Just saw this one in the Aspen Times:

http://www.aspentimes.com/article/20110306/ASPENWEEKLY/110309917/1021&parentprofile=1061

I do have to agree with the writer that an additional way for Wisconsin to reduce its projected deficit would be to eliminate the corporate tax-welfare that takes the form of "incentives" to do business in Wiscy.  I know from personal experience and research in Pennsylvania that these programs are ineffective boondoggles that raid the state treasury.  And from an American perspective they are a zero-sum waste of the collective tax revenues.

However I do disagree with the writer that the State should simply jack up taxes on corporations.  Why should companies be singled out to fund the state's growing deficit? Taxes on companies or individuals should not be continually increased to cover for the failings of fiscal control.

The Wisconsin struggle has been couched by many as the big corporations wanting to squeeze out the little guy.  But the "corporation" in this case is the State of Wisconsin, and the "savings" goes back to the people in the form of avoided tax increases.

I still believe that the idea of terminating collective bargaining rights for state employees was not needed though.  The state instead could simply have refused to meet union demands for whatever aspects of the contract were objectionable, and tolerated a strike if/when that occurred, as I imagine that if this law goes through, the unions will stage a strike anyway.

The article goes on to talk about how public-sector unions are the last stronghold of the union movement.  Perhaps that is because the state of Wisconsin (like other states) cannot simply go out of business or relocate to another area. 

Private businesses can. For all the talk about all-powerful labor movement, the average working Joe in the private sector has rejected them.  Almost every new steel mill and auto assembly plant in the USA for the past 20 years has opened up non-union, without labor unrest, and surprisingly well-paid.  UAW and USWA efforts to organize them have routinely been rebuffed by huge voting margins.

There is no real fiscal crisis.  He cut corporate taxes to create one so that he could bust the unions and so strengthen the Republican party.  Its politics pure and simple, an attack on the middle class, and on democracy

There is no real fiscal crisis.  He cut corporate taxes to create one so that he could bust the unions and so strengthen the Republican party.  Its politics pure and simple, an attack on the middle class, and on democracy


According to this article...

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20110118/GPG0101/110118121/0/GPG0703/Walker-GOP-lawmakers-agree-tax-breaks-job-creation?odyssey=nav%7Chead

...the corporate tax break was one of those "job creation tax breaks" (which I definitely object to, they are ineffective nonsense) but it also says that the projected impact on the Wiscy budget is $33MM per year.

Apparently they also passed through a tax cut for people who make contributions into Health Savings accounts that costs another $24.5MM per year, but that tax cut was for John Q. Public as I read it. (although if I were a Wiscy citizen it would do nothing for me since I do not have an HSA).

There is a third "economic development tax cut" proposal worth $25MM that will not kick in for two years.  Another ineffective boondoggle that should be eliminated.

My understanding is that the projected deficit for this year is $136MM, and for 2013 they are on pace to hit $3.6 billion.  :o  Of course those are government economist projections; government economists are oxymorons as they work in a world of compulsory income.

By the way, I took a look at the Wisconsin tax tables, and the fine citizens of cheesedom are taking a real shellacking on income taxes.  They start off at 4.6% and your average taxpayer gets into the 6.5% bracket.  Damn, I thought I had it bad here in the Keystone State with a 3.1% hit.  :o  Something is out of control up there in Packerland.

By the way, I took a look at the Wisconsin tax tables, and the fine citizens of cheesedom are taking a real shellacking on income taxes.  They start off at 4.6% and your average taxpayer gets into the 6.5% bracket.  Damn, I thought I had it bad here in the Keystone State with a 3.1% hit.  :o  Something is out of control up there in Packerland.


Wimps.  Real cheeze comes happy politicians, and Sacramento's the capital of California.  9.3%, and it kicks in at $45K and applies to capital gains as well as wages.  Buy a $400K condo and you'll also have $4K/year in property taxes.  (Or rent it from someone who's only paying $1K/year in property taxes because they bought it 30 years ago.)

There is no real fiscal crisis.  He cut corporate taxes to create one so that he could bust the unions and so strengthen the Republican party.  Its politics pure and simple, an attack on the middle class, and on democracy


Kinda funny how both Wisconsin and Indiana have something going on with the Republicans and Unions.

Kinda funny how both Wisconsin and Indiana have something going on with the Republicans and Unions.



Not just Wisconsin & Indiana but also Ohio, New Jersey, Idaho, Michigan, and I'm sure many others.


But, Michigan is trying to do more. Check this out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53BkWfyb9n0



Cat

Not just Wisconsin & Indiana but also Ohio, New Jersey, Idaho, Michigan, and I'm sure many others.


But, Michigan is trying to do more. Check this out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53BkWfyb9n0



Cat


This is outragious

This is outragious




Of course it is outrageous. That is why ALL of us needs to do whatever we can to stop this assault on our democracy.



Cat

Of course it is outrageous. That is why ALL of us needs to do whatever we can to stop this assault on our democracy.

Cat


On the michigan thing... I agree.  All the state should do is to simply withhold funding from municipalities that either will not or cannot responsibly handle their finances.

State does not need to fiddle with the whole collective bargaining thing.  If a city wants to bankrupt itself by paying its workers too much... fine, just don't ask the state to pony up the money. The taxpayers in said town can ante up (as they should have been doing all along).

Pennsylvania has its "Act 47" which enabled the Commonwealth to exert financial controls over an Act-47 designated community, and in those towns, State approval and benchmarks must be met.  I cannot say that it has been a rousing success, but the State by and large only inflicts fiscal control on the towns, and requires financial remediation activities to take place.

On the michigan thing... I agree.  All the state should do is to simply withhold funding from municipalities that either will not or cannot responsibly handle their finances.

State does not need to fiddle with the whole collective bargaining thing.  If a city wants to bankrupt itself by paying its workers too much... fine, just don't ask the state to pony up the money. The taxpayers in said town can ante up (as they should have been doing all along).

Pennsylvania has its "Act 47" which enabled the Commonwealth to exert financial controls over an Act-47 designated community, and in those towns, State approval and benchmarks must be met.  I cannot say that it has been a rousing success, but the State by and large only inflicts fiscal control on the towns, and requires financial remediation activities to take place.



The thing is, the cities, states, & country did not go broke by paying its workers too much, they went broke by giving the wealthy too much in way of tax breaks. All of this is basically turning the U.S. into a third world country. I for one, do not want to see that happen.



Cat

Kinda funny how both Wisconsin and Indiana have something going on with the Republicans and Unions.
Yeah whats in the air in the midwest there? In addition to Wisconsin and Indiana there is Ohio with the union thing.

Not just Wisconsin & Indiana but also Ohio, New Jersey, Idaho, Michigan, and I'm sure many others.


But, Michigan is trying to do more. Check this out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53BkWfyb9n0



Cat
Idaho? Must be getting tired of their potatoes there and are picking a fight with the public works union.

As for New Jersey our Governor Chris Christie is not looking to break public works unions as far as I know with their collective bargaining.

The thing is, the cities, states, & country did not go broke by paying its workers too much, they went broke by giving the wealthy too much in way of tax breaks. All of this is basically turning the U.S. into a third world country. I for one, do not want to see that happen.



Cat
Yeah but the states don't have money to pay these lavish benifits packages because they didn't  put money in their benifit package programs. Those moneys went somewhere else or just simply they didn't have the money at all to put into these benifit package programs. It is some of the states faults for not managing the money they took in right or they just kicked the can down the road when they didn't have enough revenues coming in to pay in.

I don't know much about the city governments and the federal governments finances/money issues are a whole different thing to get into.

There is no real fiscal crisis.  He cut corporate taxes to create one so that he could bust the unions and so strengthen the Republican party.  Its politics pure and simple, an attack on the middle class, and on democracy
I agree with you mostly. He just doesn't like the unions because they are huge donors to the democratic party. I don't think he cares how much the public workers are getting paid in regards to the issue of attacking the middle class.

The thing is, the cities, states, & country did not go broke by paying its workers too much, they went broke by giving the wealthy too much in way of tax breaks. All of this is basically turning the U.S. into a third world country. I for one, do not want to see that happen.



Cat


A problem with your argument is that overall Federal tax revenues have never been higher (regardless of the rate structure). And here in PA it is much the same.

As for my municipality, it has done nothing but increase property and wage taxes across the board. So in the case of the governments that I live under, it is a SPENDING problem and not a gross tax receipts problem.

What politicians want you to think is that revenues have been starved. That's not true. Instead we have grown spending at a much faster pace than tax revenues and therein lies the rub.

Not just Wisconsin & Indiana but also Ohio, New Jersey, Idaho, Michigan, and I'm sure many others.


But, Michigan is trying to do more. Check this out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53BkWfyb9n0



Cat


All of it's been in the Indianapolis Star with everything that's been going on, the Democrats left in protest and there have been rallies.


Yeah whats in the air in the midwest there? In addition to Wisconsin and Indiana there is Ohio with the union thing.


Yep, RTW laws, school voucher stuff(I forgot what it's actually suppose to be called) and a additional useless amendment on gay marriage(which is already illegal in Indiana anyway, which defines marriage as between a man and woman).

I've dealt with the United Food and Commercial Workers before(first at Kroger, didn't care for them after being there for alittle bit, especially when they bombed one of my weaker checks heavily with fees).

They also got in at Cub Foods(after I had been there awhile) by card check. One of the UFCW organizers lied to me, telling me my signature wasn't a vote. I've been really on guard when it comes to unions after that ordeal.

A problem with your argument is that overall Federal tax revenues have never been higher (regardless of the rate structure). And here in PA it is much the same.

As for my municipality, it has done nothing but increase property and wage taxes across the board. So in the case of the governments that I live under, it is a SPENDING problem and not a gross tax receipts problem.

What politicians want you to think is that revenues have been starved. That's not true. Instead we have grown spending at a much faster pace than tax revenues and therein lies the rub.



I still think you are wrong. Yeah, spending has gone up-but that is because all prices go up over the years. I can't say that it is because of inflation because we haven't had real inflation in several years.

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy11/pdf/hist.pdf

However, tax rates-especially among the top, have gone down. 

http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/fed_individual_rate_history-20101220.pdf


I will agree with you that there is a spending problem in some areas-like the DoD & giving subsidies to big corporations (like oil & gas) who already have mega tax breaks.



Cat 

Municipalties in New Jersey are actually doing good or ok. Its the state government that was messed up by both Dems and the Republicans for basically the whole entire decade of the 00's. It was actually the State Republicans early in the decade of the 00's that made bad deals with the unions. The Dems spent too much when they took over the state legislature and the Governor's office from 2003-2009 especially when former Governor Jon Corzine got into office in January 2006. Former Governor Jim McGreevy's discretions hurt the state as well as we had to replace him with Richard Codey in late 2004. New Jersey's pension fund for the government workers is in deep trouble and had not been paid into much for the whole decade of the 2000's. The pension fund needs reform to sustain itself.

However, tax rates-especially among the top, have gone down. 

http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/fed_individual_rate_history-20101220.pdf

Cat 


Let's compare 2001 with 2011.

The bottom-income tax rate dropped from 15% down to 10%.  That means that the lower income tier pays 33% less tax in 2010 than they did in 2001.  The top-income tax rate dropped from 39.1% to 35%.  This means that the top-income tier pays about 10% less tax in 2010 than they did in 2001.

Note that the new 10% lower-tier income tax rate was passed thru as part of the Bush Tax Cuts.

Let's compare 2001 with 2011.

The bottom-income tax rate dropped from 15% down to 10%.  That means that the lower income tier pays 33% less tax in 2010 than they did in 2001.  The top-income tax rate dropped from 39.1% to 35%.  This means that the top-income tier pays about 10% less tax in 2010 than they did in 2001.

Note that the new 10% lower-tier income tax rate was passed thru as part of the Bush Tax Cuts.


And that 10% drop was worth tons more than the 33% drop.  Just do the math.

And that 10% drop was worth tons more than the 33% drop.  Just do the math.


Oh I've done the math.

That 35% is worth megatons more than that 10% too.  ;)

Also I hear Iowa just weakened collective bargaining rights so there goes the "whats in the air in the midwest" again. I have a question though why is Terry Branstad the Governor of Iowa again? I mean he was the Governor of Iowa from 1983-1999 and he gets to be the governor of that state again? I don't get that one.

Bottom line Synder(Michigan), Walker(Michigan), and Kasich(Ohio) have overrreached the way the US House Dems in 2009 overreached with the Health Care Bill.