— How come in 2005 Donald J. Trump paid a federal income tax rate of 24 percent, and I paid a higher percentage? My income was somewhat south of Trump’s $150 million. In 1963, a married couple that earned more than $400k filing jointly would have paid a 91 percent tax. Those were the days. The rate was lowered to 70 percent in 1964. In 2004 under the war-mongering, scum-bucket. moronic administration of Bush II, the rate was lowered to 35 percent, which Trump managed to avoid even that rate.
— How is it some Tucson veterinarians charge as much as $800 to clean canine teeth and mine charges $215?
— What will be the effect of a 28 percent budget cut in the State Department? And when did the filthy-rich, oil-soaked Secretary of State become mute?
— A letter by a Mr. William Lindberg in today’s Star says: “In the fiscal year 2016 there were 19,828 border agents apprehending 364,768 illegals at a cost of $3,642,820,000 or $9,986 per apprehension and 18.4 apprehensions per agent.” I have no idea whether Mr. Lindberg is correct, but it would not surprise me if it were true. It’s no small irony that the Cato Institute, that bastion of Libertarian thought has long contended that labor markets should be unfettered by borders. Cato routinely criticizes the administration for its immigration policy. To wit: https://www.cato.org/blog/four-ways-presidents-new-immigration-ban-undercuts-own-arguments.
— I happened upon a Star online columnist who writes about Tucson. It’s called “This is Tucson.” She wrote a piece last year asserting that Tucson residents should be called Tucsonans, “not Tucsonians.” This is horse pucky. If you read the now defunct Tucson Daily Citizen in the 1970s and ’80s, residents of the Old Pueblo were always called “Tucsonians.” The Star, however, called them “Tucsonans.” The issue is very political. The Citizen was in those days owned by William Small who sported a very conservative editorial page, one that even supported South Africa’s apartheid. The Star was owned by the Pulitzer family of St. Louis and projected a liberal editorial voice, so liberal that conservatives referred to it as “The Red Star.” In this sense then, to use the term “Tucsonan” is a sign the writer/speaker is at best a raging pinko, commie sympathizer or, worse, a no-growth advocate determined to destroy capitalism’s very foundation. Speak “Tucson” at your own risk.