Readers write (July 21): State budget, unemployment, crime rates, sales taxes

Although most Minnesota citizens are not happy with the recent budget deal, there's one word that would have made it even worse -- Emmer!

If Mark Dayton had not become governor, we would have more massive cuts in addition to language in the bill that has nothing to do with the budget, such as "eliminating stem cell research."

The Republicans refused any type of tax increases even when most people approved of taxes going up for millionaires and billionaires! Dayton had no choice in this matter or the shutdown would never have ended.

SYLVIA K. GOLDMAN, ANOKA

• • •

Wednesday's article about community gardens contained a photo of a large sign with bold warning letters "Please don't take vegetables!"

Ain't it the truth. There is nothing more frustrating than to invest in seeds and fertilizer, sweat and toil all summer, only to have your beans and tomatoes taken by someone who hasn't worked for it. Makes you want to move your garden to another state where you can keep more of what you grow.

JOHN INGELIN, ANDOVER

* * *

A July 19 letter explained that if the budget were growing exponentially, the budget would double every year. That assumes the exponent is two. Any growth in the year-to-year budgets over multiple periods that graphs in an upward curve is exponential.

Any exponent greater than 1.0 results in exponential growth when compounded over several periods -- for instance, compound interest on your savings account. Even though your bankroll is not doubling every year, it still grows exponentially and not linearly. I'm surprised the editorial staff didn't catch the misconception. Another argument for more math and business education funding.

GREGG ADLER, AFTON

* * *

Since when did unemployment benefits become a way of life for so many?

Unemployment benefits were intended as short-term support for people who are in between jobs, maybe six months to a year.

Some people have been getting unemployment benefits for years now and stopped looking for a job a long time ago.

President Obama wants to extend it for another year?

I guarantee if they cut these longtime mooches off, they will be forced to find work, and they will.

There are jobs out there but if you are living off the system and not motivated to find a job, it won't find you.

When do these unemployment extensions come to a halt?

Two years should be the maximum to collect (with proof you are actively looking for a job).

Unemployment rates will never drop as long as the government and state keep using unemployment as the new welfare system.

MARILYN BABCOCK, NEWPORT

* * *

The July 19 edition of the Star Tribune included the fifth article I have read over the past several weeks about the reduction of crime, not only locally but also nationally.

All of the articles offer an idea of what has caused this reduction, most of them similar to the reasons that were quoted in most recent article: better policing, a crackdown on gun-toting felons, higher incarceration rates and so on.

No doubt they all contribute. But most of the improvement has happened over the last five or six years. Not one of the articles, not one, ever mentioned that the reduction has correlated precisely with the proliferation of conceal-and-carry laws that have swept the nation.

Minnesota's carry law was finalized in 2005; most of the other states were in the same time period.

I realize that the Star Tribune editorial staff hates this law that allows a private citizen to protect himself and his family, but don't you think maybe you could take the blinders off just for a moment and give a brief recognition to two facts:

1. Almost all of the dire predictions of shoot-out Armageddons that were predicted by the gun-haters never materialized.

2. Almost all of the improvement has come in the same time frame that private citizens were given the right to protect themselves.

The newspaper will probably never give it any credit, but obviously a lot of criminals and thugs have taken notice.

ALBERT LONG, CRYSTAL

* * *

A recent letter writer noted that if she had bought her book and magazine online, she would have not paid sales tax on her purchases, and that our lives have evolved while our tax system has not.

I, too, purchase many items online each and every year. The difference between the two of us is I track all of my purchases, and any online acquisition that was not taxed by the vendor is noted.

At the end of the year, I total all of my nontaxed online purchases, file this amount with the state Department of Revenue and pay the appropriate taxes due to the people of Minnesota.

By not paying state taxes for online purchases, one is basically a tax dodger and should be audited for the past seven years to find out just how much is owed. Just because a vendor does not charge tax doesn't mean taxes are not due.

It's not the tax system which is broken; it's those who scam it.

LANCE COMO, GOLDEN VALLEY