T Nation

MA to Vote on Repealing State Income Tax

Good stuff, I might actually head out to the polls on Nov. 4

http://www.smallgovernmentact.org/

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
Good stuff, I might actually head out to the polls on Nov. 4

http://www.smallgovernmentact.org/

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2008/05/12/activists_push_to_repeal_state_income_tax/[/quote]

If Mass repeals its state income tax, how the hell is it going to pay for its bloated government? It’ll nick you some other way.

Yeah, the timing does seem a bit odd.

[quote]Loose Tool wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
Good stuff, I might actually head out to the polls on Nov. 4

http://www.smallgovernmentact.org/

If Mass repeals its state income tax, how the hell is it going to pay for its bloated government? It’ll nick you some other way.
[/quote]

Maybe it’ll hike sales tax up like Sarah Palin did in Alaska. And run up a huge deficit like Sarah Palin did in Alaska.

And burn books in the public square while praying to W and lynching the non-existant black people who don’t live in Alaska like Sarah Palin did.

[quote]JUNEAU – With the 90-day legislative session fast approaching the halfway mark, lawmakers have yet to lay out their plans for the state’s massive budget surplus, which could reach $5 billion or more over the next two years from continuing high oil prices and a recent boost in oil production taxes.
[/quote]
Source:
http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/story/325207.html

If you’re going to lie anyway, you may as well go all fucking out dude.

[quote]MrRezister wrote:
And burn books in the public square while praying to W and lynching the non-existant black people who don’t live in Alaska like Sarah Palin did.

JUNEAU – With the 90-day legislative session fast approaching the halfway mark, lawmakers have yet to lay out their plans for the state’s massive budget surplus, which could reach $5 billion or more over the next two years from continuing high oil prices and a recent boost in oil production taxes.

Source:
http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/story/325207.html

If you’re going to lie anyway, you may as well go all fucking out dude.

[/quote]

Oh, I’m not lying. As mayor of Wasilla, Sarah Palin cut property taxes but greatly increased a regressive sales tax. It even taxed food. She increased expenditures in Wasilla by 33%. And when you averaged out her tax cuts and tax hikes, increased taxes by 38%.

She inherited a city with zero debt and left it $22 million in the hole. Most of the debt she took on was to broker a deal for a sports complex which she spectacularly botched, failing to ascertain whether the city had title and engaging it in protracted litigation which cost millions.

These are facts.

I’ve said nothing about the books issue because it’s exagerrated and largely unsubstantiated. Other aspects of her record speak for themselves, and there’s no getting around them.

Fair enough, I withdraw my accusation. Wasilla did indeed increase it’s longterm debt, but unless I am very much mistaken, that debt was due to an added sports complex and infrastructure expenditures.

[quote]During her second term as mayor, Palin introduced a ballot measure proposing the construction of a municipal sports center to be financed by a 0.5% sales tax increase.[66] The $14.7 million Wasilla Multi-Use Sports Complex was built on time and under budget, but the city spent an additional $1.3 million because of an eminent domain lawsuit caused by the failure to obtain clear title to the property before beginning construction.[66] The city’s long-term debt grew from about $1 million to $25 million through voter-approved indebtedness of $15 million for the sports complex, $5.5 million for street projects, and $3 million for water improvement projects. A city council member defended the spending increases as being caused by the city’s growth during that time.[67]

Palin also joined with nearby communities in jointly hiring the Anchorage-based lobbying firm of Robertson, Monagle & Eastaugh to lobby for federal funds. The firm secured nearly $8 million in earmarked funds for the Wasilla city government, and another $19 million for other public and private entities in the Wasilla valley area.[68] Earmarks included $500,000 for a youth shelter, $1.9 million for a transportation hub, $900,000 for sewer repairs, and $15 million for a rail project linking Wasilla and the ski resort community of Girdwood.[69] Term limits prevented Palin from running for a third term as mayor in 2002.[70]
[/quote]
Source:

Back to Massachussetts, I will be very interested to see what they do if the Income Tax is repealed. It is unlikely anyone would suffer a sudden stroke of fiscal responsibility, so I guess they will have to raise some other tax to compensate.

[quote]jsbrook wrote:

Oh, I’m not lying. As mayor of Wasilla, Sarah Palin cut property taxes but greatly increased a regressive sales tax. It even taxed food. She increased expenditures in Wasilla by 33%. And when you averaged out her tax cuts and tax hikes, increased taxes by 38%.
[/quote]Jesus, the same shit over and over again, just like your voucher argument. I don’t even like Palin but you half truths are driving me nuts. Yes, there were major infrastructure investments in Wasilla. You do know that people actually vote on these things, right?

[quote]
She inherited a city with zero debt and left it $22 million in the hole. Most of the debt she took on was to broker a deal for a sports complex which she spectacularly botched, failing to ascertain whether the city had title and engaging it in protracted litigation which cost millions.
[/quote]which the citizens of the city voted for. you either knew this and are purposely leaving it out or you research skill suck.

[quote]
These are PARTIAL facts.[/quote]
fixed that last part for you. can you quite with your wasilla talking point now?

[quote]jsbrook wrote:
I’ve said nothing about the books issue because it’s exagerrated and largely unsubstantiated. Other aspects of her record speak for themselves, and there’s no getting around them.[/quote]

What other aspects? you keep repeating one that is a non-issue.

[quote]MrRezister wrote:
Source:

[/quote]

What it this “wikipedia”? it must be new. is it only available to a select few or can Jsbrook get access as well?

It was mostly fund the sports complex. And the sports complex was built at the EXPENSE of important infrastructure improvements that should’ve been a higher priority.

I’m not necessarily completely against it. But it’s not the hallmark of a fiscally responsible conservative. And if you’re going to do it at all, do it right. This means after more important priorities have been taken care of. And not bungling the deal itself.

She bungled the deal. With shocking incompetence and arrogance. She and her administration KNEW the city did not have title to land. They started construction anyway. The long and short of it, it embroiled the city in years of litigation that ending up costing almost $2 million.

And she repeated her mistake as governor! In brokering the pipeline deal, she failed to consider the constituency of Canada’s native Americans. Who have a very valid claim to the land and still pose a real threat of protracted litigation again. Potentially threating the success of the pipeline.

Anyhow, this is neither here nor there. But I guess the lesson to be drawn that can be applied to Massachusetts is that fiscal conservatism is great. But not fake fiscal conservatism coupled with incompetent leadership. Never look at a measure in isolation and assume money is being saved and the budget is being well-managed. Look to see the execution and what else is being sacrificed.

[quote]dhickey wrote:
jsbrook wrote:

Oh, I’m not lying. As mayor of Wasilla, Sarah Palin cut property taxes but greatly increased a regressive sales tax. It even taxed food. She increased expenditures in Wasilla by 33%. And when you averaged out her tax cuts and tax hikes, increased taxes by 38%.
Jesus, the same shit over and over again, just like your voucher argument. I don’t even like Palin but you half truths are driving me nuts. Yes, there were major infrastructure investments in Wasilla. You do know that people actually vote on these things, right?

She inherited a city with zero debt and left it $22 million in the hole. Most of the debt she took on was to broker a deal for a sports complex which she spectacularly botched, failing to ascertain whether the city had title and engaging it in protracted litigation which cost millions.
which the citizens of the city voted for. you either knew this and are purposely leaving it out or you research skill suck.

These are PARTIAL facts.
fixed that last part for you. can you quite with your wasilla talking point now?
[/quote]

Most of the infrastructure improvements that were promised were scrapped. Like a sewage treatment plant and new library. And, however you cut it, the deal was bungled. You don’t start construction when someone else has clear legal title to the land. That is beyond retarded. It would’ve cost the city MUCH less to buy the land outright.

The city did not ‘vote’ to be embroiled in litigation that cost an extra $2 million because of their mayor’s incompetence. And the city voted for the sports complex AND infrastructure improvements because Palin promised they could ALL be accomplished. Instead she pursued the wrong priority and fucked that up too. But, please. Let’s drop it.

[quote]dhickey wrote:
MrRezister wrote:
Source:

What it this “wikipedia”? it must be new. is it only available to a select few or can Jsbrook get access as well?[/quote]

Everyone can do their own research on Sarah Palin and judge for themselves whether she’s been an effective mayor and governor and is fiscally conservative in practice. It’s not my job to educate you. But I suggest going well beyond wikipedia.

[quote]jsbrook wrote:
dhickey wrote:
MrRezister wrote:
Source:

What it this “wikipedia”? it must be new. is it only available to a select few or can Jsbrook get access as well?

Everyone can do their own research on Sarah Palin and judge for themselves whether she’s been an effective mayor and governor and is fiscally conservative in practice. It’s not my job to educate you. But I suggest going well beyond wikipedia.[/quote]

Sorry, jsbrook - but you did no research on this at all. Everything you have said about Wasilla are nothing more than dem talking points.

I don’t really care if you like her, or not - but please stop acting as if you have done anything beyond drinking the anti-Palin kool-aid.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
dhickey wrote:
MrRezister wrote:
Source:

What it this “wikipedia”? it must be new. is it only available to a select few or can Jsbrook get access as well?

Everyone can do their own research on Sarah Palin and judge for themselves whether she’s been an effective mayor and governor and is fiscally conservative in practice. It’s not my job to educate you. But I suggest going well beyond wikipedia.

Sorry, jsbrook - but you did no research on this at all. Everything you have said about Wasilla are nothing more than dem talking points.

I don’t really care if you like her, or not - but please stop acting as if you have done anything beyond drinking the anti-Palin kool-aid.
[/quote]

Dude, you can’t refute it. It’s all facts. Her reign in Wasilla was atrocious. She was not a fiscal conservative. Most of the infrastructure improvements she promised were abandoned. Forced to prioritize, she chose the wrong priorities. The legacy, if any, was the sports complex. And the deal was spectacularly bungled.

I’m a lawyer. If Palin and the administration were a private firm brokering the deal on behalf of citizens who hired them, they would be guilty of legal malpractice. And would probably lose their law license or at the least be subject to discpline. Probably a suspension.

The pipeline has been handled with the same incompetence. The budget surplus of Alaska is almost entirely due to the state’s oil. If I struck oil in my backyard, I would turn a nice profit too, however incompetent my management of my finances othrwise was.

[quote]jsbrook wrote:

I’m a lawyer. [/quote]

Uh-oh.

Massachusetts should simply fire about 70% of their employees, cancel any and all welfare/medicaid programs, and then look again at their budget. I’d bet their economy would boom.

When in doubt, fire government employees, except for those enforcing the law. Fire them all. I would happily do so and without cost.

RJ, we should stop talking about this in this thread. But if you’d like, start a thread describing all the good you think she did in Wasilla. I’d be interested to hear what you have to say. Because, contrary to your belief, I HAVE done the research, and I think she’s done a bad job there. And not a great job as governor, either.

[quote]Loose Tool wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
Good stuff, I might actually head out to the polls on Nov. 4

http://www.smallgovernmentact.org/

If Mass repeals its state income tax, how the hell is it going to pay for its bloated government? It’ll nick you some other way.
[/quote]

Of course, they’ll certainly try.

But it’s still a worthy proposal and I really hope it gets passed.