Something About Sales Taxes

Hot on the heels of Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell's proposal to replace his state's gasoline tax with a higher sales tax, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal is proposing to replace his state's income and corporate taxes with a higher sales tax.

The precise details, as is so often the case, haven't been worked out yet:

"The bottom line is that for too long, Louisiana's workers and small businesses have suffered from having a state tax structure that is too complex and that holds back economic prosperity," Jindal said in a statement released by his office. "It's time to change that so people can keep more of their own money and foster an environment where businesses want to invest and create good-paying jobs."

Jindal said the plan would be revenue-neutral and that the goal would be to keep sales taxes "as low and flat as possible."

The immediate, unavoidable response will be protestations from Democrats that the income tax is the primary tool by which they can redistribute wealth from successful people to layabouts.

Gov. Jindal's response to that should be a smug smile and a single admission: "I know."

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 03:25 PM



Comments

1 The president is a scoamf

Posted by: phoenixgirl so done with the GOP at January 10, 2013 03:25 PM (GVxQo)

2 What's with the republicans raising taxes?

Posted by: phoenixgirl so done with the GOP at January 10, 2013 03:27 PM (GVxQo)

3 Seems to me that others are starting to notice the prosperity in Texas under such shitty economical conditions and rethinking their drink.....

Posted by: © Sponge at January 10, 2013 03:27 PM (UK9cE)

4 Texas does not have income tax but does have 8.25% sales tax and fairly high property tax. I would like to reduce or eliminate the property tax and have a higher sales tax.

Posted by: Velvet Ambition at January 10, 2013 03:28 PM (R8hU8)

5 Didn't see the eliminate state income tax....

Posted by: phoenixgirl so done with the GOP at January 10, 2013 03:29 PM (GVxQo)

6 Posted by: Velvet Ambition at January 10, 2013 03:28 PM (R8hU

My only problem with this is that sales taxes in some respects tend to obscure the tax.
Although I guess no more than the income tax. More though than my Property tax which I have to write a check for each year.

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at January 10, 2013 03:30 PM (ULkyQ)

7 SC has been jacking up sales tax a lot for the past 10 or 15 years. Here in out little local town it has reached 10.5%. And they did not reduce any of the other taxes either.


The problem is that when you have an economic downturn tax revenue falls out the bottom.

Posted by: Vic at January 10, 2013 03:31 PM (53z96)

8 Posted by: Velvet Ambition at January 10, 2013 03:28 PM (R8hU

Considering how we are bragging about a budget surplus and lush rainy day fund. I think it would be appropriate to at least give a 2 year "Tax Holiday" on property taxes as a dry run.

Posted by: cajun carrot at January 10, 2013 03:32 PM (UZQM8)

9 Eliminate the tax on work and production and increase the tax on consumption. Both will lead to more work and production and saving, while also funding essential government services.

Moving to a sales tax-only system also makes it MUCH harder for politicians to jack up spending, because a higher sales tax is immediately felt by almost everyone, whereas a small increase in a state income tax rate only takes a buck or two out of most people's paychecks.

Posted by: rockmom at January 10, 2013 03:32 PM (NYnoe)

10 Post yanked from under my nose while I was typing a long reply!

Posted by: Kinley Ardal at January 10, 2013 03:33 PM (mrnos)

11 How about raising all the existing taxes, and doing some new ones on say, health care expenses? Then I can borrow even more money that I would borrow anyway!

Posted by: King Putt at January 10, 2013 03:34 PM (MFsWP)

12 There was just a great post where we could make fun of Amanda Marcotte, dammit.

Posted by: Ian S. at January 10, 2013 03:34 PM (B/VB5)

13 Is this the Fair Tax? I read that book but knowing those DC assholes I treated it like science fiction.

Posted by: USS Diversity at January 10, 2013 03:34 PM (MPjT8)

14 Comment on a thread and it disappears. What a bloggyspot we got here.

Posted by: Meremortal, time to slutdrop the GOPe at January 10, 2013 03:35 PM (1Y+hH)

15 someone needs to report a stolen post.

Posted by: VIA, on the tiny keyboard at January 10, 2013 03:35 PM (jlngc)

16 The real bonanza will come when states start enacting sales taxes on services and not just sales of goods. The Realtors have fought this for years and years. But if I choose to buya realtor's services to sell my house, why should that not be taxed as a sale just as much as when I buy a car?

Posted by: rockmom at January 10, 2013 03:35 PM (qE3AR)

17
Jay Carney says deficit reduction is of no importance.

So there you have it.

Posted by: Meremortal, time to slutdrop the GOPe at January 10, 2013 03:35 PM (1Y+hH)

18 Consumption tax jessss! But you better be sure to outlaw the income tax by amendment or you'll get both.

Posted by: toby928© for TB at January 10, 2013 03:35 PM (evdj2)

19
Jindal said the plan would be revenue-neutral and that the goal would be to keep sales taxes "as low and flat as possible."

Um, I know this is a dumb question, but why not just have a low, flat tax to begin with?

Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit. at January 10, 2013 03:35 PM (yiIja)

20 If the deficit is of no importance, why tax at all?

Posted by: Meremortal, time to slutdrop the GOPe at January 10, 2013 03:36 PM (1Y+hH)

21 Post yanked from under my nose while I was typing a long reply!

Press post anyway. It will be there later.

Posted by: toby928© for TB at January 10, 2013 03:36 PM (evdj2)

22
Property tax big time sux.
So does getting penalized for owning a home and improving it.
At the very minimum, property taxes should freeze for owners who turn 65.
There.

Posted by: Justamom at January 10, 2013 03:37 PM (rr5xK)

23 How about raising all the existing taxes, and doing some new ones on say, health care expenses? Then I can borrow even more money that I would borrow anyway!

I have a $1T coin I'll sell you.

Posted by: rickb223 at January 10, 2013 03:37 PM (GFM2b)

24 Personally I favor a flat income tax of 10% on all sources of income, regardless of source and amount. No deductions and no exceptions.


Everyone should have skin in the game.

Posted by: Vic at January 10, 2013 03:37 PM (53z96)

25 So this is a VAT? Value added tax?

Posted by: EC at January 10, 2013 03:38 PM (GQ8sn)

26 It is harder to evade a sales tax. Even participants in the underground economy, e.g.: pimps, hos, drug dealers and illegal aliens, will all eventually pay. Ditto for net tax consumers that are exempted from the bite right now.

Posted by: Joe Mama at January 10, 2013 03:38 PM (v9Cj5)

27 There.

Posted by: Justamom at January 10, 2013 03:37 PM (rr5xK)

Why?

So that at the point where most people are at their wealthiest they get to stop paying for municipal services?

No thanks.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at January 10, 2013 03:39 PM (GsoHv)

28 25
So this is a VAT? Value added tax?


Posted by: EC at January 10, 2013 03:38 PM (GQ8sn)


I think a VAT is tacked on at every stage of production, no?

Posted by: Tami at January 10, 2013 03:39 PM (X6akg)

29 Wait a minute, this kind of thinking could lead to states competing with tax structures designed to lure business and investment.

Posted by: Gristle Encased Head at January 10, 2013 03:39 PM (+lsX1)

30 Um, I know this is a dumb question, but why not just have a low, flat tax to begin with?

He's trying to find the lowest possible sales tax he can apply that will offset the losses in income and corporate taxes.

Posted by: EC at January 10, 2013 03:39 PM (GQ8sn)

31 An old adolescent joke: What does the S-T-O-P on a stop sign mean?







State Tax On Pussy

Posted by: Soona at January 10, 2013 03:39 PM (gKwHR)

32 Sales tax only way to get the Professional Baby Makers to pay something, anything, into the system otherwise the Corrupt Rat Party will subsidize them for votes until there's only three people left working and the system collapses as it necesarily will!

Posted by: ConcealedKerry or SubMitt at January 10, 2013 03:40 PM (vXqv3)

33 Gov. Bobby Jindal is proposing to eliminate Louisiana's income and corporate taxes and pay for those cuts

Gah, I hate this fucking phrasing.

Posted by: Waterhouse at January 10, 2013 03:40 PM (ryAWr)

34 I think a VAT is tacked on at every stage of production, no?

Well that's what's going to happen with Jindal's plan isn't it? A manufacturer has to buy the raw materials and pay the sales tax on them, then process it into the final good to be sold to consumers, who then pay the sales tax again on it.

Posted by: EC at January 10, 2013 03:41 PM (GQ8sn)

35 Right. Shift the burden to the people who can LEAST afford it.

Listen, there are no easy answers concerning taxes except to either raise them or cut spending.

Don't want to redistribute via taxes? Fine then tax everyone the same and then the poorest on low/fixed incomes have less to spend on necessities.

Don't try to claim that somehow that's fairer.

It's not.

Posted by: Bitter Clinger (aka 3 tooth) at January 10, 2013 03:41 PM (3E2th)

36
Posted by: Justamom at January 10, 2013 03:37 PM (rr5xK)

Why?

So that at the point where most people are at their wealthiest they get to stop paying for municipal services?

No thanks.


Perhaps she's over 65? .

As it stands, many people seem think that when you're 65 you're on a "fixed income" so you know...you're expenses should stay fixed as well I guess.
You should plan on increasing tax rates. Although, I personally don't like the idea merely owning something allows me to be taxed on it. It's one of the few ways in which renting outweighs the incentives stacked to make owning the preferred status.

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at January 10, 2013 03:41 PM (ULkyQ)

37 Posted by: Bitter Clinger (aka 3 tooth) at January 10, 2013 03:41 PM (3E2th)


And them paying no tax yet consuming benefits is fair?

Posted by: cajun carrot at January 10, 2013 03:42 PM (UZQM8)

38
I think a VAT is tacked on at every stage of production, no?

As I understand it, yes. It's a Cascade Tax and should be avoided like the plague.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit. at January 10, 2013 03:42 PM (yiIja)

39 Posted by: Bitter Clinger (aka 3 tooth) at January 10, 2013 03:41 PM (3E2th)



Looks like someone misunderstands the word "burden" and also has a leftist interpretation of "fair".

Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 10, 2013 03:43 PM (ROv35)

40 7 Vic,

not a problem a feature....incentivizes the bastards to stay out of the economy's way

Posted by: sven10077 at January 10, 2013 03:44 PM (LRFds)

41 Posted by: EC at January 10, 2013 03:41 PM (GQ8sn)

I thought sales tax was charged to the retail consumer. And that how it differs from a VAT.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at January 10, 2013 03:44 PM (GsoHv)

42
What's the sales tax on new shorts?

Posted by: Al Roker at January 10, 2013 03:44 PM (p/cQy)

43 Well that's what's going to happen with Jindal's plan isn't it? A
manufacturer has to buy the raw materials and pay the sales tax on them,
then process it into the final good to be sold to consumers, who then
pay the sales tax again on it.


That wouldn't be a normal sales tax. Sales tax is not paid except on sale to the consumer. Resellers are exempt. You're describing a VAT.

Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at January 10, 2013 03:44 PM (QKKT0)

44 Fine then tax everyone the same and then the poorest on low/fixed incomes have less to spend on necessities. Don't try to claim that somehow that's fairer.


It is fair. Everyone is paying the same rate.

Posted by: EC at January 10, 2013 03:44 PM (GQ8sn)

45 So that at the point where most people are at their wealthiest they get to stop paying for municipal services?No thanks.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at January 10, 2013 03:39 PM (GsoHv)


I don't think that's what Justamom was saying. You'd still be paying property taxes; I believe she was advocating a freeze on rate increases, namely for retirees who may take spare time and some of their financial worth to improve their home, but who are then penalized through higher property taxes.

Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Hobbit at January 10, 2013 03:44 PM (4df7R)

46 @35

Life is not fair.

It's best to learn that early so that you avoid learning it often.

Posted by: Joe Mama at January 10, 2013 03:45 PM (v9Cj5)

47
Freeze property tax when a homeowner retires because they are on a fixed income. While costs keep rising.
People end up having to sell their homes in some areas because of the taxes. Happens a lot in my zip code.

Our property tax is about 150% of our sales tax which is 10%.

A tax on real estate transactions will super duper suk.

Posted by: Justamom at January 10, 2013 03:45 PM (RlvM2)

48 Posted by: Bitter Clinger (aka 3 tooth) at January 10, 2013 03:41 PM (3E2th)


---------------------------------------------


Are you afraid someone will take away your 'bamapho?

Posted by: Soona at January 10, 2013 03:45 PM (gKwHR)

49 Perhaps she's over 65? .

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at January 10, 2013 03:41 PM (ULkyQ)

Nope.

Justamom is 28, with a smokin' hot body and a face to match.
Just like all the other Moronettes.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at January 10, 2013 03:45 PM (GsoHv)

50 Historically property taxes were the preferred method of taxing people because it hit only the affluent. It was considered acceptable because you had to own property to vote or hold public office.


Well that went away right quick so people got to vote and had no skin in the game. And the thing that Alexis de Tocqueville warned of has come to pass. The FSA votes themselves a free lunch and someone else has to pay for it.

Posted by: Vic at January 10, 2013 03:45 PM (53z96)

51 Don't try to claim that somehow that's fairer.

It's not.


It is. Totally fair, if words have any meaning at all. It may not be wise, however.

Posted by: toby928© for TB at January 10, 2013 03:45 PM (evdj2)

52 Well that's what's going to happen with Jindal's plan isn't it? A manufacturer has to buy the raw materials and pay the sales tax on them, then process it into the final good to be sold to consumers, who then pay the sales tax again on it.

Posted by: EC


The article only discusses a sales tax. Sales taxes are on retail sales, not commercial. So if true, it's not a VAT.

Posted by: weft cut-loop at January 10, 2013 03:45 PM (djdc7)

53 Right. Shift the burden to the people who can LEAST afford it.

Listen, there are no easy answers concerning taxes except to either raise them or cut spending.

Don't
want to redistribute via taxes? Fine then tax everyone the same and
then the poorest on low/fixed incomes have less to spend on necessities.


Don't try to claim that somehow that's fairer.

It's not.


Posted by: Bitter Clinger (aka 3 tooth) at January 10, 2013 03:41 PM (3E2th)

FWIW, Missouri went ahead and waived the sales tax on necessities (namely unprepared food products and possibly a few household goods.)The overall sales tax went up (IIRC) to offset this, but it meant that a poor person could also nearly avoid the sales tax if they so choose.

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at January 10, 2013 03:45 PM (ULkyQ)

54 As long as there is a property tax cannot own property.

Posted by: Bosk at January 10, 2013 03:46 PM (n2K+4)

55 I thought sales tax was charged to the retail consumer. And that how it differs from a VAT. Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at January 10, 2013 03:44 PM (GsoHv)


That wouldn't be a normal sales tax. Sales tax is
not paid except on sale to the consumer. Resellers are exempt. You're
describing a VAT. Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at January 10, 2013 03:44 PM (QKKT0)



I'm trying to figure out what Jindal's sales tax plan really is. Does it affect the resellers or just the final consumer?

Posted by: EC at January 10, 2013 03:46 PM (GQ8sn)

56 FYI: The LiLo piece linked on the sidebar is worth a read.

Posted by: WalrusRex at January 10, 2013 03:47 PM (XUKZU)

57 Funny thing about income taxes is that they never seem to "get" the people they are supposed to "get".


Dems think anyone who is wealthy has a huge room in their house filled with platinum coins and that they go in that room daily and swim around in it a la Scrooge McDuck. They don't. The "wealthy" have accumulated wealth, not a huge income, so they don't get taxed at a rate that those who are trying to produce wealth do. The wealthy do spend money, and that is how you get their money into the governments' hands.

Posted by: MrCaniac at January 10, 2013 03:47 PM (Zd/NW)

58 I don't think that's what Justamom was saying. You'd
still be paying property taxes; I believe she was advocating a freeze
on rate increases, namely for retirees who may take spare time and some
of their financial worth to improve their home, but who are then
penalized through higher property taxes.

Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Hobbit at January 10, 2013 03:44 PM (4df7R)

But even if you froze the rates, would the taxes be allowed to go up as a result of appreciation?Because otherwise it's just a nice gift to those over 65.

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at January 10, 2013 03:48 PM (ULkyQ)

59 I agree with the 10% flat tax. Nice and simple.

But then, of course, Warren Buffett wouldn't be able to shelter his money.

Posted by: KG at January 10, 2013 03:48 PM (p7BzH)

60 Few people care about other people's money being spent responsibly.


Hell, few people care about spending their own money responsibly.


What people DO care about is when their money is being stolen and they actually realize it.

We have a populace full of shallow-minded adult children. There is but one way to make them understand what's at stake: hit them where it hurts, their wallet. That is the truth.


So long as there are folks in this country paying no effective tax when all is said and done the stupidity will continue. A sales tax (by itself) or an honest representation of future taxation (by changing their rates/benefits now) are two solutions to doing that.


Personally, though, I say let it burn. >.>

Posted by: Kinley Ardal, LiB advocate at January 10, 2013 03:48 PM (mrnos)

61 I much prefer sales taxes (i.e., consumption taxes) to income taxes, franchise taxes, other taxes, maybe even gas taxes (though that is in essence a consumption tax). I'm not sure a trade of gas taxes for saless taxes is warranted, but to the extent that are at least eliminating one form of tax, that is probably a good thing.

The problem is that Jindal must trade income taxes for a higher sales tax rate. However, by eliminating income taxes, business taxes, or capital gains taxes, you should increase sales tax collections because the resultant increases in disposable income/investments will lead to more sale transactions.

So while I think it is a net positive trade for Jindal to make, it would be best if he could simply eliminate sales taxes.

Rick Perry should be using this latest surplus to get rid of franchise taxes in Texas. The new margins tax is a mess, and the sooner Texas gets rid of it the better. Ultimately, I think sales tax rates could go down to 5% and Texas would still be swimming in the dough.

Posted by: SH at January 10, 2013 03:49 PM (gmeXX)

62 Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Hobbit at January 10, 2013 03:44 PM (4df7R)

Oh, so I should get a discount simply because I am old? What about the increased use of libraries and senior services and emergency services? Who should pay for that?

Sorry, but making anyone a protected class is a bad idea.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at January 10, 2013 03:49 PM (GsoHv)

63 "you"

Posted by: Bosk at January 10, 2013 03:49 PM (n2K+4)

64 A tax on real estate transactions will super duper suk.
Posted by: Justamom at January 10, 2013 03:45 PM (RlvM2)



You mean like the 3.8% surcharge on certain real estate sales that is contained in Obamacare? Like that?

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Seriously, Sheldon/Penny to the end. at January 10, 2013 03:49 PM (VtjlW)

65 One advantage to be had by going to a sales tax is that everyone would know right up front how much taxes are costing them.


I count that as a plus.


Posted by: DiogenesLamp at January 10, 2013 03:49 PM (bb5+k)

66
56
FYI: The LiLo piece linked on the sidebar is worth a read.


Posted by: WalrusRex at January 10, 2013 03:47 PM (XUKZU)

Eh. I can't read that, it's too painful. It just reminds me of how her life was destroyed by bad parenting.

When I have kids, I'd like to think that I would have the good sense to say "Fuck off" if someone said "Your kid has talent, let us take them to Hollywood!" So many children whose lives were destroyed by greed. -.-

Posted by: Kinley Ardal, LiB advocate at January 10, 2013 03:50 PM (mrnos)

67 Jindal goes through with this, I'm filling up in SC from now on. It'll be worth the drive over the border. NC has the highest gas tax rate in the southeast.

Posted by: EC at January 10, 2013 03:50 PM (GQ8sn)

68
Property tax rates and valuations are fungible.

Our valuations here were helped by flack from drive by appraisals, so they just raised the rates.

They figure how much money they want, then work the rest

Posted by: Justamom at January 10, 2013 03:50 PM (RlvM2)

69 Posted by: tsrblke (work) at January 10, 2013 03:45 PM (ULkyQ)

In NJ there is no sales tax on food and clothing, so a poor person who is being careful can avoid most taxes.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at January 10, 2013 03:51 PM (GsoHv)

70 While I would also like to see property tax reductions in Texas, they are really county by county taxes, which is how it should be. The closer the taxing authority is to the person being taxed, the better. Then the residents can chose what is an appropriate tax amount for the county in which they live in. How much do they want to pay for county services and school boards.

Posted by: SH at January 10, 2013 03:51 PM (gmeXX)

71 Justamom is 28, with a smokin' hot body and a face to match.
Just like all the other Moronettes.


Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at January 10, 2013 03:45 PM (GsoHv)

Too old. That's why I don't hang out here anymore. Could someone do a Disney themed post?

Posted by: Roman Polanski at January 10, 2013 03:51 PM (LVxGp)

72 I have 8.25% sales tax. Very high property tax. And income tax. Plus we tax pets and a lot of other stupid crap. Oh, and 2% sales tax on food at the grocery.

Posted by: NCKate at January 10, 2013 03:52 PM (IYde+)

73
Oh, so I should get a discount simply because I am old? What about the increased use of libraries and senior services and emergency services? Who should pay for that?

=========
You're old?

Posted by: USS Diversity at January 10, 2013 03:52 PM (MPjT8)

74 If Jindal goes through with this, I'm filling up in SC from now on. It'll be worth the drive over the border. NC has the highest gas tax rate in the southeast.

Wrong swarthy governor.

Posted by: toby928© for TB at January 10, 2013 03:52 PM (evdj2)

75 But even if you froze the rates, would the taxes be allowed to go up as a result of appreciation?Because otherwise it's just a nice gift to those over 65.
Posted by: tsrblke (work) at January 10, 2013 03:48 PM (ULkyQ)


--------------------------------------------------


I'll take that fucking gift. Life starts to become a little iffy sometimes when a person reaches 65. We'd still be paying property taxes so that we can afford all of our wonderful sub-standard schools.

Posted by: Soona at January 10, 2013 03:52 PM (gKwHR)

76 :::35 Right. Shift the burden to the people who can LEAST afford it.

Listen, there are no easy answers concerning taxes except to either raise them or cut spending.

Don't want to redistribute via taxes? Fine then tax everyone the same and then the poorest on low/fixed incomes have less to spend on necessities.

Don't try to claim that somehow that's fairer.

It's not.
Posted by: Bitter Clinger (aka 3 tooth) at January 10, 2013 03:41 PM (3E2th)::::


Your problem is that you don't understand the meaning of the word "fair." If the system were "fair," then only those who consume services would be required to pay for them. Is it "fair" for you to be forced to pay for my groceries, while I don't have to do anything?

Is it "fair" for me to pay for public schools that I don't send my kids to, while I'm also paying for private school?

Why don't you just be honest about it? You don't think it's *NICE* to ask "the poor" to pay for anything, even though they're eating us out of house and home.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at January 10, 2013 03:52 PM (A+odv)

77 Consumer tax is clearly the optimal tax. Stop punishing income and start encouraging savings.

Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 74% more DOOM! at January 10, 2013 03:52 PM (FsUAO)

78 >>>They figure how much money they want, then work the rest

Always true. Baseline budgeting 101.

Posted by: Vizzini at January 10, 2013 03:52 PM (O7Q1u)

79 Civilian disarmament is immoral.

Posted by: The Poster Formerly Known as Mr. Barky at January 10, 2013 03:53 PM (qwK3S)

80
I like using sales taxes to replace income and property taxes, becauseeveryone pays sales taxes, and thus their use kicks all the class warfare rhetoric right in the balls.

Proposals to raise sales taxes will generate howls of protest, not least from enlistees in the Free Shit Army, because they'll be paying them too. For once they will actually have skin in the taxation game, and will be more open to arguments that we don't need a lot of shit that we have now.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at January 10, 2013 03:53 PM (DXlwL)

81 Wrong swarthy governor.

Oh crap! Wrong state. I thought SC was doing this too.

Posted by: EC at January 10, 2013 03:53 PM (GQ8sn)

82 Texas has no sales tax on most food items. In theory, I'd say just tax everything at the same rate, but to the extent that most food items are taxed less, I'm ok with that. Some compromises are more warranted than others. However, alcohol taxes above and beyond normal sales taxes - that is awful.

Posted by: SH at January 10, 2013 03:53 PM (gmeXX)

83 Income tax punishes excessive work / effort, sales tax punishes excessive spending.

Any questions?

Posted by: AndrewsDad at January 10, 2013 03:53 PM (C2//T)

84 If Jindal goes through with this, I'm filling up in SC from now on. It'll be worth the drive over the border. NC has the highest gas tax rate in the southeast.

Wrong swarthy governor.
Posted by: toby928© for TB at January 10, 2013 03:52 PM (evdj2)


Isn't Jindal in Louisiana

Posted by: Nevergiveup at January 10, 2013 03:53 PM (9Bj8R)

85 Jay Carney announced today that the President has no interest in penis reduction. "He's focused on doing everything he can to help the middle class."

Posted by: AP at January 10, 2013 03:54 PM (DrC22)

86 How about a tax on bullshit ideas?

Posted by: The Poster Formerly Known as Mr. Barky at January 10, 2013 03:54 PM (qwK3S)

87 Rick Perry should be using this latest surplus to get rid of franchise taxes in Texas. The new margins tax is a mess, and the sooner Texas gets rid of it the better. Ultimately, I think sales tax rates could go down to 5% and Texas would still be swimming in the dough.

Currently it's only 6.25% at the state level. Granted, every penny counts, but a 1.25% drop in nothing to get excited about.

Posted by: rickb223 at January 10, 2013 03:54 PM (GFM2b)

88 You mean like the 3.8% surcharge on certain real estate sales that is contained in Obamacare? Like that?

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Seriously, Sheldon/Penny to the end. at January 10, 2013 03:49 PM (VtjlW)

The entire real estate process is designed to screw the buyer (and sometimes the seller too.)You have two people in the middle conspiring to drive up the apparent price (to stuff the commission) while keeping down the actual amount of profit for the seller (to make the buyer feel better, although they are driving up for the price for him too.)
Meh.

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at January 10, 2013 03:54 PM (ULkyQ)

89 One advantage to be had by going to a sales tax is that everyone would know right up front how much taxes are costing them.


The other great advantage is that law-abiding people would have their privacy back. The income tax forces taxpayers to open their finances to unlimited inspection by the government. This sort of scrutiny should be reserved for convicted criminals. My finances should be none of the government's business.

Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at January 10, 2013 03:54 PM (QKKT0)

90 You're old?

Posted by: USS Diversity at January 10, 2013 03:52 PM (MPjT

As soon as I hit post I knew some smart-ass was going to say that.

"So one should get a discount simply because one is old."

Feel better?

Now get off my lawn!

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at January 10, 2013 03:54 PM (GsoHv)

91 "Eh. I can't read that, it's too painful. It just reminds me of how her life was destroyed by bad parenting."


Granted I don't really know shit about Lohan other than what I read in that article and news of her various escapades that make it through my Don't Give A Shit About Lindsay Lohan Wall, but unless there is some documented history of parental abuse, I have a hard time taking a flaming Histrionic's word about how she was raised.

Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 10, 2013 03:54 PM (ROv35)

92 I'm ok with food not being taxed. It takes a bite out of class warfare rhetoric and is still much more efficient.

Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 74% more DOOM! at January 10, 2013 03:54 PM (FsUAO)

93 67 Jindal goes through with this, I'm filling up in SC from now on. It'll be worth the drive over the border. NC has the highest gas tax rate in the southeast.

Posted by: EC at January 10, 2013 03:50 PM (GQ8sn)

Jindal is Louisiana, btw. Unless he moved, somehow.

Posted by: KG at January 10, 2013 03:55 PM (p7BzH)

94 Yeah I would so respond to liberal whining with.
Fine
Raw, unprocessed, grain, meat, and vegetables/legumes, and normal milk/baby formula are tax free. Everything else is a damn luxury and should be taxed.

Don't want to be taxed on bread? Eat your damn wheat berries.

Liberals would whine that it is no type of life. I would respond with, if they want luxuries they just need to pay the taxes on them like everybody else.

Your peanuts are roasted or shelled? Tax
Uncle Ben's quick rice? Tax
TV Dinners? Tax
VegAll? Tax
Your greenbeans come out of a can? Tax

Posted by: MikeTheMoose is Shrugging at January 10, 2013 03:56 PM (0q2P7)

95 Proposals to raise sales taxes will generate howls of protest, not least from enlistees in the Free Shit Army, because they'll be paying them too.

----

Which is why Jindal shouldn't be proposing a trade of increased sales taxes for a reduction in income taxes. He should simply state that to be competitive with Texas, LA needs to eliminate the income tax. Even better, lower the sales tax, then everyone gets a tax reduction. In theory, this should lead to more tax receipts but might as well also link it to lower spending. I call it a win, win, win. The only people hurt are the children. They are always hurt.

Posted by: SH at January 10, 2013 03:56 PM (gmeXX)

96 I'll take that fucking gift. Life starts to
become a little iffy sometimes when a person reaches 65. We'd still be
paying property taxes so that we can afford all of our wonderful
sub-standard schools.

Posted by: Soona at January 10, 2013 03:52 PM (gKwH)

No, we're not doing this "but it's good for me at that point" shit again.I'd like to point to the current condition of the US as evidence why that doesn't work.Also, now that I own a home, we still need to end the mortgage interest rate deduction (and lower rates across the board.)

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at January 10, 2013 03:57 PM (ULkyQ)

97 Followed by a tax on dumb questions.

Posted by: The Poster Formerly Known as Mr. Barky at January 10, 2013 03:57 PM (qwK3S)

98
Well that went away right quick so people got to
vote and had no skin in the game. And the thing that Alexis de
Tocqueville warned of has come to pass. The FSA votes themselves a free
lunch and someone else has to pay for it.


Posted by: Vic at January 10, 2013 03:45 PM (53z96)


Again, the 26th amendment was a suicide pill.



Posted by: DiogenesLamp at January 10, 2013 03:57 PM (bb5+k)

99 Personally I favor a flat income tax of 10% on all sources of income, regardless of source and amount. No deductions and no exceptions.

Yeah, that's okay, but I prefer consumption taxes, with businesses only paying a % of revenue, not profit. Property taxes need to go the hell away.

The nets are that businesses or individuals can not pay accountants billions of dollars to 'play games' to make profits disappear -- which they do -- and I will freely admit to doing in the past. People should get a paycheck without withholding, but feel the sting every time they make a purchase. It *might* make them a little more aware of how costly big government actually is. Property taxes shouldn't penalize people who create jobs and grow the economy. It's a house, damnit, not a scourge on the planet.

I expect that 0% of what I propose would ever be enacted, although it would create the greatest economic turnaround in the planets history.

Posted by: Schrödinger's cat at January 10, 2013 03:57 PM (feFL6)

100 In NJ there is no sales tax on food and clothing, so a poor person who is being careful can avoid most taxes.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at January 10, 2013 03:51 PM (GsoHv)



There's no sales tax on in PA either which is why there were buses that went from NY to the huge shopping outlets near the border.

It still takes me off guard to pay tax on food now.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Seriously, Sheldon/Penny to the end. at January 10, 2013 03:57 PM (VtjlW)

101


Granted I don't really know shit about Lohan other than what I read
in that article and news of her various escapades that make it through
my Don't Give A Shit About Lindsay Lohan Wall, but unless there is some
documented history of parental abuse, I have a hard time taking a
flaming Histrionic's word about how she was raised.

Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 10, 2013 03:54 PM (ROv35)
Was she abused? I don't know, kinda doubt it. What I was saying was that they destroyed the kid by letting her become a star.

And who is the histrionic in question? O.o I'm confused.

Posted by: Kinley Ardal, LiB advocate at January 10, 2013 03:57 PM (mrnos)

102 :::The other great advantage is that law-abiding people would have their privacy back. The income tax forces taxpayers to open their finances to unlimited inspection by the government. This sort of scrutiny should be reserved for convicted criminals. My finances should be none of the government's business.
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at January 10, 2013 03:54 PM (QKKT0)

I like the cut of this young man's jib.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at January 10, 2013 03:58 PM (A+odv)

103 I hope Jindal is successful in eliminating business taxes. That may spur Perry to propose to eliminate the franchise tax in Texas. It is not necessary.

Posted by: SH at January 10, 2013 03:58 PM (gmeXX)

104 You don't think it's *NICE* to ask "the poor" to pay for anything, even though they're eating us out of house and home.
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at January 10, 2013 03:52 PM (A+odv)


They already did that.

Posted by: cajun carrot at January 10, 2013 03:58 PM (UZQM8)

105 I'm ok with food not being taxed. It takes a bite out of class warfare rhetoric and is still much more efficient.

When I lived in Canada, we had a VAT-like tax called the GST. It was a national sales tax on top of the provincial sales tax. It was often called the "Gouge and Screw Tax" for good reason.

The GST got weird when it was applied to the grocery store. In a completely ham-fisted attempt to be "fair" to the poor, the GST was only applied to certain kinds of food and not others. The GST was levied on any kind of food that had preparation required before it was sold, and not on raw foods. So a birthday cake you picked up in the bakery section had the tax, while the eggs, flour, milk, and sugar did not. It was fucked up.

Posted by: EC at January 10, 2013 03:59 PM (GQ8sn)

106 Didn't the left tell us we went to war in Iraq and Afghanistan in order to steal all their oil? Why don't we just use that money in lieu of taxes, right?

Heh.

Posted by: The Political Hat at January 10, 2013 03:59 PM (XvHmy)

107 The real bonanza will come when states start enacting sales taxes on services and not just sales of goods. The Realtors have fought this for years and years. But if I choose to buya realtor's services to sell my house, why should that not be taxed as a sale just as much as when I buy a car?
Posted by: rockmom at January 10, 2013 03:35 PM (qE3AR)

Oneof my vendors charge me sales tax on shipping and handling charges. I'm still looking into whether that is kosher.

Posted by: polynikes at January 10, 2013 03:59 PM (m2CN7)

108 Wistful remembrance about how things used to be. Brief anecdote to set up my next point. Simple suggestion followed by admission that I don't know as much about the issue as others do. Parting shot at President.

Posted by: Jones in CO at January 10, 2013 04:00 PM (8sCoq)

109 With a VAT, they usually have a progressive rate. So groceries and gas would have a lower tax rate than say a Persian rug. I don't like the idea of a property tax, I feel a little bit better knowing that usually those funds go to local schools but at the same time that usually leads to crappy schools in crappy areas.

Posted by: Adam Smith's Invisible Pimp Hand at January 10, 2013 04:01 PM (NzBQO)

110 but it meant that a poor person could also nearly avoid the sales tax if they so choose

And how exactly am I supposed to afford that big screen and data plan?

Posted by: average poor American at January 10, 2013 04:02 PM (YXmuI)

111 Property taxes shouldn't penalize people who create jobs and grow the economy. It's a house, damnit, not a scourge on the planet.


--------------------------------------------------


Uh oh. Someone's not eviromentally aware.

Posted by: Soona at January 10, 2013 04:02 PM (gKwHR)

112 % of revenue, not profit.

Posted by: Schrödinger's cat at January 10, 2013 03:57 PM (feFL6)

That penalizes businesses in competitive industries, and rewards high margin industries.

Bad, bad idea.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at January 10, 2013 04:02 PM (GsoHv)

113 Currently it's only 6.25% at the state level. Granted, every penny counts, but a 1.25% drop in nothing to get excited about.

Well it is 8.25% for many residents due to local sales tax add ons. I'm ok with that because of my belief that if a government is going to tax you, it should be as local a governement as possible. In any event, I wasn't saying that Texas necessarily should go to a 5% rate, but I think it could easily. So yea, it should. Imagine telling a business in CA the following:

Come to Texas, no income tax, no business tax, the only state tax is a sales tax of 5%.

Just sounds better than 6.25%.

Posted by: SH at January 10, 2013 04:03 PM (gmeXX)

114 The GST got weird when it was applied to the
grocery store. In a completely ham-fisted attempt to be "fair" to the
poor, the GST was only applied to certain kinds of food and not others.
The GST was levied on any kind of food that had preparation required
before it was sold, and not on raw foods. So a birthday cake you picked
up in the bakery section had the tax, while the eggs, flour, milk, and
sugar did not. It was fucked up.


Posted by: EC at January 10, 2013 03:59 PM (GQ8sn)

This isn't too far off from MO's approach. The idea is that if you just ended it on all food you'd lose too much and have to increase the other tax to much. (Plus what about fast food? Restaurants?) So you only waive the tax on "raw" foods that required preparation. (To remove the class warfare rhetoric without increasing it too much.)

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at January 10, 2013 04:04 PM (ULkyQ)

115 Wistful remembrance about how things used to be. Brief anecdote to set up my next point. Simple suggestion followed by admission that I don't know as much about the issue as others do. Parting shot at President.
Posted by: Jones in CO at January 10, 2013 04:00 PM (8sCoq)



Link to boobehs.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Seriously, Sheldon/Penny to the end. at January 10, 2013 04:05 PM (VtjlW)

116 Property taxes shouldn't penalize people who create jobs and grow the economy. It's a house, damnit, not a scourge on the planet.

---

As long as property taxes are basically local county and school board taxes, that is probably the best a conservative can hope for. You pretty much dictate the level of service you want with where you want to live. Texas property taxes are pretty much local taxes. Not sure in other states. That being said, they should be lower to. What I don't like in Texas is elderly exemptions on property taxes. Why should they get that benefit.

Posted by: SH at January 10, 2013 04:06 PM (gmeXX)

117 What I don't like is that every time money changes hand in America, whether the transaction be for $1.49 or $10billion, government sticks its hand out demanding a cut. It makes everything public. We should have a more private economy. And we should have a federal government that devolves many of its functions back to the states. This idea the government 'needs revenue' is absurd. The government is not supposed to be a money making enterprise- as though it's a business that has to make X amount of money each year in order to put out a product. This is the US Govt saying 'fuck you- pay me'. I hate it. Go Broncos.

Posted by: Jones in CO at January 10, 2013 04:06 PM (8sCoq)

118 "Was she abused? I don't know, kinda doubt it. What I was saying was that they destroyed the kid by letting her become a star.


And who is the histrionic in question? O.o I'm confused.


Posted by: Kinley Ardal, LiB advocate at January 10, 2013 03:57 PM (mrnos)"



She claims she was in that article. There are plenty of parents that allow their kids to become stars and the kids turn out fine. Not saying she didn't have bad parenting, but simply letting your kid become a star doesn't automatically equal bad parenting.


And she's the histrionic.


Ugh, I can't believe I've typed this many words about Lindsay Lohan.

Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 10, 2013 04:06 PM (ROv35)

119

Don't try to claim that somehow that's fairer.



It's not.



It is. Totally fair, if words have any meaning at all. It may not be wise, however.

Posted by: toby928© for TB



It offends the basic, innate human sense of justice to tell someone that they will have to go without food, shelter, or clothing to pay for the government.

Rail and gnash your teeth all you want, my fellow morons, but there is no way on God's green earth that you will get far with an argument that poor people living hand to mouth on fixed incomes will just have to suck it up so we can have some type of "fair" tax that hits everyone.

It. Won't. Happen.

You're substituting libertarian ideological fantasies for socialist
redistributionist ones, and there are not that many voting libertarians.

If there's any type of switch from income to sales tax, basic necessities like groceries have to be excluded. They have to be. And then you'll have to get ready for luxury taxes, because that's the only way that the tax stream is going to be enough.

No matter how you slice it, the rich will always have to pay the lion's share in taxes, because they have the most income over and above basic necessities.

Period.


Posted by: imp at January 10, 2013 04:07 PM (UaxA0)

120 >>>Posted by: tsrblke (work) at January 10, 2013 04:04 PM (ULkyQ)

Well I'd tax the sugar and the flour. Both are luxuries. Eat your damn wheat berries and like it or pay sales tax.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose is Shrugging at January 10, 2013 04:07 PM (0q2P7)

121 (Plus what about fast food? Restaurants?) So you only waive the tax on
"raw" foods that required preparation. (To remove the class warfare
rhetoric without increasing it too much.)


Yeah, any kind of food that was prepared beforehand to be sold to consumers was taxed. So fast food, restaurants, etc all had the GST applied. The idea was to leave the most basic unprocessed foods alone so that the poor were able to buy their staples without getting hit too hard.

Posted by: EC at January 10, 2013 04:08 PM (GQ8sn)

122 I hope Presdent Obama does something to stop these guys. The government needs the money to help people.

Posted by: Mary Clogginstein from Obamaboro, Vt and Proud of it !!!!!!!!!! at January 10, 2013 04:08 PM (48wze)

123 The other benefit to sales taxes is they are all paid by credit card. Its like free money, and the MILES.

Posted by: SH at January 10, 2013 04:09 PM (gmeXX)

124
It. Won't. Happen.

You're substituting libertarian ideological fantasies for socialist

redistributionist ones, and there are not that many voting libertarians.

If
there's any type of switch from income to sales tax, basic necessities
like groceries have to be excluded. They have to be. And then you'll
have to get ready for luxury taxes, because that's the only way that the
tax stream is going to be enough.

No matter how you slice it,
the rich will always have to pay the lion's share in taxes, because they
have the most income over and above basic necessities.

Period.




Posted by: imp at January 10, 2013 04:07 PM (UaxA0)


I would go for no taxes on the poor provided they didn't get to vote. The problem with poor people voting is that they create the "Free Shit Army."





Posted by: DiogenesLamp at January 10, 2013 04:09 PM (bb5+k)

125 Louisiana better make some changes that state sucks

Posted by: occam at January 10, 2013 04:10 PM (cWOlF)

126 Today a man at Sears Optical repaired my eyeglasses for free. He didn't make any money from me today, but he will when I decide to go to him next time I need glasses. This says something about the way our small personal economy works when left alone, or something.

Posted by: Jones in CO at January 10, 2013 04:10 PM (8sCoq)

127 I think a VAT is tacked on at every stage of production, no?

Yep, whenever "value" is added to the product (which is a book keeping nightmare).

Essentially, its a "wealth creation" tax...

...BUT, it has one advantage over a sales tax. In the secondary/used markets, no value is added to anything, so things like used cars, thrift store items and such wouldn't be taxed repeatedly as they change hands over and over.

With sales tax, you bleed forever, with VAT you bleed on the initial sale. Basically VAT incentivises societal thrift and extraction of maximum long term value from something until it meets it final reward in the land fill.

Posted by: @PurpAv at January 10, 2013 04:10 PM (BNacf)

128 As a Matter of Fact, i've read that in Hong Kong, the poor don't pay any taxes, and the people over there regard it as a social status symbol that they earn enough to pay taxes!


Whodda thunk that taxpayers ought to be revered or something?


Posted by: DiogenesLamp at January 10, 2013 04:11 PM (bb5+k)

129 I didn't know Sears was still in existence.

Posted by: SH at January 10, 2013 04:11 PM (gmeXX)

130 106 Didn't the left tell us we went to war in Iraq and Afghanistan in order to steal all their oil? Why don't we just use that money in lieu of taxes, right?

Heh.
Posted by: The Political Hat at January 10, 2013 03:59 PM (XvHmy)


The UN stole all of that...

Posted by: cajun carrot at January 10, 2013 04:11 PM (UZQM8)

131 >Posted by: DiogenesLamp at January 10, 2013 04:09 PM (bb5+k)


that's brilliant. Voting is limited to federal taxpayers. And we'll slice the bread before we sell it.

Posted by: Jones in CO at January 10, 2013 04:12 PM (8sCoq)

132 125 Louisiana better make some changes that state sucks
Posted by: occam at January 10, 2013 04:10 PM (cWOlF)


Go to Lafayette and say that.

Posted by: cajun carrot at January 10, 2013 04:12 PM (UZQM8)

133 Hey, why not have higher taxes on both income AND sales! And to top it off, a repeal of Prop. 13!!1!

Posted by: Gov. Moonbeam at January 10, 2013 04:14 PM (XvHmy)

134 The economy really is pretty simple.

1. Exploit natural resources.
2. Keep taxes low - don't tax income and savings.
3. Keep regulations low.

If onlywe had a GOP candidate who would have run on such a simple plan. D'oh.

Instead we get someone who runs on "I'm going to make China play by the rules."

Posted by: SH at January 10, 2013 04:14 PM (gmeXX)

135 And then you'll have to get ready for luxury taxes, because that's the only way that the tax stream is going to be enough.

Bush v1.0 tried that in the late 80's. It destroyed the south FL marina/boat industry, which never really recovered and threw thousands out of work. The "rich" suddenly stop buying luxury shit when you try to bone them too hard.

I was living in Ft. Lauderdale at the time, and the effect was fast and devastating.

Posted by: @PurpAv at January 10, 2013 04:15 PM (BNacf)

136 Posted by: cajun carrot at January 10, 2013 04:12 PM (UZQM8

Go to Hell USL , Go to Hell
Go to Hell USL , Go To Hell

Been awhile since I've said that.

Posted by: polynikes from Lake Charles at January 10, 2013 04:16 PM (m2CN7)

137 When I was young sales tax was 3 cents on the dollar. Property taxes in the South were almost non-existent because they were low to begin with and property values were not that high. The income tax was fairly low for the State..


The sales tax stayed at 3% for the longest time. But hen we had to do it for the "chirruns at school" and they commenced their steady increase to 10.5%


The schools are worst than they were in the 50s and we pay 10 times the amount for them. So where is all that money going? There are hundreds of local government bureaucracies now from the old police and fire down to some stupid women's services offices that I have no idea what they do.


And every time we have a county council meeting there is a string of those leeches lineup to beg for more money for their programs that according to them are simply indispensable.

Posted by: Vic at January 10, 2013 04:16 PM (53z96)

138 Voting is limited to federal taxpayers. And we'll slice the bread before we sell it.

Kind of like Heinlein's franchise rights: you become a "citizen" and get to vote ONLY after military service. The idea was to ingrain some kind of understanding of your role in the whole, how your actions can affect others, and how important it was to participate in civics.

Posted by: EC at January 10, 2013 04:16 PM (GQ8sn)

139 Pennsylvania's sales tax is just 6 percent.
I can say 'just' since i live 200 yards from the Delaware border

Posted by: Buzzsaw90 at January 10, 2013 04:17 PM (SO2Q8)

140 Sounds like a prelude to introducing a state VAT. Not entirely implausible, IMHO, if you have a flat tax rate on income that's reasonable.

Posted by: Chairman LMAO at January 10, 2013 04:17 PM (9eDbm)

141 Well I'd tax the sugar and the flour. Both are luxuries. Eat your damn wheat berries and like it or pay sales tax.


Posted by: MikeTheMoose is Shrugging at January 10, 2013 04:07 PM (0q2P7)

Actually I looked and the MO system is a reduction (not an elimination, but basically one) for anything that can be bought on food stamps.If I had to guess, I'd say there was an efficiency argument there, rather than having to have grocery stores program registers double, they just got to use the same list of items. (Although that list should be shrunk too.)Flour is needed to do a lot of cooking (soups, stews, etc.) so, meh, whatever. I'd rather have people buying flour than candy. (Plus at this point our system is efficient enough flour is starting to be cheaper than stopping the process and shipping raw wheat.

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at January 10, 2013 04:18 PM (ULkyQ)

142 It offends the basic, innate human sense of justice to tell someone that they will have to go without food, shelter, or clothing to pay for the government.


It offends the basic, innate human sense of justice to say that the money I earn with my own labor is someone owed to the government first and that it is up to the benevolence of the government to tell me how much I can keep.


If taxes become so high that the poor cannot afford food and clothing due to taxes, well, then we've reached such a point of societal breakdown that fairness is the least of our concerns.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Seriously, Sheldon/Penny to the end. at January 10, 2013 04:18 PM (VtjlW)

143 That penalizes businesses in competitive industries, and rewards high margin industries.

Bad, bad idea.


When everyone in competitive industries is paying the same nominal percentage, how does that benefit one business over another?

Too much money is spent on accountants to make profits 'disappear' when the focus of a business should be anywhere else in the universe EXCEPT that. Profitable businesses hire employees, make huge real estate purchases, reward employees -- all things that are very, very good. Paying some percentage of revenue should be looked at as a cost of doing business. Raping the profits from successful businesses and making them look to other countries to reduce costs is what got us into this nightmare in the first place.

Posted by: Schrödinger's cat at January 10, 2013 04:19 PM (feFL6)

144 What I don't like in Texas is elderly exemptions on property taxes. Why should they get that benefit.Posted by: SH at January 10, 2013 04:06 PM (gmeXX)---- Hey, watch it you little whippersnapper

Posted by: Velvet Ambition at January 10, 2013 04:19 PM (R8hU8)

145 Ok, to make up for my previous mistake with LA and SC, I offer this to the horde:

The LSU Dance Team.

http://tinyurl.com/b9b4dx3

Go Bobby Jindal!!!

Posted by: EC at January 10, 2013 04:19 PM (GQ8sn)

146 someone = somehow

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Seriously, Sheldon/Penny to the end. at January 10, 2013 04:19 PM (VtjlW)

147 2. Keep taxes low - don't tax income and savings.

Vladimir Putin figured this out.

The Russian Federation income tax is a flat 13%, and their corporate tax is a flat 20%. 18% VAT.

Their GDP is growing briskly and unemployment is in the 5-6% range.


Posted by: @PurpAv at January 10, 2013 04:19 PM (BNacf)

148 Posted by: polynikes from Lake Charles at January 10, 2013 04:16 PM (m2CN7)


LoL unfortunately they are no longer USL... they are ULL. They wanted in on that sweet taxpayer money. I always enjoyed pronouncing USL as Usul.

Posted by: cajun carrot at January 10, 2013 04:20 PM (UZQM8)

149 http://www.taxrates.cc/html/russia-tax-rates.html

Posted by: @PurpAv at January 10, 2013 04:20 PM (BNacf)

150 Vladimir Putin figured this out.

The Russian Federation income tax is a flat 13%, and their corporate tax is a flat 20%. 18% VAT.

Their GDP is growing briskly and unemployment is in the 5-6% range.



It's a sad day when the commies tell us how it works.

*facepalm*

Posted by: EC at January 10, 2013 04:21 PM (GQ8sn)

151 Excluding basic food and clothing from sales taxes is not only good policy, but arguably the only moral option. The problem is what is basic food and cloting. Does GAP count? So it gets pretty dicey. Better course of action is to simply have a very low sales tax to begin with. Only tax at the initial point of sale (e.g., exclude garage sales, etc.). And move along. That being said, some compromiess are in order and if excluding food is one of those compromises. Then I'll take the benefit as well.

Posted by: SH at January 10, 2013 04:23 PM (gmeXX)

152 Dear Governor Jindal,

Thanks for giving me another great excuse excuse to move home


Posted by: gigg at January 10, 2013 04:24 PM (41VCE)

153 OT

BAL @ DEN gametime forecast

partly sunny 19F winds calm

Posted by: Jones in CO at January 10, 2013 04:24 PM (8sCoq)

154 BAL @ DEN gametime forecast

partly sunny 19F winds calm
Posted by: Jones in CO at January 10, 2013 04:24 PM (8sCoq)

I got a feeling Denver is going to have some serious butthurt after this one.

Posted by: cajun carrot at January 10, 2013 04:25 PM (UZQM8)

155 >It's a sad day when the commies tell us how it works.

*facepalm*


Posted by: EC at January 10, 2013 04:21 PM (GQ8sn)


I know right?

Posted by: Jones in CO at January 10, 2013 04:25 PM (8sCoq)

156 >I got a feeling Denver is going to have some serious butthurt after this one.

Posted by: cajun carrot at January 10, 2013 04:25 PM (UZQM

Terrell Su g g s and his pals will spend most of their time sucking oxygen on the sidelines

Posted by: Jones in CO at January 10, 2013 04:26 PM (8sCoq)

157 LoL unfortunately they are no longer USL... they are ULL. They wanted in on that sweet taxpayer money. I always enjoyed pronouncing USL as Usul.
Posted by: cajun carrot at January 10, 2013 04:20 PM (UZQM

Can't really blame them. They always wanted to be University of Lousiana but LSU put the kabosh on that. There can only be one King. That's why this McNeese graduateroots against LSU.

Posted by: polynikes from Lake Charles at January 10, 2013 04:26 PM (m2CN7)

158 It's a sad day when the commies tell us how it works.

The Russians now know communism doesn't work. Even the old diehards are becoming politically marginalized.

Whatever Putin is doing, its working. The crackdowns on govt corruption, and mechanisms put in place to minimize institutionalized corruption look impressive so far to me.

If I have to have a strongman, I'd much rather have a Putin than an Obama.

Posted by: @PurpAv at January 10, 2013 04:28 PM (BNacf)

159 If I have to have a strongman, I'd much rather have a Putin than an Obama.


What flavour polonium do you like best? I like vanilla.

Posted by: EC at January 10, 2013 04:30 PM (GQ8sn)

160 My plan, 20% state excise tax on Obamaphones and SSDI payments, for the children.

Posted by: Jean at January 10, 2013 04:33 PM (kdfQ/)

161 What flavour polonium do you like best? I like vanilla.
Posted by: EC at January 10, 2013 04:30 PM (GQ8sn)--- True dat

Posted by: Velvet Ambition at January 10, 2013 04:34 PM (R8hU8)

162 If Putin keeps poisoning people, somebody might get the impression he isn't a nice guy.

Posted by: Jean at January 10, 2013 04:34 PM (kdfQ/)

163
AmI the only person who breaks out in hives when someone who is out of preschool bleats about "fairness?"

Posted by: Jay Guevara at January 10, 2013 04:38 PM (DXlwL)

164
160My plan, 20% state excise tax on Obamaphones and SSDI payments, for the children.Posted by: Jean at January 10, 2013 04:33 PM (kdfQ/)

I like a 50% tax on lawsuit settlement payments,and actors' remuneration, for the polar bears.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at January 10, 2013 04:40 PM (DXlwL)

165 I like the sales tax. Even when kids are very little they can grasp it. They reach up and put their quarter on the counter for a 25-cent treat and the clerk woefully tells them they have to cough up more for tax. Makes them cry. Heh.

When they get a real job, kids are disappointed by not getting as much as they thought they would in their paycheck, but pretty soon they get used to thinking in terms of take-home-pay. And then they think they're getting a gift when they get a return on taxes. Screw that.

Posted by: Margarita DeVille at January 10, 2013 04:40 PM (C8mVl)

166 Jindal is correct, and the first tax that should go is the corporate income tax. Then income tax.

The higher sales tax is exactly what we need because:

a) Encourages savings, discourages consumption
b) it affects everyone is very visible.
c) its much harder to segment off parts of the voting base or to give them goodies from it.

Reason C is more appealing nowadays. Politicians who need more revenue can just tax certain people or give their friends tax breaks. That is much, much harder to do with sales taxes.

A flat income tax would be okay too, but with any income tax system, there is a temptation to tinker with it over time, and then you have the same problem again.

Posted by: sexypig at January 10, 2013 04:41 PM (dZQh7)

167 "I like a 50% tax on lawsuit settlement payments,and actors' remuneration, for the polar bears."

THIS.

Posted by: sexypig at January 10, 2013 04:41 PM (dZQh7)

168 I watch a lot of science programs, and it is pretty amazing how the old USSR beat our ass in the space program. The moon? They got there first, but unmanned. Venus? They kept at it, got there first, but weren't prepared for the temps or gravity load.

If I had to rate 'the minds' of China, the old USSR, and the USA, I'd say that we better 'up' our game soon because they're no dummies, and we may come in third place. Seeing them bring tax rates into an area that encourages innovation, job growth, and rewards achievement should scare the hell out of any American with an IQ north of 90. Which might only be about 50 million out of 315 million Americans.

Can someone please tell me the exact day and time when the word 'prosperity' became such a profanity?

Posted by: Schrödinger's cat at January 10, 2013 04:46 PM (feFL6)

169 Sales taxes are made at time of expenditure, so they encourage savings. They also remind ever one... every time... that they pay taxes.

So tax and spend policies become... problematic... because politicians can't promise "someone else" will pay.

The problem... and why I've ALWAYS voted against a sales tax in Oregon, is that they Democrats refuse to discontinue income and/or property taxes. You can't give them multiple ways to Loot. Starve the Beast.

Posted by: DANEgerus at January 10, 2013 04:52 PM (e3/KR)

170 The GST got weird when it was applied to the grocery
store. In a completely ham-fisted attempt to be "fair" to the poor, the
GST was only applied to certain kinds of food and not others. The GST
was levied on any kind of food that had preparation required before it
was sold, and not on raw foods. So a birthday cake you picked up in the
bakery section had the tax, while the eggs, flour, milk, and sugar did
not. It was fucked up.


Posted by: EC at January 10, 2013 03:59 PM (GQ8sn)

The GST is waived, as you added later, for those items considered to be "staples". A frozen pizza is "prepared food", so it is taxed. Flour is not. Nor are fresh meat and veggies. I pay GST on a haircut. As a small contractor in the oilpatch, I have to charge GST on my services, do a GST return quarterly, and cut the government a check. And that GST return, you know it's a whole ONE page! How dare they burden me with that paperwork? It must take me at least ten minutes to fill out every quarter.

GST is currently at five percent. I'd be happy as a pig in sh*t if they raised it 20% and eliminated the Federal income tax. How much GST one pays as a consumer is almost entirely predicated upon how large one lives. Buy used goods in (legal) private sales, you pay no GST. Cars, furniture, computers, whatever. Buy from used-goods dealers, you do pay GST, based, I think, on the notion that such dealers provide a "service". Buy new, and of course you pay GST. I'm pretty frugal, so I don't pay a heck of a lot of GST.



As to property tax, the largest fraction of it here is used to fund education. I really think there needs to be an overhaul of that. Why should my home have to pay the operating costs of the local schools, when it doesn't benefit? I can see charging the capital cost of schools to property tax, because the presence of a nice quality school building in the area should, by rights, improve my property value. But operating costs should be funded out of general provincial revenue. Basically, it costs X dollars per student per year to provide the schooling, whether in a one-room schoolhouse, or a fancy architect-designed "campus". In other words, try to put as much of this service as possible on a user-pay basis. My house and land "uses" the existence of a modern school building to gain resale value that makes it worth more than a similar property located in a district with an old, run-down school. But the population, as a whole, "uses" the service of teaching children, to keep them off the streets, and maybe even prepare them to get jobs and become good little taxpayers, so the population, as a whole, should fund that service via broad-based tax revenue.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at January 10, 2013 04:54 PM (29+x5)

171 4
Texas does not have income tax but does have 8.25% sales tax and fairly
high property tax. I would like to reduce or eliminate the property tax
and have a higher sales tax.

Posted by: Velvet Ambition

I think S.F.'s sales tax is around 9% (it was recently changed). We have Prop 13 (liberals gag saying it) which prohibits reassessments unless properties change hands. Our top state inc. rate is 9.3% (that may have also been raised to 10% for the "rich") and it starts around $40,000!

Posted by: SFGoth at January 10, 2013 05:05 PM (dZ756)

172 What I don't like in Texas is elderly exemptions on property taxes. Why should they get that benefit.Posted by: SH at January 10, 2013 04:06 PM
-
They aren't exempt, the taxes are frozen at age 65.

Posted by: Vashta Nerada at January 10, 2013 05:05 PM (a/BVM)

173 Sales taxes are regressive.

What they don't see is that the rich SPEND MORE idiots.

Except for that crazy granny that leaves $6 million to her cats.

Posted by: SmileyNH at January 10, 2013 05:09 PM (hlZx/)

174 New Hampshire has neither a sales nor an income tax. You're all a bunch of suckers.

Higher sales tax?!??! MORON!

Property tax is the fairest. You can control the town budget and attend town meetings. You don't have those? You don't read the town budget?

So you just blindly pay without reading the bill? You get what you deserve. To be fucked.

Posted by: SmileyNH at January 10, 2013 05:13 PM (hlZx/)

175 For me the issue is the cost and efficiency of government. I asked one state rep if anyone knew what it cost the state to deliver one dollar of value to anyone receiving pubic assistance. Not a word. No interest in the question, let alone in the answer.

Who would go to WalMart and not care they spent $1 to get something that was worth less than $1? When we do, we kick ourselves. Yet government costs far more than $1 for every dollar's worth of service it provides. Indeed, if it gives more than a dollar of value for a dollar in taxes, it is an accident, and an unnatural act.

We cannot afford the government we have, even if only for the sheer cost of getting so little from it.

Posted by: theBuckWheat at January 10, 2013 05:49 PM (SsVuS)

176 Taxes should not be something snuck out of your pocket, they should be something felt each time they are pulled, from everyone that they are pulled from. After that, raise them all you think you need to.

The problem is that no one feels the pull, except the w9's out there, aka the rich, so this minority is demonized and marginalized.......

Posted by: vikingsfan at January 10, 2013 08:16 PM (IboCP)






Processing 0.04, elapsed 0.256 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.2332 seconds, 185 records returned.
Page size 114 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.

MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat