Articles tagged as

Taxes

Green Choice

…this is a tax that can increase without ever seeing a public hearing. No one will testify. No one you vote for will be held to account for the tax increase. You will just pay more.

“The need for countries to maximize their take from their citizens”…Really? Is that all we are?

OK, this snippet is from the Economist of about a year ago (yeah, spending the last of my frequent flier miles on magazine subscriptions.  Hey, it allows me to sample some stuff for a short period of time that I wouldn’t ordinarily purchase).

It certainly is a Euro-centric philosophy expressed in its pages – and Big State to boot.  Oh certainly, from time to time, I’ve been surprised that they’ve agreed with my outlook on something.  That said, I could not say that their outlook other than Statist and almost always side with growing Govt.

Can you spot what caught my eye?  Oh, heck, I’ll make it easy for you:

High-tax European governments have complained in the past about competition from countries like Ireland; the current crisis may lead to more calls for co-ordination of tax policies.  Indeed, many countries will be raising taxes simultaneously, which may reduce the temptation for businesses to shift.  much depends on where countries start; it shouldd be easier for those iwth lower tax burdens to increase their take.

Higher earners can also be mobile.  So many French professionals moved to London in the past decade that Nicolas Sarkozy, France’s president, pleaded with them (and offered tax deals) to come back.  Britain is gradually losing its appeal to high-earning foreigners.  calculations by pricewaterhouseCoopers, an accounting firm, show that British authorities will take a bigger tax bite out of the pay packet of a married exutive earning 250K Sterling ($370K) than any other G20 nation except Italy.

The need for…

Read more

Reverend Jackboot!?

UCCThe left always considers any comment by clergy, in the secular affairs of state, an affront to imagined Constitutional separations unless the remarks support their positions.  Such is the case with the Reverend Gary M. Schulte of the United Church of Christ (UCC).  With a fusion of left wing talking points and liturgical flair, he leapt the imagined Jeffersonian separation of State and Church, to express his objection to the budget passed by the New Hampshire House.

If taxpayers do not pony up to the government, in the form of a larger state budget, people will suffer.  The old, the weak, the children….But we’ve no idea just how much of your money Reverend Gary will need you to give to the Government to end the suffering, nor can we ever.  Distress always expands to meet the supply of publicly funded services available to reduce it. We just need more even though no amount is ever enough; just look at the failed states of California, Michigan and New York whose pursuit of social justice with taxpayer dollars has made them so bankrupt that they no longer have the money to care for much of anything at all.

But the UCC does not seem interested in that risk.  They are just another myopic Christian/Marxist fusion church that seems willing to advocate state power to achieve warm and fuzzy ends.  It is Social Justice, which is essentially communism.  And communism, being a godless secular faith all its own, has no issue with polluting and then subjugating institutions like the UCC to achieve its ends, even converting or subverting their purposes to advance the growth of statism.  They started with the language, which UCC has embraced, then moved on to policy, which they now advocate. And now we have Reverend Gary, who is probably a great guy who means well, rent seeking for the left wing agenda, with the full power and faith of the UCC behind him, asking politicians to spend more money on government, as if government is the answer.

But if you saw the UCC web site, you’d not be at all surprised.

Read more

And to go along with Steve’s Picture of the Day….

Can You Spell I.R.S.? Sure you can! Do you know what it means?   Sure you do! Can you think of other words that start I.R.S.? I know you do….and here’s some more: (H/T:  Big Government)

Big Ben, Parliament

Rumor has it Mr. Obama gave a speech yesterday about something. I didn’t watch it and with good reason. Been there, done that. Two faced, self contradicting, tired, and repetitive. Put another way, Big Ben, Parliament.

Municipal Outsourcing Works…

There is a city in Georgia that outsourced just about everything. The result? Better services, low taxes, no pension bombs, and money to spare.

The (other) Picture of The Day

New Hampshire may have a chart just like this one, so with any luck someone will be kind enough to provide it. Until then this shows us what Ohio Education Association Union Employees make compared to the other suckers who “also pay taxes.” A theme repeated in every state most likley. Data is supposed to be from the US Dept of Labor.

Meet Terie “Billion Dollar Deficit” Vu.

NH Journal is reporting more fear-mongering from the left, and from the usual suspects. Teri “Billion Dollar Deficit” Norelli (D- scaring women and children), is promising us that the Republican Budget will ‘put peoples lives at risk.

The Right To Your Money: Nothing ‘Fair’ About It.

Tax Dollar Black HoleThe Granite State Fair Tax Coalition, discovering that it’s "percentage of income model" argument against property taxes really applies to all things, and that lower income people pay a higher percentage of their income on everything, (a problem resolved through hard work and perseverance to which we apparently do not have a right) has announced that it is looking for a way to make "Rich BastardsTM" pay more for everything.

One example?

How about Marriage.  Now that we’ve determined that Marriage is a civil right, (unless you are too young, too closely related, are already married, to uncivil to be or stay married, or want to remain single) why does a decent wedding (or any wedding) have to cost low income workers as much as 100% of their annual income while "Rich BastardsTM" only have to pay 25% to as little as 2% of theirs?  The answer is of course a Statewide wedding tax on higher income wage earners to subsidize the constitutionally protected right of marriage–because you can’t help who you fall in love with.

The plan could create a State Bureau of Weddings and Funerals, staffed by at least a dozen bureaucrats, (with taxpayer supported wages, benefits, pensions, office space, paid vacations, supplies, and protest signs that actually come with sick notes attached; for days when they need to go the State House and make demands of the taxpayers elected-officials on matters of workers rights etc,).  These fine individuals would be charged with handling questions and processing the paperwork and fees related to the weddings and funerals tax placed upon job creators, and the Rich Bastard population in general, (“Rich” to be defined by the collectors of the tax based on their perception of revenue needed) for the distribution of said revenues to those less fortunate seeking lavish weddings that have nothing to do with love, everything to do with impressing people whom you never see, and who are really just there for the free meal, and with any luck, an open bar.

One potential issue to the new Bureau’s mandate, however, is the rights of single people who would not benefit from the tax, or maybe this is just a rhetorical device on my part to segue into my next sarcastic rant.

Read more

A Silber In The Minds Eye

So in the face of this economic catastrophe, which the democrats happily sold as a disaster not unlike a Biblical plague, what did NH Democrats do? They decided that despite that we were going to take in 23% more revenue than we did when times were “good” and went on a grow government spending spree. You could call that a revenue problem, but I think it is really more of a democrats are selfish, ideological, tax and spend A-holes problem.

AMT – a stealth tax riser

The AMT was first put into place, the intent was to prevent high net worth individuals from paying no income tax – a special case of 155 people.  Today, far different problem: 4.5 million. Fortunately for me, I am not at that level of income, nor am I in one of the states that seems … Read more

Roll Call-palooza – Another Democrat Taxpayer Swindle

New Hampshire Democrats, who benefit from taxpayer money laundered through public employee union dues into their campaign, are spending taxpayer dollars in the legislature to make sure they have sound bites and talking points to give to their union buddies to ensure the Aztec gold continues to flow moving forward.

The End Of The “We Pay Taxes Too” Argument?

The only way it could ever be equal, is if we all paid the same taxes, and taxpayers paid nothing extra for benefits and retirement; you would have to fund pay all of your share of both at the same rates as the average private citizen.

How About Some Cheese With Your Hamm?

Tax TrapIf the democrats in New Hampshire want anyone to take them seriously on why we should not lower the cigarette tax, they had best find a better spokesperson than House rep. Christine Hamm from the Peoples Republic of Hopkinton.(PRH)

From this mornings union leader..

Rep. Christine Hamm, D-Hopkinton, argued against the change. She said no state has seen tobacco tax revenue increase after a tax cut.

“This is yet another expensive exercise in futility,” she said. When it comes to tobacco, she said, “Every tax hike produces new revenue, and every tax cut reduces it.”

Oregon tried a 10-cent cut, and saw revenues fall by 10 percent, she said.

“To do the same thing would be fiscally stupid,” Hamm said

You know what else is stupid?  Listening to Christine Hamm.  Oh, and comparing Oregon to New Hampshire?  There are almost no demographic similarities, the most important of which is the sheer size of Oregon and the proximity of neighboring states which are also huge.

No one is driving across Washington State, or up from California, or Idaho, or anywhere else to buy cigarettes in Oregon.  Only Washington State taxes them more (the last I checked.) No incentive, no gain.

But here in New England, where people can buy almost everything cheaper in New Hampshire, the classic New England maxim does not apply–"you can get there from her," or here from there, and they do.  People shop here from other states to save money.  So reducing taxes on cigarettes (or anything else) gives them one more incentive to make the trip or to buy more while they are here.

Need proof?

Raising the tax already cost us revenue.  Last August Maine announced that it’s sales had increased 20%.  That is most likely money that used to get spent here but which the tax hike diverted back to Maine. (I wrote about it here)

And more Proof?

Read more

Share to...
BufferCopyFlipboardHacker NewsLineLinkedInMastodonMessengerMixPinterestPrintRedditSMSTelegramTumblrVKWhatsAppXing