Letter: Letter writer's numbers inaccurate
To the Editor:
According to James P. Nelson's figures in his letter to the editor Feb. 7, I am a multi-millionaire earning a substantial six figure salary. I called my banker and my financial counselor to inform them that something was awry with my financial statements since those statements don't jive with the figures Mr. Nelson presented. They presented me with an array of figures as spectacular as Mr. Nelson's, disproving the idea that I am in any way as wealthy as Mr. Nelson would have one believe I am.
Just as a precaution I burned the editorial page in case my wife came up with the same calculations as Mr. Nelson's letter to make her think I'm holding out on her. That, despite the fact that she does the banking and the financial book work in this household. Wait a minute. Maybe she's holding out on me.
I can do simple math though and the $52 and change I find in my pay envelope that my employer's accountant tells me is the result of the Bush tax credits multiplied by the 52 weeks I work each year, what with overtime, comes out in the $2,000 range. James might want to talk to his boss's accountant.
James certainly has me on the poverty thing though. I remember remarking to a fellow worker just a few weeks after the Clintons took the White House how all of the homeless people had disappeared. For the full eight years Bill and Hillary were co-president I can't recall a single news story on, nor protest by, the homeless. But within hours of Bush's inaugural speech the New York Times, if I recall, published a report that America's streets were teaming with homeless whose plight the Bush Administration was ignoring.
What's more, the minimum wage, which hadn't been increased since the 1980s was evidently more than adequate for a family of four under the Clintons. Once Bush took office though it was an outright crime that anyone would be expected to support a family on the miserly minimum wage Bush and the Republicans refused to increase.
Worst of all, a year before Bush was even elected he caused the stock market to plunge about twice the percentage drop that ushered in the great depression. It threatened the economy and employment as well as millions of people's retirement. We all remember the jobless recovery that Bush's tax cuts brought about that lowered unemployment to less than 5 percent, a figure we're told indicates full employment. I don't understand how the people in the numbers James cites could have missed out in an economy they tell us is twice the size of Bill Clinton's.
I can't refute James's numbers because even if I could get my Google search to work I wouldn't know where to look. The copies of The Economist, National Review, World Magazine, The Washington Times as well as The New York Times I glean my information from have long ago been recycled and I have to rely on my inadequate memory of what they wrote. It is obvious from the dizzying array of percentages and figures in James's letter that he has his information down cold. The question that comes to mind is whether or not James gets his information from the same place Ron Paul gets his. If he does that would explain a lot.