System more punitive than fair

The current administration wants to talk about fairness.

Fair; 6 a: marked by impartiality and honesty: free from self-interest, prejudice, or favoritism fair person to do business with>

6 b (1): conforming with the established rules: allowed (2): consonant with merit or importance: due fair share>

So the word is subjective and used to create divisiveness. A buzzword to generate hostility and used in the same sense against any taxpayer or non-taxpayer equally. It’s a politician’s way of covering a need for self-fulfillment. Those that foot the bill are opposed to those that benefit from it (which is apparently around 51 percent of the voting public) and vice versa.

Parasite; 1: a person who exploits the hospitality of the rich and earns welcome by flattery

3: something that resembles a biological parasite in dependence on something else for existence or support without making a useful or adequate return.

The rich don’t pay their “fair” share, yet they (the top 5 percent) pay 60 percent of the taxable revenue. They continue paying more when you look at other percentages reported by the Hoover Institute. They follow the same tax rules available to everyone, which allows 47 percent to not pay any taxes.

Where does fair begin? If Democrats are so concerned about being fair, why are they OK with those who’ve paid into Social Security and retire, have to pay taxes on Social Security if their annual income is more than $32,000 ($25,000 for single filers)? It’s bad government that taxes your income then taxes it again when you retire if you get too far above poverty. Yeah, that’s fair…. It’s being punitive actually. They only spout what they believe is best for us minions, they don’t have to worry about anything when they retire because they don’t have to live like the rest of us. They have free health care and keep their pre-retirement income. Is that fair?

Jake Conroy

Marysville

Talk to us

> Give us your news tips.

> Send us a letter to the editor.

> More Herald contact information.

More in Opinion

toon
Editorial cartoons for Friday, Nov. 21

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

FILE — The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau logo is seen through a window at the CFPB offices in Washington on Sept. 23, 2019. Employees of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau were instructed to cease “all supervision and examination activity” and “all stakeholder engagement,” effectively stopping the agency’s operations, in an email from the director of the Office of Management and Budget, Russell Vought, on Saturday, Feb. 8, 2025. (Ting Shen/The New York Times)
Editorial: Keep medical debt off credit score reporting

The federal CFPB is challenging a state law that bars medical debt from credit bureaus’ consideration.

Schwab: Release the files? Sure; Trump has nothing to hide.

The man’s an open book. And scandals that would destroy others’ political lives are a MAGA selling point.

Few seem to understand property taxes, Port of Everett included

Regarding the Nov. 13 front-page article about the Port of Everett’s 2026… Continue reading

Protect access and conservation of our public lands

I am one of millions of Americans who love our nation’s public… Continue reading

Won’t somone explain tariffs to Trump?

To borrow from the caption for The Herald Editorial Board’s Nov. 15… Continue reading

No Kings rally: Kids say darndest things

At Snohomish’s very large and very peaceful No Kings rally there was… Continue reading

A model of a statue of Billy Frank Jr., the Nisqually tribal fishing rights activist, is on display in the lobby of the lieutenant governor's office in the state Capitol. (Jon Bauer / The Herald.
Editorial: Recognizing state history’s conflicts and common ground

State officials seek consensus in siting statues of an Indian rights activist and a missionary.

FILE — President Donald Trump and Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick display a chart detailing tariffs, at the White House in Washington, on Wednesday, April 2, 2025. The Justices will hear arguments on Wednesday, Nov. 5, 2025 over whether the president acted legally when he used a 1977 emergency statute to unilaterally impose tariffs.(Haiyun Jiang/The New York Times)
Editorial: Public opinion on Trump’s tariffs may matter most

The state’s trade interests need more than a Supreme Court ruling limiting Trump’s tariff power.

toon
Editorial cartoons for Thursday, Nov. 20

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

Comment: Trump’s $2,000 tariff rebates are a shell game

Most Americans have already paid $1,800 in price increases from the tariffs. It’s another distraction.

Comment: If Trump cares about affordability, he must show it

It will take more than reducing tariffs on a few items; he must show he understands consumers’ pain.

Support local journalism

If you value local news, make a gift now to support the trusted journalism you get in The Daily Herald. Donations processed in this system are not tax deductible.