I heard you say that your huge tax cut will solve the unemployment problem.

But many economists say your proposal is mostly for wealthy people who don't really need the money. I am not an economist and I do not have much faith in economists - I think a person is better off shooting craps than counting on economists. But I am unemployed and I used to pay income taxes, so I can speak with some personal authority on the subject.

I sure wish I had some income and property to pay taxes on right now. What good does your tax cut do me when I have no income to pay taxes on? None whatsoever as far as I can see, and that is the park bench I will be sleeping on unless I find work right away. I simply do not have time to wait for the trickling down of crumbs, and I doubt whether any will slip through the tight cracks of those expensive tables anyway.

I really do not understand why you believe cutting the taxes of rich people even further will induce them to invest in hiring people to produce things that most people cannot afford to buy or are afraid to buy given what appears to be the financial mismanagement of the United States economy. I have a suggestion. If you must grow the deficit, why not hire unemployed people instead of cutting the taxes of people who already have incomes? For example, why not train and hire people to watch the borders so terrorists don't slip in and kill us?

I beg your pardon, but your government's financial policy does not make sense to me. What sane person or prudent business person would do everything he or she could do to lower income and increase expenses? No, that just does not make sense to me. With all due respect, I think it is a moronic plan, and it makes me wonder if you, sir, have ever managed to turn a profit on your own, or if you have instead depended on the charity of wealthy and influential people for your success. Well, please pass a big plate of crumbs or plenty of real jobs on down to this end of the table.

I'm just speaking out loud here, Mr, President. My mind is not completely made up on this pressing issue now threatening me with homelessness and premature death. I must admit I am getting a bit desperate. Crime apparently pays very well nowadays, more and more people seem to enjoy being defrauded, stolen cars go for $800 a piece here; but I'm not up to crime even though it might solve my housing problem even if I fail at it.

By the way, I remember you said people have a duty to work forty hours a week - where is my right to work those forty hours? What is a duty without a right? I don't want welfare. I want work. Do you have forty hours of work available around the White House? Or is there an artificial scarcity of work around there too, in order to frighten applicants into selling their souls?

I look forward to your early response.


Sincerely,

David Arthur Walters
Empirical Pragmatics



File No. 002