4 thoughts on “Taxachusetts”

  1. The graphic is interesting in that it does not illustrate any proposals or discussion for eliminating government spending. Perhaps that is because the purpose of the chart is to illuminate tax proposals only. It is a very busy chart as it is, and adding the spending cuts would certainly clutter it up even more. Nevertheless, if I lived there, I’d want to see what the legislators and the Governor would be willing to give up in terms of spending.
    Meanwhile, here in Massachusetts West, I have done my part to say no to new spending by voting “No” on our five ballot proposals to deal with the immense budget deficit. None of them address actual insane spending by cutting any of the duplication and triplication of bureaucracy. I’m hoping that if these propositions go down in flames that legislators everywhere will get the message: Stop spending the taxpayers money on your pet projects and vote buying gimmicks.

  2. Isn’t interesting that in state after state that is going bankrupt they are basically only talking about raising taxes, not cutting spending or bloated unionized workforces.
    In NY, we are going under due to Medicaid, social spending and union benefits and pensions. Wall Street had a horrible year. The Dems answer-increase the budget by 9%. Impose a millionaires tax which is already and predictably driving rich people out of the state and while we are at it overturn the Rockefeller drug laws which btw only affect 30-40 big drug dealers a year and ram gay marriage down everyones throat.

  3. Suckers!
    Let Reagan convince them taxes are a bad thing. Even had Cheney (who has made every one of his dollars from government revenues) to do the same.
    The US deserves to be a 3rd world nation.
    Q. How do you stop a Republican from whining about spending?
    A. Bring up Dept. of Defense and Pentagon budgets. They’ll run faster than a college Republican from a military recruiting office.

  4. I do not know where you live Berto, and I certainly have no idea of the budget situation in your state, but the deficit in California is not due to low tax rates. The marginal rate is over 10%, sales tax is over 8% and you can hardly create any wealth or new opportunities here because there is always some commission or other unelected entity that delays or stops a project.
    The evidence is all around us here that high tax rates, excessive fees and regulation have driven business and high earners out of the state. With Nevada being income tax free, many do not have to go very far.
    Overall, here in California, the only thing that is noteworthy or creative about the legislature is the many ways they find to spend other peoples’ money. Just as in Massachusetts there is very little in the way of substantial effort to find ways to cut back. The public unions have completely filled this mess kit with their excrement, and now what is left is unusable. It’s very reminiscent of what the UAW has done to GM and Chrysler. Maybe Obama will take us over.
    As for your criticism of Reagan, when marginal income tax rates were lowered from 70% to 50% and then in 1986 to 28%, the overall revenues rose tremendously. This is a fact that is easily corroborated by historical fact, as if you’d care.

Comments are closed.