Page 4 - Dinuba Sentinel 12-14-17 E-edition

Opinion
A4 | Thursday, December 14, 2017
In My Opinion
Sacramento is dAestroying California
ll business, when structuring There are too many an operational plan, realizes rules, regulations and that there is an old axiom restrictions attached
Fred Hall - Publisher Keven J. Geaney - Editor
dealing with the threshold of business which can be vested in any single account. Any interruption which impacts the cash flow from overly vesting in the outcome of a single source can be catastrophic!
When one realizes that the relatively small numbers in the upper brackets are paying most of the tax while roughly half of California residents pay nothing or get money back through EITC it appears that we are placing the state in the very position that business schools warn against. Colloquially that would be “putting all of one's eggs in one basket.”
What happens when the growing exodus of high earners accelerates and the high tax payments over which politicians literally slobber begin to move into Nevada or a number of states that are more tax friendly?
We are all keenly aware that governments, in and of themselves, produce absolutely nothing. The ladies and gentlemen who comprise the bandits of Sacramento have broadened their sights when it comes to “picking the pocket” of the hard working Californian in their pursuit of money to spend on failed social programs. We've just got to face facts. California has this nation's largest percentage of poverty and the highest taxes. That should be counterintuitive but the two seem to go hand-in-hand. The more money your government takes, there is less for the hard working taxpayer.
Taxes, fees, regulations and environmental problems have placed us squarely atop the list of expensive places in which to live. The state geography is beautiful and diversified but with the cost of utilities, fuel, rent, food and clothing we're faced with making the decision of feeding our families or being able to see the mountains or the ocean.
California, at the present time
and projected well into the future, is experiencing a real crush in its need for affordable housing. When one finds that the per unit price of such a unit
is approaching $500,000 there can
be no doubt that something is wrong!
The Truth Hurts
What the high fructose cWorn syrup is going on?
Fred Hall
to every job and the state seems to have an endless stream of fees to fund the bureaucracy which oversees the inane regulation.
Our population has roughly doubled in the last 25 years
which adds to poverty and low school scores and yet our politicians seem to actually be recruiting low achievers
by fighting the Federal government at every turn over tightening access via our borders. The intentions to take care of the poor people of the world are indeed commendable, but we have to exercise some judgment and care that while we're doing so, we're not dragging others—as well as the entire country—into poverty.
Our roads and highways are in shambles and yet the governor is so dug in on his legacy project of building a high speed rail which it appears
too few will ever avail themselves of this amenity to make it “pencil out”
as existing without subsidies far into the future. Money from everywhere
is being gathered to throw at the HSR project where there appears to be no real need or demand.
California, there was a time when the world was humbled by your
beauty and the opportunity which you offered. Anyone called the Golden State can be proud of such a definition but when we seem to devolved into pockets of unbelievable wealth and others of excruciating, grinding poverty something has gone terribly wrong. The powers which put us here are in Sacramento and it will take lengthy periods of sanity from those same people to turn things around. Forget about personal animus toward people who think differently than you do and stop using our money to build a useless project which you see as a legacy.
But, as always, that's only one man's opinion.
Fred Hall is publisher of the Sentinel
Letters to the editor
ith the hustle and bustle I decided that I
of covering holiday events don't want lots of for my work, and doing this processed sugar
s the Trump tax cuts fly through Congress at $40,000-aires to millionaires. People breakneck speed, one has to wonder: What’s get that, too.
the big rush? The Quinnipiac survey showed 61
Editor,
Council story one-sided
raucous and commotion that racked the council chambers was inappropriate. While I do not wish to call her out, this lady knows who she is. It is uncalled for and unnecessary to be allowed to randomly interrupt and dismantle the nature of the proceedings. It is not the duty, nor the place of random citizens to disrupt council proceedings. If we, as a democratic society, have adopted and pledged to use Robert's Rules of Order to conduct meetings, then individuals who disrespectfully disrupt these meetings should be removed from chambers so that proceedings may continue unaffected. Finally, it is the sole duty of the city attorney to determine if conflict of interst exists. I was glad to see that the attorney was allowed to weigh in on the topic in last week's article. If we, as a citizenry elect these individuals to represent our interests, then we must allow them to do so in an orderly and stable fashion.
Thank you,
Zachary Rocca A “horrified” citizen
A Everyone hates this tax bill
When a media outlet does not present the full story of a topic, but chooses to be biased to one side, that media outlet has lost all credibility and trust of its readers. In reference to the article about Councilman Thusu, why is it that only one side of the argument was truly represented with a full quote? There were numerous individuals who approached the podium to speak in support of Councilman Thusu; yet, none of those individuals were represented via quotation in last week's article. Being one of those who spoke and also stayed after the council meeting, I would have been more than happy to give my side to your reporter, but he did not open himself up for comment. Granted, I am not trying to make waves or cause dissidence. I am asking that the Sentinel remain neutral and report the facts of both sides equally. Reach out and do your dillegence by taking into account the entirety of a news story.
On a second note, I wish to mention that with all the
Guest Column
holiday shopping, I have resorted to eating out at fast food restaurants more often. What I have noticed while eating out has astounded me.
First of all, while eating out at one establishment I noticed that honey packets I would ask for now read “honey sauce.” On further inspection
I read high fructose corn syrup as the main ingredient. Honey was the fourth item on the list and next to it was 7%.
What! This “honey ” packet only contains seven percent honey. The packet even had a picture of a bee on it. Why? He only made seven percent of it. Maybe they should put a picture of high fructose corn syrup instead.
When we visited my sister-in-law
I told her about the “honey sauce” trickery that this restaurant did to
me. She quickly answered, “I know all about it.” She then told me that a lot of products are having high fructose corn syrup in them, as the main ingredient, like ketchup and syrup. She stated that she only buys organic ketchup and pure maple syrup.
That day when I got home I opened up my cupboard and was taken back by what I read on numerous labels. High fructose corn syrup was written everywhere. How did I not notice
this. I don't remember high fructose corn syrup running so rampant in my cupboard. I decided to look up this ingredient that has taken control of my usual condiments.
The definition of high fructose corn syrup: It is a sweetener made from corn starch that has been processed by glucose isomerase [an enzyme]
to convert some of its glucose into fructose.
It further states that this syrup is compared to granulated sugar, but easier to handle and more cost effective.
Now I know why it has taken over my condiments. It's a cheap substitute for sugar.
Keven J. Geaney
consumed by my children so I switched to an organic ketchup and pure maple syrup. My old syrup had 12 ingredients. The new one has only
Surely a body known for gridlock and deliberation would want to hold hearings, interview stakeholders, and gather public input before restructuring the world’s largest economy. Instead, the tax cut plan was rushed through both the House and Senate, without a single public hearing or Democratic vote.
All the same, the public input so far is incredibly clear: People hate the Republican tax bill.
Five recent polls all confirm this.
A Quinnipiac national survey released December 5th showed voters disapprove of the bill by nearly two- to-one (29 percent approve, 53 percent disapprove). ABC and CNN each conducted polls that showed an anemic 33 percent and 31 percent support for the bill. A comparable poll from Reuters put support at just 28 percent.
Perhaps most telling is a poll from Politico that initially pegged support at 48 percent in early October — which dropped 12 points to 36 percent in just two months.
In short, the more people learn about the bill, the less they like it. Hence the speed game on display in Congress right now.
It’s not that people don’t understand what’s in the tax bill. They do. They’re becoming increasingly aware that this legislation is a heist — and they’re the victims, not the beneficiaries.
According to the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation and the Congressional Budget Office, people making $40,000 to $50,000 would pay a combined $5.3 billion more in taxes by 2027. By contrast, households with income above $1 million would get a $5.8 billion cut.
Put simply, this is a direct transfer of wealth from
percent of the American public think the wealthy will benefit most from the plan. An ABC poll found nearly the same results. Less than a quarter of respondents to either poll believed the middle class was coming out on top.
Looking back to historical major legislation, the Washington Post found
one: maple syrup. My new ketchup tastes better. I also like the pure maple syrup, but my son and wife still like the taste of the processed syrup.
Last week at the grocery store I noticed my old syrup was now stating “made without high fructose corn syrup.”
It reminded me of other marketing ploys over the years regarding fats, trans fat, diet sodas, etc. Remember how diet sodas were the craze and then it was determined that diet sodas were unhealthy because of the processed sweetener. Then it was “zero trans fats.”
The new fad is organic. I believe moderation is the key. Too much of anything isn't good. That's why I'm removing some of our high fructose corn syrup products, but probably not all. I also limit my soda intake, regular not diet. My wife is still stuck on diet sodas, but she also limits her intake. We also try not to eat fast food that often, but during the holidays it's hard. Just like being on a diet during the holidays is nearly impossible.
As I type this column I wonder if the fast food hamburgers I occasionally eat are made with seven percent beef. What else am I getting less of and not informed of?
I want to end by saying, “Where's the honey? I don't see any honey in here.” Those of you who were around when the “Where's the beef?” commercials aired in 1984 will get the joke.
Keven J. Geaney is the editor of the Sentinel. He can be reached at editor@thedinubasentinel.com
Josh Hoxie
The Dinuba Sentinel welcomes submissions of letters to the editor on topics of local relevance. Word limit is 350.
Letters must include the author’s name, phone number and address for verification. Mail to 145 South L Street, Dinuba, CA, 93618, or e-mail to editor@thedinubasentinel.
com.
Letters will be edited for length, grammar and clarity.
Libelous letters will not be printed.
Guest columns will be considered for publication. Word limit is 650.
Join the discussion
that this tax bill is the second most unpopular piece
of major legislation considered by Congress in three decades. (What was number one? The failed Republican health care overhaul from earlier this year.)
Congressional Republicans aren’t acting out of deference to the will of the people. They’re responding to the will of their donors, a fact they’re increasingly brazen about sharing publicly. They’re most concerned about protecting the private jet set, the folks who are already doing phenomenally well, at the expense of middle and working-class families.
It’s not too late for Congress to change course.
Since the House and Senate passed two different versions, they’ve convened a conference committee to produce a final bill. The conference committee has the ability end this mockery and restore faith to their disheartened constituents.
If they continue to prioritize wealthy campaign donors rather than the folks who actually pull the lever for them in the voting booth, they should have no doubt they’ll be held accountable.
Josh Hoxie directs the Project on Taxation and Opportunity at the Institute for Policy Studies. Distributed by OtherWords.