Ryan’s plan to tax income of seniors is disturbing

To the editor:

I am somewhat disturbed by State Rep. Ryan’s proposal to tax seniors’ retirement income in an effort to reduce or eliminate county school taxes. This, if achieved, would only add more taxes to the senior citizens already difficult burden. And mind you the elimination of the school tax would not mean it would never be reinstated should some future manufactured need arise. In essence it could be considered a short term elimination, not a permanent one.

I remember when I attended the Port Royal discussion years ago on a remedy to eliminate the school tax by increasing the sales tax by 1%. I thought that fair for it would essentially tax the consumer of high ticket and luxury items while leaving more funds in the pockets of the citizens for food, medicine and basic survival needs since their buying needs would not be as expansive as the higher earner and spender. But that failed and I would suggest only because it reduced the control of the taxation rate from the politicians who seem to be on a constant search to find ways to spend, spend and spend and rarely if ever, see a program in need of elimination.

Yes, he suggests Social Security would not be included in this tax farce. But then Social Security was never intended to be the sole retirement income. It was intended to be a survival buffer. Many of the retirees have worked most of their lives and many collect retirement pensions which Ryan’s plan would tax. How about those who worked building a business and in their older years converted that business into some form of investment return so as to live their retirement years without being a burden upon others? And many of those investments and retirement incomes are already taxes. Would Ryan’s plan impose a double tax?

What I find particularly insulting is the fact that seniors do not usually have children in school yet they would be given an added burden of taxation to pay for school programs that appear on many levels to be over-extended starting with the sports and meal programs that have grown beyond the their original scope.

What I find additionally insulting is that under the lottery rebate system, not only is the senior homeowner entitled to a rather minor rebate but so too are those on federal welfare programs such as SSI who do not own property but simply rent. The taxpayer through federal programs such as SSI pays their rent and then they can apply for the same rebate given to actual property owners who earned and pay taxes on their income. This to me is double dipping. How about eliminating that welfare rebate gift and apply it to even a slight reduction in school taxes for everyone?

If Ryan comes to my town to advance his plan might I suggest he come not as a Republican or even a Democrat but wearing a sign declaring himself a socialist, for this program has all of the mimicry that those under that banner are continually advancing upon the taxpayer.

Diane Logan