In response to “Focus should be on spending cuts, not on class warfare” (Dec. 28 Forum):

Middle class is suffering; all they seek is a level playing field

Forum writer Fred Alexander needs to realize we’re still recovering from one of the largest economic collapses since the Great Depression. We have to reduce spending, but in a way that won’t cause a double dip recession.

When those in the upper tax brackets are thriving while middle class wages are stagnant it’s considered fair and balanced.

When we try to even the playing field, it’s class warfare.

It is the epitome of class warfare to believe that the votes of the majority are somehow invalid due to their socioeconomic status.

Chuck Gardner

Charlotte

U.S. on a downward spiral thanks to policies of Democrats

Forum writer Fred Alexander is exactly right.

Taylor Batten said the Observer editorial board generally leans left of center. If a ship’s captain had that attitude his ship would circle leeward in the ocean until it eventually foundered, never reaching its destination.

That’s exactly where the U.S. government is headed in the hands of Democrats.

Robert Douglas

Charlotte

---

GOP increasingly unpopular because it’s out of step

Republicans are in a bind. After losing three of the past four national elections, their ideology of tax cuts for the wealthy and austerity for the rest of the U.S. has proven unpopular.

Republican social issue stances on abortion, gay marriage and gun control are proving even more unpopular than their fiscal policies.

The reason the GOP is unpopular is that their ideas are impractical, un-American, and just plain wrong.

Michael A. Clark

Charlotte

Too much hypocrisy on foreign aid, raising taxes on rich

I find it very hypocritical that when it is brought up that we spend way to much on foreign aid, and especially way too much on countries that don’t even like us, we are told that the cost of foreign aid is such a minuscule part of the budget that it is not even worth worrying about.

Now, we are told that it is imperative that we raise taxes on the so-called “wealthy.”

The funny thing is, that won’t even pay for that same foreign aid. Am I missing something?

Richard Jerge

Mint Hill

---

In response to “Last child will empty the nest; dog fills it” (Dec. 27):

Wish empty nester had given ‘pound puppy’ a home instead

I’m happy for guest columnist Lashawnda Becoats, that she’s able to experience the love of a dog to help with her empty nest.

But I wish she had used that experience and her public platform to highlight the plight of shelter animals.

The designer dog she ordered, and paid a lot of money for, is probably cute and cuddly, but just encourages breeders and puppy mills to breed dogs in cages while thousands of dogs just as cute and cuddly are euthanized daily.

The only money I’ll ever pay for a dog will be its adoption fees.

Deborah Beck

Iron Station

---

What are we willing to sacrifice to secure all of our schools?

With nearly 99,000 public schools and 33,000 private schools in this country, the armed security issue may seem unaffordable unless you look closer. Using $56,000 per school per year as a base, one armed security person in each school would cost $7.4 billion per year.

Option 1: Reallocating only 14 percent of the nearly $53 billion the U.S. spends on foreign aid each year would pay for the entire program. Which program is more vital to the security and well being of our country?

Option 2: NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who has become obsessed with telling Americans how they should live, could fund the entire program from his personal fortune, estimated at over $11 billion.

Maybe the issue of protecting our children instead of playing politics is not unaffordable after all.

Edwin Saint Sing

Mooresville

Protecting your right to a weapon carries a high price

If the NRA position is that protecting the right to own an assault weapon is more important than protecting children in schools, students in universities and people in public places, they must understand that there has to be a cost.

The answer is clear. Let gun owners bear the cost for the armed security guards through additional sales taxes, say 10 percent, on all guns, ammo and gun accessories. Make the added tax 20 percent on all guns that could be classified as assault weapons.

Governments place additional taxes on alcohol and tobacco. The same should be done for guns and ammo.

Alden Segrest

Denver, N.C.

In response to “Time we made our schools as safe as our airports are” (Dec. 28 Forum):

Can’t stop at taking guns out of schools. So where does it end?

Forum writer Richard Maccini states that on 9/11 four planes were hijacked “by terrorists with guns.” Actually, there is no evidence guns were used; passenger accounts mention razor knives.

Moreover, it would make no sense to stop at keeping guns out of schools. All places where children congregate – day care, sporting events, scout meetings, church youth groups, etc. – would have to be afforded the same level of protection to have the desired end result.

Such an undertaking is neither practical nor desirable.

Steven P. Nesbit

Charlotte