Raising Taxes Again

[ProEye]

This is definitely not a new concept here in the NE. Sheesh, we have a BUDGET SURPLUS and we need to raise taxes??? Where is all this money going??????

And to think our governor is a Republican. What do these major parties stand for anyway???


February 7, 2007
Connecticut Governor Proposes another Significant Tax Hike

by Curtis S. Dubay
On the heels of Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell's massive tax hike proposal yesterday, Connecticut Governor Jodi Rell proposed a tax hike today that could cause equal economic harm.
Governor Rell wants to increase tax rate from 5 percent to 5.5 percent on income over $10,000 and increase the cigarette tax from $1.51 to $2.00 per pack.
While the Governor did not release revenue estimates with her income tax proposal, we know that Connecticut's income tax brought in approximately $5 billion in FY 2005. So her increase might be expected to raise as much as $500 million. The cigarette tax increase will raise taxes a substantial amount too; $86.4 million in fiscal year 2008 and $82.8 million in 2009.
Connecticut already has the highest total tax burden in the country and 12th highest state and local tax burden. Governor Rell's proposals will increase both.
Of course a state's tax burden alone is not enough to determine whether a state's tax system is economically punitive. How a state collects its tax burden is as important as the burden itself.
Unfortunately for Connecticut, it has an economically damaging business tax climate on top of high tax burdens, according to our State Business Tax Climate Index. The Governor's proposal will drive Connecticut's competitiveness down.
Connecticut lawmakers should be aware that states that have better tax climates generally experience higher rates of economic growth. As taxes climb and Connecticut's business climate deteriorates businesses, jobs and people will leave the state.
Governor Rell apparently has little regard for the state's toothless cap on spending growth as this is the second year in a row she proposes to go over it.

[the dufferz]

Politicians.... never met a tax they didn't like!

[Wyody]

Having lived in several "republican controlled" states - this is a normal occurence, i.e., excessive tax with no meaningful purpose or benefit for the people of the state.
This is why it always amuses me when somebody comes out with the phrase "tax and spend liberal" - It's always the conservative elements who strip us down and empty our pockets for weird agendas while the so-called liberal elements are usually forced to raise them due to narrow-minded management tactics of opposing predecessors.
Not to be at all argumentative, it's just my first-hand experience in what is beginning to be "a long and disturbed life"!

[RodFarlee]

With apologies for addressing a national issue in a particular state forum...

Originally Posted by ProEye

...And to think our governor is a Republican. What do these major parties stand for anyway???

In the "actions speak louder than words" department, Republicans are what Republicans do:
cut taxes, increase spending, pass the debt on to the next generation.



An article from the conservative CATO Institute entitled The Conservative Case for Voting Democratic notes "if you do strip out military spending and consider only the domestic record, GOP chief executives emerge in an even worse light. In terms of real domestic discretionary outlays, which are most easily controlled, the biggest spender in the past 40 years is George W. Bush, with expenditure racing ahead 8.2% annually." GWB makes LBJ look like a penny-pincher.

Note to a1: It's that darned biased "liberal media" again, at the Heritage Institute and the CATO Institute... chuckle.

[the dufferz]

Rod,

Presidents have nothing to do with raising taxes, other than signing bills passed by congress. note the second half of Clinton... Republicans were in charge of both houses. Note how in bush's term it went back up... note who now is in charge of congress. very telling.

It does not tell the whole story. Fact is, spending is the fuel that runs politics on both sides.

Who is at fault? We are.

[ProEye]

Originally Posted by the dufferz

Rod,

Presidents have nothing to do with raising taxes, other than signing bills passed by congress. note the second half of Clinton... Republicans were in charge of both houses. Note how in bush's term it went back up... note who now is in charge of congress. very telling.

It does not tell the whole story. Fact is, spending is the fuel that runs politics on both sides.

Who is at fault? We are.

Nah. I think it's the system. What are you going to do? Repeal the government? You can't say, "Throw them out!" Because what do you get instead? More of the same.

I don't know what the solution is. Maybe our country needs to start falling behind other countries then we might start getting our government spending under control.

I think we are simply too fat and happy...

[the dufferz]

Originally Posted by ProEye

Nah. I think it's the system. What are you going to do? Repeal the government? You can't say, "Throw them out!" Because what do you get instead? More of the same.

I don't know what the solution is. Maybe our country needs to start falling behind other countries then we might start getting our government spending under control.

I think we are simply too fat and happy...

Seeing it has not been an overnight thing, then the "we" started a long time before we were the we. No, we can't kick them out and it is a problem that won't be going away for a looooong time.

And yes, we are simply too fat and happy. Imagine what would happen to America if we went into a deep depression like back in '29, how would people cope? scary thought.

[ProEye]

Originally Posted by the dufferz

Seeing it has not been an overnight thing, then the "we" started a long time before we were the we. No, we can't kick them out and it is a problem that won't be going away for a looooong time.

And yes, we are simply too fat and happy. Imagine what would happen to America if we went into a deep depression like back in '29, how would people cope? scary thought.

Yeah, really, there was probably a time that this could have been nipped in the bud, but who knows, our incredible self-centered society probably would have warped the government into what we have today no matter what we did then. After all, Thomas Jefferson and the founding fathers had good reason to fear a strong central government and run away taxation but look what we have (?)

[Sekretgardengal]

taxes are the pits.