A dam difficult dilemma

A dam difficult dilemma

There are 12 comments on the Estes Park Trail-Gazette story from Feb 14, 2012, titled A dam difficult dilemma. In it, Estes Park Trail-Gazette reports that:

S ay, concerned electorate, caucus goers, and November voters, you are aware, are you not, criminal justice costs per case are up $300. For the judiciary, it is up 503 percent as cities are hemorrhaging.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Estes Park Trail-Gazette.

77Cod

Keokuk, IA

#1 Feb 15, 2012
Mr. Garrett
When would be a "good" time to decrease government? Would the collapse of social security be a good time to start? How about when a rogue nation attacks and destroy's a large portion of our country? No a good time is never going to come if you left wing spend crazy demo-nuts have your way. You want a nanny state like Greece.. Tea party and conservative republicans aren't advocating less revenue, they are saying don't pick on one area of societyand harm job creation. I agree we should vote for wisdom and that "ain't " Obuuma or his puppet demo-nuts.
WOW

Estes Park, CO

#2 Feb 15, 2012
I read and re-read Mr. Garretts letter to the editor and I must say it made less sense everytime I tried to decipher what he was trying to say. Nothing tied together and it appeared to me as random spewing. But, the last sentence was especially disturbing in that Mr. Garrett threw up his hands in defeat and is willing to jump on the raise taxes bandwagon as an answer for more govt. spending and increased national debt. Currently under the Obama administration we are spending 1 billion dollars per minute and are over 14,000,000,000,000.00 in debt. Rather than raising taxes on the already overtaxed middle and upper class (they pay over 90% of all taxes) lets look for solutions as to why we are inundated with entitlement costs/government hand-outs and pork projects. Dare I say illegal immigration (as 1 example) needs to be reformed? You bet. These folks need to pay their fair share of what they are hemmoraging from the citizens of this country who are here legally. The amount of money illegals cost Estes Park alone is astronomical...and they keep coming and coming because they can. No one else, from any other country can do this and having talked with many of them they are mad. Mad at being discriminated against because they come into this country the right way. They study for the citizenship test, they go through the waiting period, they do not steal identities, they do not overpopulate to gain ammnesty by having a child born in this country (anchor babies) to gain "citizenship", they do not bankrupt the medical and school systems, get freeies everywhere, bring gangs in and gang activities, etc.
Also under this administration if a family earns less than $50,000.00/yr. they pay no taxe(Piton Group). Taxes may initially come out of their paycheck but they are reimbursed every dime by the IRS.
So, before rasing and raising taxes are there other solutions? Just like cutting back on household expenses to stay within a budget something must go. You don't just spend more and break the bank and owe and owe and owe because you will be caught and made to pay.
WOW
Clockmaker

Estes Park, CO

#3 Feb 15, 2012
WOW wrote:
I read and re-read Mr. Garretts letter to the editor and I must say it made less sense everytime I tried to decipher what he was trying to say. Nothing tied together and it appeared to me as random spewing. But, the last sentence was especially disturbing in that Mr. Garrett threw up his hands in defeat and is willing to jump on the raise taxes bandwagon as an answer for more govt. spending and increased national debt. Currently under the Obama administration we are spending 1 billion dollars per minute and are over 14,000,000,000,000.00 in debt. Rather than raising taxes on the already overtaxed middle and upper class (they pay over 90% of all taxes) lets look for solutions as to why we are inundated with entitlement costs/government hand-outs and pork projects. Dare I say illegal immigration (as 1 example) needs to be reformed? You bet. These folks need to pay their fair share of what they are hemmoraging from the citizens of this country who are here legally. The amount of money illegals cost Estes Park alone is astronomical...and they keep coming and coming because they can. No one else, from any other country can do this and having talked with many of them they are mad. Mad at being discriminated against because they come into this country the right way. They study for the citizenship test, they go through the waiting period, they do not steal identities, they do not overpopulate to gain ammnesty by having a child born in this country (anchor babies) to gain "citizenship", they do not bankrupt the medical and school systems, get freeies everywhere, bring gangs in and gang activities, etc.
Also under this administration if a family earns less than $50,000.00/yr. they pay no taxe(Piton Group). Taxes may initially come out of their paycheck but they are reimbursed every dime by the IRS.
So, before rasing and raising taxes are there other solutions? Just like cutting back on household expenses to stay within a budget something must go. You don't just spend more and break the bank and owe and owe and owe because you will be caught and made to pay.
WOW
I am a concerned taxpayer Milt. Concerned that illegal immigrants get free medical care, free school lunches, free everything which is exactly where my tax dollars are going albiet more federal government spending more taxpayer money to subsidize these criminals. They have no laws so why follow laws within this community and others. And shame on the businesses in Estes Park who hire these illegals to line their own pockets. They are the worst offenders and should be raided and fined. You may have money to burn Milt but I do not. Let's start rewarding the law abiding citizen who are here legally, pay taxes, stay within the limits of the laws, respect God and country and deserve to live the American Dream.
Straight Shooter

Arvada, CO

#4 Feb 15, 2012
Milt and his school teacher friends cannot understand Obama's payback to his union friends and bigger government mentality. Teachers already came out in support of a 2nd term Obama in 2011. I wonder why!! What is it going to take for present day Americans to quit thinking of themselves and start thinking of the USA future. Obama could start with a 50% decrease in the size of his Federal govt. He is trying to make everyone dependent on the Federal govt.
Obe Won

Arvada, CO

#5 Feb 15, 2012
America is turning more and more to a Socialist & Comuunist state but other Communist countries have found that doesn't work so well. USA has to have the most stupid voters in the world with their " me first" attitude. What a shame!
Jesus

Arvada, CO

#6 Feb 15, 2012
Milt,
How many of your ' population increase' is because of illegal immigrants (which your schools love)?
Jack in EP

Estes Park, CO

#7 Feb 16, 2012
I'm sure Milt loves hearing from all the mongoloid tea partiers. You are all hold-overs from the Civil War. How stupid can you be to think that as the years go on, major population increases are due only to illegal imigrants. Also, don't forget that bank failures in 2008 were due to the constant roll back of regulations, supported by both parties, but particularly by Republicans. Remember John McCain and his call for less banking regulations. He is rich as well by marriage.
FOR YOU TEA BAGGERS

United States

#8 Feb 16, 2012
QUOTED FROM MICHAEL LINDEN AND MICHAEL ETTLINGER,Michael Linden is the Director of Tax and Budget Policy and Michael Ettlinger is Vice President for Economic Policy at American Progress:
President Bush enacted his tax cuts in 2001 and 2003, and over their 10-year lifespan, they reduced tax revenues by around $2.4 trillion, with $474 billion of that coming in the first four years. The first-term impact of those tax cuts is equivalent to about $574 billion in today’s dollars, or about 1.1 percent of gross domestic product.President Obama has also signed two major pieces of tax-cutting legislation into law. The first, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, included a variety of tax cuts that benefited nearly every single American household. ARRA contained the Making Work Pay tax credit that directly reduced a family’s income tax bill by up to $800, which, overall, reduced tax revenue by about $116 billion. It included expansions of the child, earned income, American Opportunity, and first-time homebuyer tax credits. ARRA patched up the alternative minimum tax, providing $70 billion in tax cuts, and cut a wide array of business taxes, together totaling another $60 billion.
All told, the Recovery Act included $243 billion worth of tax cuts through 2012. Nearly two years after signing his first big tax cut bill into law, President Obama completely outdid himself by signing the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010, commonly known as the December 2010 tax deal. The biggest element of the December deal was the extension, for two additional years, of all the Bush tax cuts and alternative minimum tax relief, at a two-year combined cost of more than $400 billion. In addition, the deal extended a variety of business tax cuts and incentives, which reduced revenues by some $150 billion, and it cut the estate tax—a tax paid by only a very few super-wealthy, massive estates—by $65 billion. The December tax bill also cut the payroll tax paid by employees by 2 percentage points, delivering more than $110 billion in tax cuts to working Americans.
Put it all together, and in one fell swoop, President Obama cut taxes by $654 billion in 2011 and 2012 alone. In other words, with this bill President Obama cut taxes by more, in raw dollar amounts, in just half of his term than George W. Bush did over his full first term.
With the huge Recovery Act tax cuts and the enormous December 2010 tax cuts combined, President Obama has already signed into law tax cuts amounting to more than $900 billion from 2009 through 2012. Even after accounting for legislation that the president signed that increased revenue during that period, President Obama has cut taxes by more than $850 billion in his first term, or approximately 1.5 percent of GDP. Just recently, President Obama proposed another $250 billion in tax cuts designed to spur job creation, mostly in the form of additional cuts to the payroll tax. In fact, as the Citizens for Tax Justice noted, President Obama’s proposed payroll tax cuts are essentially equal in size to the total cost of the extended Bush tax cuts for 2012. If Congress passes this next set of Obama tax cuts, his total will rise to well more than $1.1 trillion, or nearly 2 percent of GDP—close to double the size of the tax cuts in President Bush’s first term.
FOR YOU TEA BAGGERS

United States

#9 Feb 16, 2012
Of course, there are two major differences between President Obama’s tax cuts and President Bush’s.

First, President Obama’s tax cuts are much more targeted at the middle class. The Bush tax cuts were heavily skewed toward the wealthy with more than half of the entire benefit going only to the richest 20 percent. President Obama’s tax cuts, on the other hand, are distributed more evenly. Eighty-five percent of the benefits of the Making Work Pay tax credit, for example, went to the bottom 80 percent of households, and because the very wealthy don’t pay payroll taxes on all of their income, the payroll tax cut, too, benefits the middle class much more than the Bush tax cuts did.

Second, the Obama tax cuts are temporary. All of them, from those in the Recovery Act to the newly proposed ones in the American Jobs Act, either already expired or will expire in the next year. The president has proposed making some of them permanent—lower rates on income under $250,000, and a permanent fix to the AMT, among others—but many will eventually disappear. Because of this, and because the president wants to raise some additional revenue to help close the budget deficit, if you compare the entire 10-year cost of the Bush tax cuts to a similar 10-year period predicted for President Obama’s proposals, President Bush is still the bigger tax cutter.

These two differences reflect the important fact that the philosophy behind the cuts differs dramatically even though both presidents signed big tax cuts into law. While President Bush’s tax cuts primarily benefited the wealthy, President Obama’s tax cuts focus on the middle class. While President Bush believed tax cuts were the cure-all elixir for whatever ailed the economy—a belief that was far-fetched even at the time—President Obama uses targeted breaks to businesses and consumers in a time of profound economic weakness designed to spark job creation. And while President Bush was entirely unconcerned about the long-term costs of tax cuts and the resulting debt pile-up, President Obama has consistently made the case for more revenue, especially from those who can most afford it, to help close the budget gap.

The underlying philosophies are different, as are the long-term consequences. But the fact remains that right now President Obama’s tax cuts exceed those of President Bush. By 2012, bills signed into law by President Obama will have reduced tax revenues by about $900 billion, or 1.5 percent of GDP. And if he gets his way, and Congress passes another $250 billion in cuts, the total of all Obama tax cuts will rise to about 2 percent of GDP. That’s close to twice as big as the tax cut tally at the close of President Bush’s first term.
FOR YOU TEA BAGGERS

United States

#10 Feb 16, 2012
President Bush enacted his tax cuts in 2001 and 2003, and over their 10-year lifespan, they reduced tax revenues by around $2.4 trillion, with $474 billion of that coming in the first four years. The first-term impact of those tax cuts is equivalent to about $574 billion in today’s dollars, or about 1.1 percent of gross domestic product.

President Obama has also signed two major pieces of tax-cutting legislation into law. The first, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, included a variety of tax cuts that benefited nearly every single American household. ARRA contained the Making Work Pay tax credit that directly reduced a family’s income tax bill by up to $800, which, overall, reduced tax revenue by about $116 billion. It included expansions of the child, earned income, American Opportunity, and first-time homebuyer tax credits. ARRA patched up the alternative minimum tax, providing $70 billion in tax cuts, and cut a wide array of business taxes, together totaling another $60 billion.

All told, the Recovery Act included $243 billion worth of tax cuts through 2012.

Nearly two years after signing his first big tax cut bill into law, President Obama completely outdid himself by signing the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010, commonly known as the December 2010 tax deal. The biggest element of the December deal was the extension, for two additional years, of all the Bush tax cuts and alternative minimum tax relief, at a two-year combined cost of more than $400 billion.

In addition, the deal extended a variety of business tax cuts and incentives, which reduced revenues by some $150 billion, and it cut the estate tax—a tax paid by only a very few super-wealthy, massive estates—by $65 billion. The December tax bill also cut the payroll tax paid by employees by 2 percentage points, delivering more than $110 billion in tax cuts to working Americans.

Put it all together, and in one fell swoop, President Obama cut taxes by $654 billion in 2011 and 2012 alone. In other words, with this bill President Obama cut taxes by more, in raw dollar amounts, in just half of his term than George W. Bush did over his full first term.

With the huge Recovery Act tax cuts and the enormous December 2010 tax cuts combined, President Obama has already signed into law tax cuts amounting to more than $900 billion from 2009 through 2012. Even after accounting for legislation that the president signed that increased revenue during that period, President Obama has cut taxes by more than $850 billion in his first term, or approximately 1.5 percent of GDP.

Just recently, President Obama proposed another $250 billion in tax cuts designed to spur job creation, mostly in the form of additional cuts to the payroll tax. In fact, as the Citizens for Tax Justice noted, President Obama’s proposed payroll tax cuts are essentially equal in size to the total cost of the extended Bush tax cuts for 2012. If Congress passes this next set of Obama tax cuts, his total will rise to well more than $1.1 trillion, or nearly 2 percent of GDP—close to double the size of the tax cuts in President Bush’s first term.
Straight Shooter

Arvada, CO

#11 Feb 16, 2012
FOR YOU TEA BAGGERS wrote:
Of course, there are two major differences between President Obama’s tax cuts and President Bush’s.
First, President Obama’s tax cuts are much more targeted at the middle class. The Bush tax cuts were heavily skewed toward the wealthy with more than half of the entire benefit going only to the richest 20 percent. President Obama’s tax cuts, on the other hand, are distributed more evenly. Eighty-five percent of the benefits of the Making Work Pay tax credit, for example, went to the bottom 80 percent of households, and because the very wealthy don’t pay payroll taxes on all of their income, the payroll tax cut, too, benefits the middle class much more than the Bush tax cuts did.
Second, the Obama tax cuts are temporary. All of them, from those in the Recovery Act to the newly proposed ones in the American Jobs Act, either already expired or will expire in the next year. The president has proposed making some of them permanent—lower rates on income under $250,000, and a permanent fix to the AMT, among others—but many will eventually disappear. Because of this, and because the president wants to raise some additional revenue to help close the budget deficit, if you compare the entire 10-year cost of the Bush tax cuts to a similar 10-year period predicted for President Obama’s proposals, President Bush is still the bigger tax cutter.
These two differences reflect the important fact that the philosophy behind the cuts differs dramatically even though both presidents signed big tax cuts into law. While President Bush’s tax cuts primarily benefited the wealthy, President Obama’s tax cuts focus on the middle class. While President Bush believed tax cuts were the cure-all elixir for whatever ailed the economy—a belief that was far-fetched even at the time—President Obama uses targeted breaks to businesses and consumers in a time of profound economic weakness designed to spark job creation. And while President Bush was entirely unconcerned about the long-term costs of tax cuts and the resulting debt pile-up, President Obama has consistently made the case for more revenue, especially from those who can most afford it, to help close the budget gap.
The underlying philosophies are different, as are the long-term consequences. But the fact remains that right now President Obama’s tax cuts exceed those of President Bush. By 2012, bills signed into law by President Obama will have reduced tax revenues by about $900 billion, or 1.5 percent of GDP. And if he gets his way, and Congress passes another $250 billion in cuts, the total of all Obama tax cuts will rise to about 2 percent of GDP. That’s close to twice as big as the tax cut tally at the close of President Bush’s first term.
Jack,
You need to get a life and get a clue..........
Kim

Denver, CO

#12 Feb 17, 2012
Very interesting letter by Renee. I find it hardly a courtesy to charge the citizens for a phone call. If the town of Estes Park is going to make the call, it should be posted when signing up for electric service; and it should NOT be called a courtesy!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Silverthorne Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Minturn land swap Mar '16 Frank 1
News Police: Man punched skier on Beaver Creek (Dec '10) Feb '16 Vail inquiring minds 17
Mystery shoppers needed in Frisco Feb '16 cawthon 1
Place to change out of ski clothes? Jan '16 Alison 1
News Colorado immigrant rights group brings annual a... (Oct '15) Oct '15 private guy 2
fire (Jul '15) Jul '15 PHIL 1
City Market (Mar '14) Mar '14 JoAnn 1
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Silverthorne Mortgages