To the Editor:

I like to respond to some feedback regarding my letter about the present economic and regulatory polices of Donald Trump entitled “Short-term gains and long-term consequences.”

One responder stated that my letter demonstrated I hated Mr. Trump. Another said that I would not give credit to Mr. Trump even if he cured cancer. Yet, no one raised any arguments regarding the questions I raised.

The questions included whether extensive environmental deregulation represented a legitimate response to excessive regulations, or would it result in going backwards protecting our environment. Second, what if climate change concerns proved accurate? Third, what effect would Mr. Trump’s policy have on income disparity between the top 1 percent and the bottom 90 percent? The final question was what would be the effect of a continued rise in our national debt? These long-term considerations must be weighed in determining the effect of Mr. Trump’s policy. I concluded it was too early to make any definitive determination.

I do not think anyone would see environmental issues of the past returning or intensifying, or rising oceans flooding coastal cities, or increasing income disparity between the top 1 percent and the rest of us, or the national debt being handled in ways that clearly hurt a segment of the population unable to handle such a burden as good things. These consequences may not occur. Yet to deny that if they were to occur it would eliminate the “good feeling” we have about the present economic gains is irrational. I do not know what the answers will be. I do know those questions have to be raised. It is difficult to believe that anyone, regardless of their political viewpoint, would object to stating that the future answers to these questions will have great impact on the final verdict of this administration’s regulatory and fiscal policies.

Carey Jaffee

Stony Hill Road, July 7