
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