Granite State Fair Tax Spins And Spins And Spins

Mark Fernald is pimping for the misleadingly named Granite State Fair Tax Coalition (GSFTC).  This is a group of tax and spend liberals (their fellow travelers and useful idiots) who are trying get an income tax. 

To sell you on this Utopian elixir of piss, GSFTC argues that New Hampshire’s property taxes favor the rich, and most recently have sent out a pile of nonsense with some misleading graphs, through Fernald’s email list to make the sale.  But as usual it is spun upside down and backwards and ignores one very unassailable fact.  New Hampshire has one of the lowest overall tax burdens in the nation because it relies on property taxes.  And the rich are not paying less for their share of State government.

TaxesGovernment is a necessary (preferably limited) evil, laid out like a salad bar.  There are all kinds of services your tax dollars pay for.  Some of them are for “just in case kinds of things” like public safety.  Then there are roads and schools and clerks and so on.  And then there are unemployment, welfare, heating aid, and a host of social support services, and the cost of the bureaucracy itself. 

By law these services are made available to everyone equally based on need so the folks most likely to consume government services are lower income residents.  Statistically, the less you earn, the more of the salad bar you are likely to need or eat from and the more trips you are likley to make in a given year.   But no matter what you earn, or where you live, or how well you live, you still only get one plate–and you pay for that plate in the form of taxes.  

The GSFTC would like you to believe that the rich are paying less for that plate.  To perpetrate this deception they use "taxes paid as a percentage of income" to make their case.   Their argument is that the rich only pay about 2% of their income as taxes while the poorer folks pay over 8% (Roughly), and that this is unfair.   But is that really the case?  Are the rich paying less money for a trip to the New and Improved State Government Salad Bar or is GSFTC just playing class warfare games?

Read more

It’s The Christian Thing To Do.

Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson’s remarks, as expressed in a Sunday Union Leader staff editorial, suggest that it is immoral to reduce what the government spends on health and social programs.

As quoted, "When sacrifice is perpetrated on the vulnerable and weak by the strong and prosperous, it is social abuse."

He goes on to include the poor, the disabled, the blind, the unemployed, the impoverished elderly, the uninsured and children living in poverty.

His point (one of them at least) is that by reducing government’s fiscal contribution to bureaucracies established to manage such things, that governor John Lynch and the New Hampshire legislature are considering immoral choices to balance the state budget.

So where do I begin?

Read more

What Changed For State Workers In Wisconsin?

If we ignore the change in national perception based on weeks of evidence that public union employees (and democrats) are selfish, angry, violent, children what actually changed when the Wisconsin legislature and Governor Walker succeeded in passing changes to collective bargaining?

Common cause – Granite State Fair Tax Coalition with NEA and SEIU. Birds of a feather?

And when I talk about the Granite State Fair Tax Coalition (not to be confused with the Americans for Fair Taxation, commonly known as The FairTax, a group that wishes to get rid of the Federal income tax and the IRS and substitute a consumption / sales tax with a "prebate" in its stead).  In fact, all protestations aside, the GSFTC does nothing BUT complain that NH’s property taxes are too high and its members / spokespeople are more than happy to give comparisons of NH’s ranking of property tax to other States (where NH ranks as one of the most highest).  They are more than happy to point out that because "the rich" refuse to "buy big" with respect to property, their tribute to the State is less than what they would want from them on combined bended knees.

What they REFUSE to do, however, is to discuss OVERALL taxation rates and NH’s rankings with respect to a citizen’s TOTAL level of taxation – the lack of a sales tax, an income tax, and a whole host of other taxes that other States have – and NH ranks VERY well on the LOW taxation scale. 

GSFTC won’t and can’t – as their secondary position also is clear; it is obvious that they believe that NH State Government is starved for income streams so as to be able to grow government and spend more.  The reliance on property taxes at the local level prevents the State from having more.  To me, that’s a feature and not a bug!

Now, up to now, it has been groups that I could consider to be genuinely concerned about the poor (even though they have tendencies that favor redistribution of other peoples’ money).  However, they have now made common cause with:

  • SEIU (state employee union)
  • The NEA – the Teachers’ Union

as can be seen by this screen shot of the GSFTC page at the time of this posting:

Read more

The Real Reason For Raising The Drop Out Age To 18?

I can tell you from long discussions about the various pathways to “graduation” that the goal is more geared toward getting kids through school on paper to make the numbers look good. Any reasonable path to that end is considered a win, but by any traditional standard it is anything but a public school success story.

The Cost of Defining “Adequate” In Merrimack NH

AppleA funny thing happened on the way to the ‘off-hand comment’ on the Merrimack TEA facebook page.  I was accused of not using "real and accurate data" and that my "rhetoric was not doing anyone any good."

Nothing surprising there I suppose but to stay on point–what was it I said that earned me such a response?

I announced that if you took the total Merrimack School budget and divided it by the total student enrollment that it cost more than  sending your kid to UNH.  This appears to have riled some people up.  In fact someone sent me a nice itemized list of the "costs" of sending your kid to UNH for a year just to prove I was wrong, and to justify how Merrimack’s cost per child wasn’t as much.

Read more

Two Congressmen And A Free Throw

HR 1 The US House just finished it’s work on HR1, cleaning up after democrats who in 2010 abrogated yet another  obligation when they found themselves incapable of writing the budget they really wanted right before an election.

The liberal-progressives wanted more spending but that was not politically advantageous.  And since the single driving-force behind all Democrat decisions is politics the budget got relegated to the back of the bus, where the electorate’s short attention spans were meant to forget that democrats were never fiscally conscious representatives–they just tried to play them on the campaign trail. 

But avoiding the high profile budget battle was more evidence that they had something to hide. The Democrat House majority was appropriately sedated and placed under observation, while the Senate saw minor adjustments but no change in leadership.  So the process of changing our spending ways would still have to go through a Democrat controlled Senate and across the desk of a President who thinks the words "spending cuts" are just a rhetorical flourish used to provide cover for more spending.

Obama’s budget is proof enough of that.

But Obama only proposes a budget.  The House is in charge of spending.  So the new Republican congress went to the back seat of the Hopey-changey bus and picked up the budget obligations abandoned by the 111th congress.  This wwas a free shot at changing the fiscal direction of the country before writing their own first official budget, which was not due until later in 2011.  It was a gimme, a free throw, but one that had to survive the democrat Senate and the Spender in Chief.

So how did it turn out?

Read more

The Economic Power Of New Hampshire

I’m a strong supporter of Vermont’s sovereign right to hold the line on taxes, and for them to try because of New Hampshire–well, it doesn’t get much better than that. It is as if we are projecting economic power throughout the region.

Random thoughts – WI, unions, and taxes; another take

The teachers and all of the other union members in WI are demonstrating against what they see as an assault on their take home pay (never taking into account that their demands will result in lower take home pay for taxpayers).  However, let me ask this against the backdrop of what the union bosses see … Read more

Merrimack Starts A TEA Party

Former Merrimack Town councilor Mike Malzone has decided he has had enough. What tipped him over the edge? An 11 pm town meeting decision to implement pay as you throw after just about everyone had gone home.

Smoke Em After You Buy Em…In New Hampshire

Right off the bat, thanks to Matt at Red Hampshire for reminding me about Ken Wyler’s bill to cut the cigarette tax by $0.10 cents per pack.  (HB 156) I’ve been queuing up a post on this having written about it often and what better time than now to unload it.

First the basics.  Wyler thinks cutting the tax by a buck a carton will actually increase revenue by attracting more out of state traffic.  Ken is correct.  A larger cut would be better, but I guess we can crawl before we walk.  And with that in mind, lets review why it will raise more revenue.  And I’m not even going to have to go back very far for a decent flashback.

Read more

A Democrat’s Idea Of Tough Choices

Obama’s budget is out. It raises tax revenues by adding more taxes. It is reported that the deficit will increase by as much as 7 trillion dollars as a result. (That’s $7,000,000,000,000.00). It defends all the abusive spending of the past two budgets by ignoring the trillions in new spending and debt. It will set records for a third and forth consecutive trillion plus budget with record setting deficits.

What Zandra Rice Hawkins Was Really Selling At Her “Fake” Sale

cupcakeZandra Rice "The Huckster" Hawkins of Granite State Progress (an out of state funded left wing group) staged a bake sale based on words she put in State Rep Jeanine Notter’s mouth.   

Hawkins just decided that because Notter had more faith in individual responsibility and more local control that this guaranteed that people would suffer; that Notter’s solution meant people would need to have a bake sale to raise money to pay for cancer treatments if New Hampshire tried to opt out of the unconstitutional Health Insurance mandate.

I think this says a good deal about Zandra the Huckster’s world view and it’s not all that flattering.

Read more

Democrats, Trains And HB 218

De railedThe Union Leader has a great editorial in this mornings Sunday News titled "Free Trains."  It is great for several reasons the least of which is that it mirrors concerns I have been expressing for years.  That no matter who pays to build them, someone has to pay to keep them.  That would be New Hampshire Taxpayers. But Democrats are aghast that the NH House would dissolve the New Hampshire Rail Transit Authority–the head of a beast seeking to force commuter rail upon us–because hey it doesn’t cost anything.

But it does cost and it could lead to something that costs us even more in the future.  A lot more.

December 2009 at NH Insider – I hit it out of the park when someone compared road taxes to rail taxes.

Passenger rail costs are not limited to the root infrastructure itself.  That would be rails versus roads.   Taxpayers would have to subsidize passenger rail-cars, fuel the cars, maintain the cars, probably pay the workers and their benefits, and support the entire system when it fails to turn a profit, which will be always and probably forever.   While roads have some other infrastructure nothing compares to rail.

In contrast people buy their own cars, and pay for their own fuel and maintenance.  They may buy the car to get to a job that’s probably not funded by taxpayers either. (Except in Concord) Taxpayers do not need to subsidize any of that where with rail we’re supporting all of it.  So there is no possible apples to apples comparison to road and rail taxes. 

The state also makes a lot of money on registration fees and fuel taxes for road vehicles, tolls and license plates, and some towns rely so heavily on registration fees that even minor reductions can cause budget issues.   Passenger rail offers no comparable net increase in revenues and in all likely hood a net loss.  So Passenger rail risks reducing revenues and increasing tax obligations for no significant greater good. 

Read the whole thing here

But that’s hardly the most pressing point about the ongoing illusion of free commuter rail…

Read more

Supporting A Corrupt Business

Would you stand up in a public hearing and defend an organization implicated in aiding illegal activity, sexual abuse, statutory rape and sex trafficking?  What kind of people would?  How about democrats, union members, and greedy corporate stooges on the take? (oh, my!)

If it was anyone but Planned Parenthood, the national media sensation that admits it has a ‘training’ problem, the professional left would be storming the castle not just to demand why taxpayer dollars were begin given to these criminals, but when the bastards were going to be rounded up and put on trial.

There would be bus loads of angry folks protesting outside executives homes, harassing staff and customers.

Left wing bloggers, even at that sad little web site Blue Hampshire, would be disconnecting their brains from their keyboard, bellowing about the injustice and abuse, the violation of civil rights, and another destructive association by a political party full of hateful bigots and misogynists who view women as second class citizens.  A few of them might even ponder running a few people down in the crosswalk.

But this is Planned Parenthood, a national business, a big business, that makes plenty of money while using its status as a “health care provider” to milk taxpayers for money it does not even need.  And there are still a few people here in New Hampshire willing to stand up and say incredibly stupid things in defense of a business model that seems incapable of protecting the interests of the young girls it claims to champion from a life as an underage sex slave.

Read more

Don’t Say There Is No Place To Cut.

Privatize the public school system and shift the educators, staff, maintenance, and transportation and facility costs off the books, along with converting public benefits and pensions into the same kind of programs the rest of the private markets have, and you would see property tax rates plummet.

The One-Trick Tax-And-Spend Donkey By Any Other Name…

No Good Dancing DonkeyThe New Hampshire democrats have a name for their new 501(c)(4) non-profit.  It’s the July Fourth Forum. What, “We just lost The Whole Damn State” was already taken?

As with most things named by democrats it presents a notion diametrically opposite its true intention.  We see this same naming tactic in their legislation  (at least in DC).  Their bills always have the words American, Freedom, Rights, Choice, or Affordable in the name, usually including two or more at any given time.  This is meant to serves as a warning to anyone who dares gaze upon the hundreds of thousands of words that follow the name of their bill (not that they want anyone to actually read them).   If allowed to become law it will hurt Americans, deny freedoms, infringe rights, cost a fortune and leave you with whatever choice the government has decided is best for you and few if any other.

So the only word in any name of any Democrat bill that has any hope of being remotely accurate must be the word “Act.”  As in, that American-Freedom-Rights-and choice-stuff  is all just an act.

Which brings us back to Kathy Sullivan’s ‘”July Fourth Forum.” 

Read more

A Modest (Budget Cutting) Proposal

Public Sector Unions SuckThere are plenty of towns like mine trying to figure out where they can cut costs.  But every conversation seems to end at cutting education or safety services.  While I find it hard to believe that there is nothing else in a budget you can trim, I think I have come up with a reasonable compromise (if not just for the sake of our own rhetorical amusement) that can cut at least a little bit of money from the budget without affecting staffing or resources.

Any teacher, support staff, officer, firefighter or public employee who currently pays union dues will have the total amount of dues paid calculated and that amount removed from their respective department budgets (aka:paychecks).  This will do the one thing no one ever seems willing to do; include the unions in the burden of cost cutting.

Read more

More on “it’s not mine to give”

More on the meme – is the use of property taxes really charity? (earlier here and here). From the Laconia Citizen, 1/14:  Rebuttal to Laura DiFonzo

By all means, all of the charities (which you call service organizations) you list do good work; no one on the Gilford Selectboard or Budget Committee have stated otherwise. What they have said, if I maybe so bold (as I am an elected Budget Committee member but do not speak for the Committee here), is that it is rightfully up to the citizens of Gilford to make that  decision, via the ballot box, whether or not to use their tax money AND that of their neighbors’ to support them. 

Personally, I am against the practice of sending tax monies and plan on voting no on these warrant articles.  Why?  I do not have the hubris to demand that my neighbor, or my fellow citizens in Gilford, to be forced to support any given charity no matter how good the intention even if I believe they should. At that point, it is no longer charity – it is forced giving.  Charity is an act of individual kindness and responsibility; using tax monies is neither. Someone is declaring their disrespect for the property of others (i.e., their money) when they advocate someone else’s money should be used for a purpose that they might not otherwise support.  

It should be up to the individuals of the town to make their own decisions whether or not to reach into their own wallets and no one else’s.  Ms. DiFonzo asks the question of "what is a NH Citizen to do?" The answer is exactly what she is doing – as a United Way volunteer who works diligently to persuade individuals to be charitable and part with their money for her cause, she asks individuals as it should be.

Is she now advocating that people should no longer have a choice in how their money is to be spent?  Does she believe that politicians should now be in charge of who receives charity – and who doesn’t?  And by her Letter, is she signifying that all should be forced to give to those she supports?

In my estimation, these charities have lost their way and have become too professionalized as well as too dependent upon government monies.  Perhaps, as the United Way does, they should return to the roots of charitable contributions – seeking funding from the actual public instead of from the individual town Public Treasuries.

Read more

Share to...