"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have"
Thomas Jefferson

Wednesday, March 5, 2008

WFP "Robin Hood Plan" Only Has It Part Right.

Robin Hood, much like the Working Families Party, is seen by some as the champion of the people, fighting corruption while others see an arrogant and headstrong rebel.

The Working Families Party is proposing a tax increase on higher income individuals. Proposing a tax increase for any one is their first mistake.

The Working Families Party is proposing a tax increase on higher income individuals. They are proposing this tax increase to spend more money, thus institutionalizing higher cost of government for us and future generations to pay, this is their second mistake.

Here is the part they got right; offer property tax relief, close the budget gap, prevent taxes from going up and reduce the fare hikes and fees on the middle class.

What is amazing is they fail to see the root cause of the problem in New York State which is SPENDING. Reversing a tax cut which through their rhetoric is masked as an abomination is only their way to a spending frenzy.

What New York needs is more disciplined lawmakers who will spend slightly below the means of New Yorker's ability to pay and help us by building some reserves to usher government through the economic bad times and disciplined lawmakers who quit putting us and the next generation into debt by deficit spending.

We need to elect legislators who have demonstrated they are fiscally responsible with their own money, then we know we can trust them with our money.

I urge Darrel, Dede and 118th Assembly person elect to oppose any tax increase and focus on reducing spending.


TF said...

It will probably come as no surprise that I disagree with your thinking on taxing the very richest New Yorkers at an increased rate. My belief very simply put is; those who are more able to contribute to our societal general welfare should do so in proportion to that increased ability to contribute. That includes you, me and Warren Buffet. Warren by the way agrees with my premise.
Should we use the money received wisely? Of course. But that use too is subjective.
On the Danger Democrat website I am
attempting to track the progress of the bill you cite in the Assembly and Dede Scozzafa's reaction to it as sort of a test to see how she feels about the social implications of the graduated income tax. For me it will be instructive as to her broad philosophic position. My suspicion is that you and I will probably disagree about that philosophy. But by all means keep on keeping on I'm enjoying your blog.

Anonymous said...

TF and the WFP continue to perpetuate the HUGE DEMOCRAT LIE that wealthy people don't pay their share. They actually pay more than they should, even with the tax cuts. Higher earners got a bigger break BECAUSE THEY PAY THE MOST TAX!! WAKE UP and stop lying about it. As far as the runaway spending, who passes the federal budget? Congress! Must be George Bush's fault, right?

TF said...

To further my comments here is a cut and paste this morning from
Jay Callagher of Gannet news.
ALBANY -- The vast bulk of the $1.5 billion income-tax hike being proposed by Assembly Democrats would be paid by residents of Manhattan and suburban counties, including Westchester, according to a review of state Tax Department records.

"There's no doubt that the bulk of the high-wage workers are in Manhattan and the suburbs," Tax and Finance Department spokesman Tom Bergin said Thursday.

Does that help you any Mr. IV?

Anonymous said...

tf won't respond to fact, he is meely mouth communist. The so called rich already pay the lions share of taxes. Yep, keep increasing the taxes for the "common good". NYS the most over taxed state in the country and we need to raise taxes. That will keep the people from fleeing this once great state.

Anonymous said...

It is very nice to believe that the only effect of Spitzers incresed tax is picking the pocket of some rich guys in NYC.

The problem is the ongoing tax burden that is placed on all New Yorkers, and the downward spiral of job losses.

Like it or not my Democrat friends, those "rich guys" who will be paying the increased taxes are the same people who have a say whether their company stays in New York, or moves to North Carolina.

Similarly, the same is true of companies looking to move their own company to NY or some other competing state.

Often it seems that the Dems have bit of a schitzoid view of the world, loving employees, but sticking it to the employers, as if one can exist without the other.

Anonymous said...

Yes, the wealthy do pay a large portion of the federal tax in fact, th majority of the income tax, but you must be talking SOLELY about the income tax to mistate that they are paying more than their fair share.

As a percentage of income, the bottom fifty percent likely pay a higher percentage in tax through the gas or highway tax than the income tax, and a much more significant portion of their income than the top 1%. The revenue raised from the gas tax I believe is about $200 Billion in revenue annually for the Federal Government. About $1 to $2 thousand dollars per year in gas taxes is not unusual for the working class and the poor. A similar spending happens for the top 1% as well, because the rich don't drive significantly more than the poor or working class.

By contrast, the bottom 50% pay about $30 billion in income tax.

By way of contrast the top 1% of estates, the only people paying the estate tax, pay about $30 billion per year in gift and estate taxes.

The bottom fifty percent pay a significant percentage of the Social Security and Medicare taxes, likely as much as 30% of that tax because of the cap on income taxed, which raises about $400 billion per year for the federal government. The top 1% aren't paying the Social Security and Medicare tax on a significant portion of their earnings, regardless of the cap, because a significant portion of their earnings are not treated as earned income for tax purposes thanks to the effective use of tax planning by business owners to avoid taxation. It is probably that the bottom 80%, those earning less than $100K per year in fact pay 90%or more of the Social Security and Medicare tax.

I haven't been able to find out what peice of the budget is made up of tariffs, but it is likely that there is an equal distribution of these revenues split across the income brackets, with some exception, because at the end of the day tariffs are paid by consumers and the rich and poor don't consume significantly more on a daily basis due to income. Do the rich spend more, yes, but the spending patterns, with some notable exceptions, are not too disimilar between Warren Buffet and a middle class accountant, in fact, the accountant might spend more. Buffet is frugal.

What are the top 1% paying in terms of income tax? If I remember correctly about $600 billion per year.

By way of perspective, yes, they are paying more, but what does that top 1% own? 80% of the wealth! Are they paying 80% of the taxes? No! Not even close!

The next question is, should they ONLY be paying 80% of the taxes? Again, the answer is NO!

Reduce the tax rate on the bottom 50% to zero, eliminate the Social Security and Medicare tax, eliminate the gas tax, eliminate the income tax, and tax the top 1% to make up the difference.

Why? To end the credit card culture for one. If the working class were able to keep the money they earn, they would pay off those debts, or not incurr them in the first place, they would be able to save and invest, which would be good for the economy, they would in fact be able to create small business from those savings.

The bottom 50% are paying 50% or more of their income in taxes, if those taxes were eliminated for them, and those who are already successful were required to pay a more significant portion of their income to the tax man, economic development would improve.

What would change is corpocracy, and the wage slavery that has dominated American society since the rise of Reagan and trickle down. As Bill Maher said long ago, "They're telling you that they are pissing on you."

Anonymous said...

Don't forget the so called rich are also the biggest donors and philanthropists. They prefer to have a choice in where there $ are spent. Dem's want to add big gov't into the mix in an administrator role. Raise taxes ib the rich more, and they will donate less.

Second, and most importantly: New York's budget problem(s) is/are not revenue related they are SPENDING related.

The likelihood of pols reducing spending is minimal, unless we ENACT TERM LIMITS. Then they don't have to worry about their own future they will know they only have x years on the job. My suggestion is 12 years max across the board: assembly, state senate, US House and Senate. We would HAVE to grandfather in those who are in power now in order to get them to pass it but at least we would have hope for the future.

Live Blogging