------------------
When is the last time you had a Tootsie-Pop? Seriously, go get one. . . they are ALL good. . .chocolate, cherry, raspberry, blueberry, orange. . . and the chewy Tootsie-Roll filling. . . a classic!
Just tax the rich!!
Michigan's flat-rate tax system is incredibly regressive. My state tax bill is barely noticeable in terms of total dollars; we have more than enough discretionary income. While I wouldn't necessarily be happy to pay more, I can certainly afford to.
Speaking as someone who stands to gain a fair amount by some of the proposed tax cuts at the federal level, I think that there are better uses for that money than to pay for extra trips to Lighthouse Point. I'd rather let the government keep it than (a) cut programs more deeply or (b) go more deeply into debt.
defict.. simple.. cut your spending
Most states are constitutionally required to balance budgets, which is why state budgets have so much volatility. It is largely only the federal government that gets to assume long-term debt. Of course, most economists believe that there is a beneficial role for such debt; namely, the government can be used to dampen the swing of the natural economic pendulum.
But at the state level, the personal analogy does hold. There are only two things you can do: cut costs, or get another job (raise taxes).
-brian
A limosine liberal, without the limosine.
It looks at the moment like the legislature isn't too happy with any of Taft's suggestions, and accordingly, he's not too happy with them. The truth of the matter is, the State's revenue comes mostly through income and sales taxes, so the challenge is to find ways to increase cash flow from those sources without actually raising tax rates. The answer, of course, is that when people earn more money, they pay more income tax, and when people spend more money they pay more sales tax. But neither income nor retail spending has increased at the anticipated rate of growth that the state was counting on when they put the budget together, and so now they're in trouble.
What the State needs to do is to budget the same way that the rest of us do. Instead of budgeting for next year based on projected revenue increases, plan for next year based on this year's revenues, and use any overage in the following year. The rest of us call that "savings."
--Dave Althoff, Jr.
LIVE ENTERTAINMENT said:
hehe you have my vote, Red Garter Rob.As much as I appreciate it.. you'll probably never see me run for office as much as I'd love to.
Some people have skeletons in thier closet.. I have a cemetary.. The mud-slinging fest would be just ugly..
------------------
June 11th, 2001 - Gemini 100
VertiGo Rides - 82
Technical Services 2002
Fright Zone Screamster 2002
Brian Noble said:
Just tax the rich!!Michigan's flat-rate tax system is incredibly regressive. My state tax bill is barely noticeable in terms of total dollars; we have more than enough discretionary income. While I wouldn't necessarily be happy to pay more, I can certainly afford to.
Speaking as someone who stands to gain a fair amount by some of the proposed tax cuts at the federal level, I think that there are better uses for that money than to pay for extra trips to Lighthouse Point. I'd rather let the government keep it than (a) cut programs more deeply or (b) go more deeply into debt.
defict.. simple.. cut your spendingMost states are constitutionally required to balance budgets, which is why state budgets have so much volatility. It is largely only the federal government that gets to assume long-term debt. Of course, most economists believe that there is a beneficial role for such debt; namely, the government can be used to dampen the swing of the natural economic pendulum.
But at the state level, the personal analogy does hold. There are only two things you can do: cut costs, or get another job (raise taxes).
-brian
A limosine liberal, without the limosine.
The so called "defecit" at the federal level is an accounting phenom. It is a myth that the liberals have thrust upon the laymen as a way of gaining political power.
1. The federal deficit is lower now than it was in 1968 when measured in "real dollars", that is adjusted/proportianal.
2. The deficit increase is only correlated with one economic effect; the lowering of interest rates.
3. Most pundits use "static" analysis to describe a dynamic phenom. Therefore ANY conclusion that is derived is faulty.
4. The use of tax cuts to increase revenue,thus government outlays is a long proven technique of fiscal management.
5. Although most state constitutions prohibit the use of long term debt (deficit spending) they engage in it nonetheless through the use of muni debt such as long term bonds (to build a school, factory, maintain a toll road, ect), RAN's(revenue anticipation notes), TAN's(tax anticipation notes).
6. One of the most well known examples of state deficit spending is the recent flood of Tabacco Settlement notes. In other words the state of WI, NJ, ect issued debt that is backed by the future revenue from the recent settlement of the various class action lawsuits against the cigarette corporations. These bonds/notes carry an A1(Moodys)/A(S&P) rating. In plain english they are medium to medium high investment grade paper. I think that the state of CA carries an underlying ratiing of A(S&P) to put things in perspective.
7. The use of the tems "regressive/progressive" are a meaningless/detrimental way to describe taxation. A flat tax would actually result in higher income earners paying more! The taxes of the lower 3 quintiles of taxpayers would decrease!
8. Most people are unaware of the "hidden" taxes that they pay;such as the federal excise tax on tires or the SS tax of around 15% on earnings up to 87 thousand dollars per year(I think thats the number this year). The Social Security tax is funneled into the general revenue
stream.
9. It is a myth to think that tax revenue is based on the level of taxation;rather it is the level of economic activity that determines the level of tax revenue. In other words if the economy is growing like it was until 2000 tax revenue will increase. Likewise as the economy has slowed up abit (GDP growth was around 1-2% last yr) tax inflows have decreased.
I like most right thinking Americans/taxpayers want to keep their money to spend as they choose on things like going to Cedar Point ect.
The correlation between a modest increase in sales taxes and consumer spending is tenuous at best; the studies of this are mixed. Don't get me wrong I hate taxes and I hate paying them even more but government services are not free!
Brian I would suggest that you read "Free to Choose" and "Tyrany of the Status Quo" by Milton and Rose Friedman; as a simple primer on economics these two books are the finest written on the subject. Your view on taxation,fiscal policy and monetary policy will be influenced beyond words.
You must be logged in to post