Jim Fossel’s column on the state budget surplus (Dec. 5) could not have been wrong on more fronts.

First, he should avoid using analogies that he knows nothing about. What la-la land does he live in where contractors making more on a job than estimated should give it back?

The contractor took a risk and deserves to be paid the amount on the contract. Why do you think they’re called “contractors”? It also helps make up for the other three jobs they lost money on that year, or the early years of business when a flat-screen for Christmas was not even a consideration.

On this premise, then the same should apply to any company making excess profits and I should have huge checks coming from Apple, Amazon and Big Pharma, but the truth is not even liberal Warren Buffett will be doing it, because that is free enterprise.

Now for the real issue of what to do about the surplus: Mr. Fossel admits that our state government struggles mightily to regularly balance the budget, which is why we need to continually build up the rainy day fund.

More importantly, however, we have a surplus because of many factors, and those will change, but it is also because our leaders at the national level have provided money for states to invest in our future. Any efforts to shift that money for day-to-day use is completely counterproductive and only makes us more dependent upon the federal government in future years.

Bradford Norris
Cape Elizabeth

Copy the Story Link