Letters to the Editor

Prime Minister Kan thanks world for coming to aid of devastated Japan

Thank you for the Kizuna.

Kizuna — the bonds of friendship.

One month has passed since an earthquake of unprecedented scale struck Japan, taking thousands of precious lives. Even today, evacuation shelters are still the only refuge for more than 150,000 people.

In the tsunami-devastated regions there was no food, no water, no electricity, and the survivors had no communications. At that desperate time people from around the world rallied to our side bringing hope and inspiring courage.

Every blanket and every cup of hot soup brought warmth and strength to the cold and exhausted who had lost everything. Rescue teams heroically searched for survivors in the heaps of broken rubble, while medical teams worked tirelessly caring for the injured.

We are still receiving a tremendous outpouring of encouragement, prayers and support from people worldwide. We deeply appreciate the Kizuna our friends around the world have shown and I want to thank every nation, entity, and you personally, from the bottom of my heart.

Reconstruction has already begun and we are putting every effort into stabilizing the situation at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant.

Through our own efforts and with the help of the global community, Japan will recover and come back even stronger. We will then repay you for your generous aid.

With this in our hearts, we now stand together dedicated to rebuilding the nation.

As our feelings of deep gratitude to you grow into feelings of hope, we, the people of Japan, express our sincere thanks to you all.

Naoto Kan
Prime minister of Japan

Tax hikes better than cutting aid to needy

My appreciation goes out to our state legislators who are making gut-wrenching budget decisions. They struggle for ways to reduce expenditures and to increase revenues.

Many people would be affected only by revenue increases, and thus they rail against increased taxes. Their voices are heard, and politicians quake.

But we and our legislators must not forget the fragile elderly, the disabled, the homeless, the chronically ill and others who depend on the social safety net. They cannot speak with one voice, and their pleas are not heard as loudly and strongly as the no-tax zealots.

Now is not the time to reduce spending for those in need, especially as those needs grow.

Reasonable and finely tuned revenue increases are preferable to slashing aid to our most vulnerable citizens.

Small increases in the income tax rates (including taxation of pensions) would preserve safety net supports. But these must be carefully structured to affect only those who can afford them.

Thomas Huber
Kaneohe

Don’t always rely on others to help needy

Marya Grambs asks: What if my sister was being beaten by her husband, what if my long-lost uncle turned up homeless, what if there were no day care and free meals for my 86-year old grandmother ("Budget cuts hurt many in society," Letters, Star-Advertiser, April 21)?

My answer to Marya is that I would help them all myself instead of demanding that complete strangers (i.e., taxpayers) take care of them.

If I needed to make sacrifices to assist them, I wouldn’t give it a second thought — I’d sacrifice until it hurts in order to help them.

I hope, too, that Marya would help her relatives if they were in need.

Jeffrey Herman
Waianae

Higher golf fee could reduce city income

In these hard economic times, the city and state need to tighten their budgets not by raising fees but by being more efficient in their procedures and processes.

My only enjoyment is golf, and with municipal golf fees going up, we might as well go to a private course.

Do not chase the golfers away by raising the fee; it will not generate additional income.

Golfing fees should be lowered, so that more people will play.

More people playing means more revenue for the city.

Did the city analyze the last fee increase to determine if it increased revenue?

Dennis Sanada
Kaneohe

The fairest taxation is a single rate for all

Bruce Conquest believes that progressive tax rates for wealthier residential property owners is a good idea ("Tax wealthy at higher rates," Letters, Star-Advertiser, April 20).

He asks, "Why should the owner of a Makiki studio apartment pay the same rate as an owner of a Kahala oceanfront multimillion-dollar estate?"

Does he also believe that wealthier car owners should be taxed at a higher rate than less-wealthy car owners when they fill up their cars with gasoline?

We need to scrap our current income tax system altogether so that gross pay is take-home pay, and replace it with the same tax-collecting system all car owners are now subject to today every time they buy gasoline at the pump.

Every car owner today pays the exact same tax rate at the pump. Why not apply this pay-at-the-pump tax-collecting system to all places of business that sell products?

Paul E. Staples
Kailua