When a family member
loses his or her job, that family has less income and normally creates a
budget to live within its means, maybe cutting cable TV, Internet, etc.
Can government not survive within a budget, instead of requiring
taxpayers to give more? It could if it tried, but it’s easier to raise
taxes and appeal to the bleeding hearts of the American people.
reason why we see many mental health people in jail or on the streets
is because they refuse to take their medicines. If a crime is committed
by people who refused to take their medicine, they should be
Everyone loves free things, correct? I
wonder if any Oklahomans have heard of Alcoholics Anonymous, Narcotics
Anonymous or Al-Anon for friends and families of substance abusers?
These programs are free to anyone who needs help.
summarize his commentary, Batchelder attempts an example of giving by
using the Marshall Plan used from 1948 to 1952. For those unfamiliar,
this program was implemented after World War II to rebuild economies and
modernize Europe. The American people were forced to pay extra taxes to
rebuild Europe in a war created by Germany. This is not a matter of
principle, and those who can contribute “their fair share” should pay
more, as Batchelder stated.
He wants to have taxes
raised in a recession and then refers to giving by explaining Americans
freely “giving” their tax money to Europe when the government decided
this for the people. Is he suggesting raising taxes to give more to
mental health and substance abuse programs that already receive
millions of dollars? Who knows?
But the next time you see a smoker, thank them for giving to health care.
—Amber Nemecek, Oklahoma City