Readers Write (Jan. 26): Romney's taxes, health care, State of the Union

Perhaps I have become a flat-tax convert. I had always believed that such a tax was bad, because it was not progressive -- the wealthy have received many blessings from our society and should pay a higher percentage of taxes than the poor. I honestly thought that was how our system worked.

When I saw the tax charts that come with our federal tax forms, I had pitied the wealthy who were paying a whopping 35 percent of their income in taxes.

But, after seeing Mitt Romney's 13.9 percent rate, I pulled out those charts and wondered who really pays that top rate ("Romney's taxes show breaks given wealthy," Jan. 25).

Putting pencil to paper, I learned that if someone actually worked for their money, had no dividends or capital gains, gave nothing to charity, had no mortgage interest and had no deductions to reduce their income, they would have to claim more than $5 million of income a year on their W-2 form to reach a 35 percent tax rate! That would amount to a wage of $2,500 per hour.

Please tell me where to find that job. I'll even work part time and gladly pay the 35 percent rate. Otherwise, I'd like to use Romney's rate. Uncle Sam owes me $1,500, which I promise to immediately spend as part of my patriotic duty to kick-start the economy.

ROCHELLE EASTMAN, SAVAGE

• • •

Anybody who receives dividends from investments is being pilloried because those dividends are taxed at a 15 percent rate -- Warren Buffett, Mitt Romney and many others.

In 2001, after 35 years as a professional forester for the state of Minnesota, I was receiving roughly $40,000 per year, which puts me at the lower end of the middle class. In the mid-1970s, my wife and I started investing in the stock market, and we continue to do so.

There are millions of people just like us who have invested in stocks and bonds and pay a lower rate on dividends and long-term capital gains.

Be careful of what you wish for -- sticking it to a small number of millionaires means that millions of average Joes will also pay a price.

The top 1 percent may receive what is called "unearned income," but the term applies to a large portion of the other 99 percent as well.

LARRY WESTERBERG, HASTINGS

• • •

Here we go again. Class envy seems to be hugely popular in our state. With respect to Mitt Romney's recently released tax returns, let's review some facts:

• The man already paid our highest rate of taxation on his earned income during his working years -- far higher than almost every American taxpayer.

• After he paid those taxes on his earned income, he chose to invest his money in enterprises that he judged to be profitable. He lost every dime he invested, in some cases. As to the investments he made in profitable ventures, he paid an additional 15 percent on those profits.

• Let's also note that Romney contributed millions of dollars to his church. In fact, he gave much more than his pledge suggested.

•In sum, he paid in taxes and gave in charitable contributions more than 40 percent of his income.

• Is this a man my fellow citizens want to castigate for the simple fact that he worked hard, made money, created jobs and gave back to charity on a significant scale?

I would caution my friends on the left to beware of any comparisons with their heroes. In 2007, Joe Biden donated a grand total of $369, or 0.3 percent of his income. Barack Obama was also thrifty in his charitable giving.

Those nasty, evil, hate-filled, bigoted conservatives.

MARK H. REED, PLYMOUTH

* * *

A Jan. 25 letter writer hopes for continued gridlock preventing implementation of President Obama's Affordable Care Act. She suggests several dire consequences resulting from enacting health exchanges.

But for those preferring the status quo, consider some outgrowths of the current system:

• 45,000 deaths per year in the United States are associated with the lack of health insurance (American Journal of Public Health).

• More than 50 million people were uninsured in 2010 (U.S. Census Bureau).

• Workers paid 47 percent more in 2010 than they did in 2005 for family health coverage; employers paid 20 percent more (Kaiser Family Foundation).

• U.S. health insurance companies have the highest administrative costs in the world; spending about 20 cents of every dollar for nonmedical costs (T.R. Reid, "The Healing of America").

Standing up to change is not a plan. The goal is affordable health care insurance for all. I don't see the current system getting us there.

TAD BORNHOFT, MINNEAPOLIS

* * *

Having watched both President Obama and Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels on national television Tuesday evening, I find only one thing to be certain.

Simply put, the idiots don't understand that the American public wants common sense and good judgment used to accomplish change.

Listening to these two political pitches means it ain't going to happen.

BOB STEINBRUCK, COON RAPIDS