Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (Jan. 29, 1996)
EDITORIALS OPINIONS, UTTERS TO THE EDITOR U.S. military discharges all HIV-positive soldiers ■ OUR OPINION: I ung vm infected m hased o« leaf rather than compassion and logical thinking "I have cancer, - "I'm sorry You're Owl ** We recoil farm this sce nario How mold a cwnpa ny fire someone who in ill but is still capable of per forming his or her responsi bilities7 It would, in fart, tie illegal — a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. This law does not apply to the U,S. military, appar ently. As pari of a 4205 billion defense bill approved by the White House last week. America's armed forces will discharge all enlisted men and women who test posi tive for HIV, the virus that causes AIDS President Clinton has promised that the soldiers who .ire relieved of their duly will continue to receive full medical and dental benefits. That’s nice. Hut it doesn't speak to the larger issue of why a viable group of workers is being sent home to die. Of course. HIV is different than many other terminal disease* unlike cancer. It is contagious The military does have a vested interest in making sure that HIV pmitive people are not sent into comoat, where their blood could spread the virus to uninfected soldiers How* ever. HIV I* not contagious through casual contact, and the military should assign infected personnel to non combat posts People with HIV can con tinue to live productive lives without illness for as long as IS years. Yet. bw aim* we know the dis ea** is incurable, we often treat HIV-poftHive people m jf they werojtotng to die tomorrow. Tout altitude may speed their demise Medical mtoarr h contin ues to affirm that ill people who lead normal live* have a better chant* of living longer. By telling HIV posh live people they are no longer capable o( doing their job*, the military tell* them they are no longer living Nett only i* thi* policy bad for peonle with HIV. it is not in the best interest of the armed fort e* or the country. The AIDS viru* continue* to spread, in part, because so many Americans think the disease does not or will not affect them. VVeespel HIV-positive people from their jobs and their communities, and the disease remains invisible. And the rate of infection continues to rise When ihe bill takes effect. I 0411 men and women will be discharged from their military posts Instead. Infected jenson nel should bo allowed to keep their fobs and serve their country until they are no longer able to work Out of thi* pool of dedi rated personnel. • few ntay let brave enough to tell their stories to their peer*. Some may even be hired to con* duct seminars about the dis ease and its prevention Americans from all walks of life and in all occupations are living with this disease. If we learn from them instead of (earing them, we may he able to curb the rise of HIV infection and extend some valuable lives in the process Imagine a policy that did that. Emerald *a &$ im <'-jmm. •wmum >«•* m tom *m *m imm m !•««*«» ***M “* MM"*» ** •» Ow#** &**» tmwM ^<w>*w»8 C» «w Ml* UWM| « CMfW, * «r». i'Mpw * .w»»m a* — miwm mw'Ww * m tunum, mm .<**.»% e t«.» MB » m> I <t 4Mmu • uwa* mma>wmmmmmum* Itmlmmi »mmummunt !»*««M<«mm«m m«tman a twiM*• n> lM* »(i«l t«W* ■nn ||H*» a»y ti IiM nxan ■■MMMr QM>l«w ' **Y^y 2 fti&ib-y IWW MtHMrnt Ml* Cntt Mb MMb *«* *MMM «*M> COwj ma* »*•* ’mm •*»<<* •ab' *>*« Outwit uammutmu OwnnwiM*. **» VMm* IrMrtMIM mbiwbK 11 IM Bw »■xtum Mb* ’"man «.*w»»)«ih <M*» OHM MNOHM Mb l mum .'•mo MM ml Imp Sum Mtn Mb Ubku> MatowOnci MM> :«•«#«« UmmUj hmum in imw) lowtUmi «*•**•• *j. wmi ant .'MM SM*K«n Mw Cm cm* fbbkM WMMUMH MMMlMMpMnr «*»* IM fcKMM** It Wo dung, t»« <j»«M Inn UW Mithm Mb tnim* iBmMMt Mt«« mm tmem mi ***»» Mmmjc amt , nM Mb M»*a law mwiwiii •»<* i b»»iit»M lb.**#*-.! Ktwtgr • .»• .• bn .orbit. Mm**m» *»*•» trmmfum «.MM* 9km. btao »f<*» &MW, jmwk Ml «f« bb MtUMB Cm Vm Ml Mat tcwm SbMi Simii Bwiim. ifet^n * M**U mvu . m m The Flat Tax So simple you can fWe on a postcard ! i <M% r«* ZLiL. C HAHOt. 'JJ Flat tax steals from lower, middle class It damn'I take much arm twisting to make me admit I am a Marxist at heart just think of it ~ everyone hat enough money, a direct «ay tn the world around them and complete tub satisfaction It aleo doesn't take much lor me to admit that I think it i* impossible The ideal* of Marxism always seem to (tumble to the realities of com ro union, making me glad I live in a capital ton democracy. We are surrounded by paradose* like thi* •very day A plan sound* and look* great lor everyone on paper, but before the ink baa dried, the problem* are already sell evident The Oat la* in many way* remind* me of Marxism It look* good, but it end* up with the rich getting richer and the poor besoming only mote dow ntrodden What make* the flat tax sound so good to so many people? A lot of thing* — aome unfortu nately distorted The first and most obvious is the complete mess our current tax system is in With 43? forms to chouse from and a seven mil lion word federal income la* code, it (an be move than a Utile intimidating f-ormet Rep |«tk hump. who > unfwntly lead* •he Republican comrntsaion calling for tlse flat tax replacement. Mid. "The present system t* beyond repair It it impossibly complex, oulra jpHwitty expensive. overly intrusive, economi cally destructive arid manifestly unfair “ A* a way to “eomact" this unfairness. individ ual* would pay one flat tax (depending on the plan. Phil Oram in* l» percent. Stephen PorW 17 percent, or Kemp * to pen entl What a great idea Think of that Taxes at a Heady level of about lit percent, while most middle income taxpayers current Is (all in the IS- Of lit percent bracket* Kven the very wealthiest of Americana would only have to pay »« percent instead of the 39 6 percent they currently pay. And. of course, the country would have plen ty of money, right? Wrong. Ik-(ore the (la! tax. the poorest of the poor pay IS percent in taxes while the richest pay 39 per tent, but after the flat tax is implemented, the poor don’t pay at all and the rich pay a mere 21 percent. .And not only would taxes "plummet," but the flat tax would end the taxation of interest divi dend* and capital gam* (profit on sale of it** U or other Investment*). So just where is all that money coming from? Ah. from the nol-so-deep pockets of the lower and middle da**** A# Bob McIntyre (head ol the labor-hacked Cftinma (or Tax Justice) ao elo quently states. "It's a bunch of rich Republican busniex* types who got together and put out a wish list that doesn't come close to adding up it would add hundreds of billions to the budget cUfidt.' The extra money comm from the elimination of traditional deduction* — not only state and OPINION local taxi*s and money given to charity, but. and this is a big one. mortgage interest pay ments. Something smells fishy, and it's not the catch of the day Stats are published daily about how good life would be with a flat tax. Don't get too excited, though While flat tax supporters are the first to point out (hut many middle class (if you consider married with no children and earning over $100,000 yearly middle clasts, that is) are in the 31-percent tax bracket Under the current tax system, you are taxed only on the amount of money you make in a specific bracket (example for the couple 15 per cent on the first $.19,000, 28 percent on the next $55,250 and 31 perc ent on the remaining) mak mg thetr tax bill add up to about 23 percent of their income That is still ft percent above Forbes' suggested tax rate, which is (ust one reason you will see him clinging to it so stridently. Not only is 2 percent not an especially large amount to save, studies show that once a flat tax goes over 20 percent, taxpayer support starts dropping (The Oregonian, jan. 23). Oddly enough, these cut® are not being pul there by the party known for its support of dti ran* on the lower rungs of the economic ladder, but by big business and the very wealthy. In order to comfort voters (who would rightly think that the tax rate would have to rise and risel, proponents have also included a stipula tion to make it difficult for the tax to be raised (either a three-fifths or a two-thirds vote within Congress). So even when the mistake was noticed, it would be almost impossible to rectify They argue that this tax would stimulate business enough to make up for the lost income While some politicians are blasted for their “tax and spend" policies, this group holds the "don't tax and spend anyway" ideology. If you think this sounds familiar, remember the theory of tru kle-down economics that worked great 120 years ago but not so great in the 1980s Consider the current national debt and the spending procedures that put it there. Can we really afford another lesson on outdat ed Industrialist-era economics? Unfortunately. It look* tike we are about to get one. and it # already obvious who's going to poc ket the bill Kay knnitat heid, a sophomore ma/anng in hk»l ojiy, is a columnist for the Emerald e-mail koyk$fyj>l(Histi»nt* uoregon alu
