Wednesday, December 25, 2024
36.0°F

Letters to the editor Dec. 23

| December 23, 2024 12:00 AM

Simple math isn’t simple

In response to the well written letter out on Dec 17 (Inflation madness) in theory this is an excellent idea. However, when you get into what is considered necessary and unnecessary spending, then it gets cloudy. 

I recall back in 2008, I was working on a project up near Glacier Park. The customer commented that the only good thing about the package that President Obama had passed was that about 2% of it was worthwhile and allowed this person to do some tax incentivized upgrades on their home. I replied “that’s great. My 2% of that package was that I was allowed to refinance at a better interest rate thus saving me money.” 

I spoke to others who got a break for installing solar panels. All of these 2% benefits add up to 100%. Maybe not 100 because we know that both sides of the government waste a lot of money, however, it becomes difficult when you start to decide who should get their 2%.  

However, one of the main differences here, I support other people getting their 2% and my customer wasn’t very happy about it. In my opinion this is part of the problem. It isn’t the 2%. It is who is deciding what programs are worthwhile of our country’s money and that being politicized. Both sides, throwing a whole bunch of garbage into the dumpster fire.   

Looking forward to a time when the world looks at America as an example of how to responsibly run an economy, and how to get it right. And make sure to tell Gov. Greg Gianforte thank you for giving the high earners 10 times the tax break of the normal Montana taxpayer. They needed it more.  

— Jeremy Phillips, Kalispell