While recent polls show that 80 percent of New Yorkers support increasing the tax rate on the state's very wealthiest taxpayers as a way to deal with New York's budget deficit, others have been vocal in their opposition. And some, including some NYSUT members, were put off by the union's advertising campaign urging lawmakers to make the wealthy pay their "fair share." Meanwhile, some members have shared their concerns about proposed budget cuts and have offered alternatives. What follows is a sample of those opinions.

VOTE-COPE contributor troubled by NYSUT ads

I read your article and it disturbs me that my VOTE-COPE money went to this. How much does it cost for you to put this on the radio all over New York? Do you realize that you are setting up a class war? I worked for more than 20 years in the schools and, believe me, there is plenty of waste.

The governor can get money elsewhere instead of taxing people according to what they make. Do you realize that when you tax people a percentage more, they won't strive to earn more? They will find ways to hide it or just leave the state. You will kill all that is good here. How much more do you want from families? Do you realize that it is people like this who create jobs and help restaurants, stores, etc?

I am so disappointed.

Dawn Pellechi
Received via e-mail

'So-called rich' already pay fair share

I am writing to NYSUT because I am very upset at the despicable ad campaign targeting some New Yorkers your ad says need to pay their "fair share" of New York taxes.

The so-called progressive tax rates should be unconstitutional. If all are equal under the law, the tax rate charged to millionaires should be no different than the tax rate charged to school janitors. Since you represent supposedly educated persons, teachers, you don't have to be a math teacher to understand that if the $30,000-a-year janitor is paying a 15 percent tax rate, the guy making $20 million is going to pay a lot more than the janitor, even at the 15 percent tax rate. Why should anyone be charged a higher rate of taxes than his neighbor? The same rate will yield higher payments from those who make more.

Statistically, the so-called rich already pay more than their "fair share" of taxes. What is fair about confiscatory tax rates? Does that make you feel better? How would you like it if those janitors rose up and demanded that teachers pay what the janitors decided was their "fair share" of taxes?

You are entitled to your opinions, warped as they are, but you are not entitled to the sweat of anyone's brow. They earned it, you didn't.

Kevin Lynch
Clifton Park

'Tax the wealthy' an un-American idea

When your commercial played on my radio this morning, I could not believe what I heard. What in the world makes you think that those people who have worked harder or smarter or have made better use of their money should pay a higher percentage of taxes than anyone else? That idea is based in communism.

Everyone has an equal opportunity to pull themselves up by the bootstraps and put themselves in the "wealthy" category. To encourage others to take away what these "wealthy" people earned is unconscionable and un-American.

Jim Spaller
Received via e-mail

Retirement incentive could save jobs

The newspapers recently reported that 15,000 New York City teachers would be losing their jobs. There is a simple way to maintain teacher positions. Why not offer an incentive allowing teachers who have been teaching 25 years or longer (without age restrictions) the opportunity to retire? This would enable a vast amount of teachers as young as 46 years old the option to retire. It would also save a lot of jobs. You could hire two new teachers at $46,000 each for the price of one veteran teacher who earns approximately $95,000. It makes sense.

Valerie Auguste-Partin
The Bronx

Progressive tax could hurt some teachers

In your Feb. 5 edition, it was interesting to see that NYSUT is joining "most New Yorkers" and calling for a "more progressive" income tax plan ("A matter of fairness") that would tax high-income New Yorkers making more than $250,000. Though the article was not specific, other news sources have specified that the tax would apply to households earning more than $250,000. What you are supporting alienates part of your membership.

My wife and I are both employed as science teachers in Westchester County, and earned a gross household income in 2007 of more than $240,000. This year, we may top the $250,000 figure with step increases and extracurricular activities. Thus, NYSUT is suggesting that union teachers who worked hard to get good-paying jobs be taxed at a higher percentage than others.

Most Westchester teachers already pay the painfully unfair Alternative Minimum Tax, which disproportionately taxes household income over $150,000 by taking itemized deductions (such as classroom supply deductions) away from high-income households.

This threshold was never corrected for inflation. A progressive state income tax will tax high-earning teachers similarly to the AMT. Remember, you represent us as well.

Ed Gruber
Eastchester Teachers Association

Unions, education need support

Gov. Paterson declines to support public education. We need to petition him to increase funding for education — to do something that generates income and reduces taxes:

• Support union members and locals;
• Support quality public education;
• Support excellence in teaching;
• Support the teachers who are making a difference in our children's lives;
• Support all men and women who work in educational settings;
• Instead of cutting schools, cut meaningless bureaucracy;
• Stop laying off working people in schools and corrections — they are good taxpayers;
• State and federal legislators should take a pay cut;
• Start stimulating jobs by fixing infrastructure;
• Establish statewide tax-free shopping days so people go out and buy goods;
• Offer tax incentives for solar-, wind- and battery-powered homes, cars etc.; and
• Start new nuclear and hydroelectric power projects.

Thomas Dick
Received via e-mail

Public education must be a priority

It is important for state legislators to understand exactly what harm education budget cuts will have on the students we serve. Previous draconian cuts to school budgets have already had an adverse effect on the culture of New York's public schools.

It is unconscionable to suggest further cuts to programs, resources and personnel in our already underfunded public schools. As (NYSUT Executive Vice President) Alan Lubin said in his Jan. 28 budget testimony in Albany, "Poor districts cannot absorb these cuts."

It is imperative that teacher mentors, teacher centers and Career and Technical Ed remain in public education. If the budget cuts are compounded by a loss of key personnel, it is obvious our students will not get a "second chance" to have a quality education.

Furthermore, our nation cannot be sustained if we lose a generation or if it fails to educate its most "vulnerable citizens." Education must be a priority in our nation. The pauperization of our schools must stop now.

Phyllis C. Murray
United Federation of Teachers