Rick Snyder's budget proposal spurs debate: Is it fair?
The crescendo of complaints about Gov. Rick Snyder’s proposed budget — which infuriated a mass ensemble of groups throughout Michigan — sounds a common theme.
By most accounts, people seem to agree that “shared sacrifice,” as the governor has put it, is fair and necessary to help Michigan establish a sustainable state government.
But few can agree on the definition of fair. And there has been little agreement on a better alternative.
Gov. Rick Snyder is trying to convince Michigan that his budget proposal is fair.
Melanie Maxwell | AnnArbor.com
“And without federal stimulus dollars, those are very painful decisions that have to be made in other areas of the budget.”
Snyder’s proposed budget would slash business taxes by $1.8 billion, raise $900 million through increased taxes on pension, axe most of the business tax credits and individual tax credits, and levy major funding cuts for higher education, public schools and municipalities. The Republican calls his proposal fair and says it would eliminate the Michigan’s chronic budget deficits and place the state on a fiscally sustainable path.
Opponents of Snyder’s plan offer a wide range of alternatives. A consensus has been elusive, but the most heated criticism revolves around Snyder’s plan to cut business taxes, reduce K-12 spending and eliminate exemptions on everyone who holds a pension, except members of the military.
“It’s like building a house. Somebody’s got to come up with an architectural plan and Snyder did that,” Ruff said. “Now, it’s up to the construction workers to fiddle with that plan to make sure it works.”
Politically, Snyder’s ability to get something similar to his budget approved by the state Legislature probably rests on his ability to convince the public that what he’s proposed is fair and equitable.
Pittsfield Township resident John Leipzig, a retired professor at the University of Alaska Fairbanks, said he doesn’t buy Snyder’s argument that the pension tax proposal is fair.
For one, some retirees who live in Michigan earned public pensions that limit their ability to draw social security income. Snyder’s proposal would exempt Social Security income from taxes - but, Leipzig asks, what if your pension was meant to take the place of Social Security?
“They’re not being treated the same,” he said. “Fair equals same. If fair equals same, they’re not being treated like other classes.”
Meanwhile, members of the military are the sole class of society whose pensions would not be taxed under Snyder’s plan.
John Leipzig
“I can’t see the argument why you would exclude one type of pension, meaning military, when you wouldn’t exclude other pensions from people like police and fire,” said Leipzig, a former director of Alma College's Center for Responsible Leadership. “The problem is right now, being in two, three wars, the last thing you’re going to do is be anti-military. My heavens, this isn’t something that's either politically or personally palatable.”
Still, supporters of Snyder’s proposal say that it’s reasonable because, under the current system, a working senior who earns $45,000 a year is taxed on all of their income, while a retired senior who receives $45,000 in pension payments pays nothing.
Fair?
“There’s all sorts of really unjustifiable unfairness in taxing working seniors and not taxing retired seniors,” said Lou Glazer, president of the Ann Arbor-based nonpartisan think tank Michigan Future. “The budget is never sustainable with that large of a percentage of taxpayers who don’t pay.
“Everybody’s got to contribute to make the numbers work.”
That doesn’t mean Glazer supports Snyder’s entire proposal. In fact, Glazer argues that Snyder’s proposed business tax cut — which would replace the controversial Michigan Business Tax with a 6 percent corporate income tax exempting about 95,000 small businesses — won’t create many jobs.
The proposal favors small businesses, like the startup companies Snyder funded as an Ann Arbor venture capitalist, over big businesses, like the global computer-making giant Gateway, which Snyder led in the 1990s.
Snyder, who has repeatedly said it’s time for the government to stop picking winners and losers in the economy, is picking business, in a sense. Whether that’s fair to the rest of the state is up for debate.
Glazer said he supports Snyder’s goal of simplifying the state’s incredibly complex business tax code. But he doesn’t support a massive business tax cut to fund the cuts on education spending, for example.
Michigan Future President Lou Glazer
File photo
“We think a business tax cut is a less effective way of growing the economy than these public investments in education, quality of place kind of things,” Glazer said. “We just don’t think it’s an effective way to grow the economy. If you actually look at the evidence, state’s business taxes don’t correlate at all with whether states are doing fine. Some of them have good economies, some of them have lousy economies.”
Glazer added: “Why is it we should believe that this is the magic bullet? Give us some evidence.”
Ann Arbor-based book manufacturer Edwards Brothers, which has endured 118 years of economic changes and governmental reform, is still assessing the impact of Snyder’s proposal on its financial picture, said President John J. Edwards.
Edwards Brothers, which has more than 400 workers at its Ann Arbor headquarters, operates in an industry characterized by intense price competition. Anytime the company can shave some costs off of the cost of book production, it improves its ability to compete.
“Anything he’s trying to do for business is a good thing, but I don’t know if that’s the case here, as a manufacturer,” he said. “I just hope it doesn’t cost us more and I just don’t know.”
Even as the state debates funding shifts, Michigan residents want a plan that creates jobs. In a survey released Thursday by Lansing-based Marketing Resource Group, 79 percent of voters said that Michigan’s economic situation is the biggest issue facing the state.
Edwards Brothers President John J. Edwards said he'd use a business tax cut to invest in his 118-year-old company.
File photo | AnnArbor.com
Yet what’s fair, according to voters? Forty-nine percent of voters said they don’t approve of Snyder’s plan to raise pension taxes and lower business taxes, while 43 percent approve, according to another recent survey by Lansing-based EPIC-MRA.
For companies like Edwards Brothers, handing over less money to the state could help the company be more competitive.
“Any tax takes money out of profits and could prevent us from buying that thing or hiring that person,” Edwards said. “I know there’s always a risk that businesses will just take the money and stick it in their product, but what we would do is invest in the business.”
Perhaps so, but is it worth it? Is it fair to give businesses a boost at the expense of cash-strapped public schools and municipalities?
Ann Arbor City Council member Christopher Taylor, D-3rd Ward, said the business tax cut is not fair to the state.
“I believe that a state with a healthy budget and good roads and good bridges and a thriving environment and cities that have adequate safety services and schools that are fully funded and providing world-class education to kids — those are, or would be, real competitive advantages far in excess of a marginal tax break to attract or retain businesses,” Taylor said.
Businesses argue that the overall tax cut is fair because they would simultaneously give up most of the tax credits distributed by the Michigan Economic Development Corp., which would be limited to $75 million in incentives under Snyder’s original proposal.
Ann Arbor City Council member Christopher Taylor said a business tax cut is not appropriate.
Ryan J. Stanton | AnnArbor.com
But even the proposal to eliminate most of the business tax credits irks certain segments of the economy. Proponents of Michigan’s currently unlimited film industry tax incentives, for example, are furious that the governor has proposed limiting the film incentives to $25 million a year. In 2010, Michigan paid out $117.2 million in film tax credits, according to a recent study by accounting firm Ernst & Young.
John Truscott, who was hired to lobby lawmakers in favor of the film industry tax credits, said a reduced tax credit is fair, given the state’s distressed economy. But he argues that the state must ensure that it does not repel the industry by going too far.
“You have to look at what other states do and still remain competitive,” said Truscott, a former member of Republican Gov. John Engler’s administration.
To balance the budget, many of Snyder’s opponents seem to have settled on the concept of a statewide graduated income tax, which would tax wealthier residents at higher rates. They believe that a graduated income tax is fairer because it ties taxes to individuals’ ability to pay.
State Rep. Jeff Irwin, D-Ann Arbor, last week introduced legislation that would allow Michigan voters the chance to vote on a proposal to amend the Michigan Constitution to allow for a graduated income tax.
"We need to restructure our tax system in Michigan,” Irwin said in a statement. "Instead of shifting the tax burden to low-income workers and fixed-income residents, we should implement a fairer tax. We need progressive tax reform in Michigan, not more reverse Robin Hood politics."
But that proposal is almost impossible politically — at least while Republicans control the state Legislature and governorship. Republicans say that higher taxes on wealthy citizens would hurt the economy.
State Rep. Jeff Irwin wants to give voters the chance to approve a graduated income tax.
Ryan J. Stanton | AnnArbor.com
So, for now, the debate is focusing mostly on whether the business tax cut is too high - and how the pension tax can be scaled back.
The state Senate Republicans are reportedly pushing Snyder to consider increasing the corporate income tax to 6.75 percent and extending it to most small businesses that would be exempt under Snyder’s original plan. They also are weighing a plan to tax pensions only of future retirees.
But Snyder believes that voters will soon realize that his original plan is appropriate. And, as voters say they want, fair.
Kym Muckler, mayor of the city of Milan, said Snyder’s plan is irritating because it lowers the amount of revenue sharing available to her small town. Nonetheless, she supports the proposal.
“There are things about it that annoy me, but on the other hand, he’s asking everybody to make a sacrifice,” Muckler said. “I’m totally willing to make the sacrifice because he’s asking everybody to do it.”
Contact AnnArbor.com's Nathan Bomey at (734) 623-2587 or nathanbomey@annarbor.com. You can also follow him on Twitter or subscribe to AnnArbor.com's newsletters.
Comments
Joel A. Levitt
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 8:38 p.m.
Grye, There were two major factors in our recovery from the Great Depression. WWII forced us to invest in industries which could be converted to producing consumer goods after the war ended. And, the GI bill enabled us to train the people needed to run these new industries. If we care about our children's future, now is not the time to cut state expenditures. Now is the time to invest. Here is a list of steps that I hope may be of some use. First: ? Substantially Increase the income tax rate. ? Eliminate business taxes, making all subject to the income tax. ? Substantially increase funding for infrastructure repair. ? Guarantee a percentage (perhaps, 50%) of each expansion loan made to small businesses which have demonstrated three years of profitability. ? Increase funding for K through university funding, and: > establish the position and responsibilities of master teacher; > establish group preparation periods for teachers with similar responsibilities; > individualize wherever possible; > strengthen teacher in-service training; > eliminate teacher tenure; > replace longevity increases with COLA and performance increases, and > strengthen vocational education. ? Increase funding to Michigan research institutions for: > biological systems research; > medical research on geriatric and genetic diseases; > robotics research; > nonpolluting power generation research; > Michigan suitable agriculture research; > medical and industrial instrument development, and > new agricultural and food processing equipment development. ? Reform our medical system by: > increasing scholarships for physician, nurse and medical technician training, and > using general revenue funds to pay for medical services for all Michigan citizens. Then: ? Amend the Michigan constitution to permit a graduated income tax, and ? Eliminate all Michigan hardship deductions, business tax credits and sales, excise and property
grye
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 3:31 p.m.
For all those who are unhappy with the changes in the business tax restructure, what is your plan to help start new businesses and to help existing businesses grow? The only way we are going to get out of this economic slump is to create new jobs. All I hear is consistent whining about the budget and who is or not getting taxed. Try to be constructive and come up with a plan to create additional jobs in Michigan.
xmo
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 1:25 p.m.
Is it fair to have 10% of the population paying over 50% of the taxes? Is it smart to throw money at education when we spend more than any other country and get less than stellar results? Why in a state with a declining population does government spending continue to grow?
KJMClark
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 12:12 p.m.
One quick comment. In your poll, the last option is, "No. Wealthier citizens should pay more because they can afford more." I voted for that option, but not for the reason given. Wealthier citizens should pay slightly more because they derive the most benefit. The people who do the best in the existing system should be the ones most willing to support it. We should be the 38th state with a graduated income tax.
1bit
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 8:22 p.m.
I'm assuming you understand math. Wealthier citizens pay more than "slightly more" and do not "derive the most benefit" for their tax dollars. At the current tax rate, someone making $40,000/yr will pay about $1,740 in taxes. Someone making $400,000/yr will pay $17,400 in taxes and someone making $4,000,000/yr will pay $174,000 in taxes. You're seriously contending that the person making 4 million a year gets 100 times the services as someone making 40 thousand a year? I'm not opposed to a graduated tax so long as it is written in stone that in the future if taxes are raised they are raised on everyone equally. The logic you espouse is the same logic that is used to raise taxes on only a segment of the population, because it is politically convenient and expedient.
Left is Right
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 4:50 a.m.
It seems to me that *fair* to everyone is to have a more favorable business tax structure. Why? Business taxes either are passed through to you and me--the consumers--or serve to make Michigan-based businesses that compete on the national stage less competitive. In a good economy or with a high-margin enterprise, it may not make a huge difference but at the bottom of our economic cycles, it seems that the risk of ruin (or the just plain "aggravation factor") likely forces more businesses (i.e., a higher fraction) to close in our state than in states having a more favorable tax structure--especially for the rapidly growing second-stage companies that generate significant employment. Taxes such as the old SBT or newer MBT on gross receipts or top-line revenue are especially egregious. Over several such cycles, we have many fewer innovative enterprises that grow and instead must rely on our larger, more sclerotic companies to generate jobs and job growth. Short-range, I don't see the business tax cut as having significant job creation potential. Long-range, I see that it does and that it is absolutely essential to diversifying our economy. It's a hypothesis that can be tested I suppose. There are many that have strong opinions on this site who can undoubtedly weigh in with some credible evidence one way or the other.
DonBee
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 3:34 p.m.
Awakened - If you define the top 20 percent as wealthy as Jeff Irwin has done in his graduated income tax bill, then you are defining households with about $70,000 in income as wealthy. Does that sound rich to you?
Awakened
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 12:20 p.m.
Raising taxes on the wealthy will solve Michigan's immediate budget crisis. For a few years. What is needed is a 25 or 50 year view. That requires keeping business and jobs in Michigan. In the last ten years Michigan has lost 20% of its workforce. The population is virtually the same. If businesses move instead of re-investing here the state will become a beautiful summer vacation spot for rich fishermen. And that is all.
pandamonium
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 2:25 a.m.
Is it fair? Yes.
mun
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 2:10 a.m.
To those who claim tax cuts are job creators, how are those Bush tax cuts workin' for ya? <a href="http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2009/01/09/bush-on-jobs-the-worst-track-record-on-record/" rel='nofollow'>http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2009/01/09/bush-on-jobs-the-worst-track-record-on-record/</a>
Monica R-W
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 3:46 a.m.
@Marshall, Bush was in office eight years, mind you. The unemployment rate was around 8.0% when he left. Upon taking office in 2000 from former President Bill Clinton, the same unemployment rate was 4.0%. The moral of this story is Republicans on an average increase unemployment and Democrats try and fix the mess that was created. Personally, I wish we elected Independents (free of party loyalty) into higher offices. Still to say Bush policies decreased the nation's unemployment rate would be far from the truth. As for Obama, if the unemployment rate decreases to 7.0% by the next election in 2012, he too would have helped the overall rate go down (like Democrats often do). Time will tell.
Marshall Applewhite
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 2:41 a.m.
The unemployment rate was 5.8% in 2003. Today, it stands at 8.8% with only 65% of adults being considered part of the workforce. I wouldn't mind a return to 2003........
stilllikemichigan
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 1:29 a.m.
ok, explain to me how it balance the budget when you take from working/retirees to give to business. the deficit is still the same. there is no change in the amount being paid off of michigan's debt. From what I have read, Bush tried this for the federal deficit. He gave the business tax cuts, and there were no new jobs for 8 years. How does this work? Everything depends on the small business, but can they afford to hire 10, 20, 30 people with the tax cuts they are given. Steelcase is moving to Mexico, and their profit for the quarter increased. It all goes to show that it is about money in the share holders, and CEO pockets. Nothing for the working people. Snyder is just as bad, he is paying his people more than what Granholm paid her directors, except for the Department Of Human Services, who took a 10,000 paycut. (and yes it is a woman running that department....hmmmmmm, only men deserve raises?)
DonBee
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 3:33 a.m.
stilllikemichigan - If you look inside that number, you will find Jobs rose significantly until they dropped back to where they were at the beginning. Right now President Obama could be said to have destroyed over 2 million jobs by spending 2 Trillion dollars in stimulus. That would be the same kind of analysis you did. Neither are true, but both can be said with a straight face.
EZduzzit
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 12:34 a.m.
The fix for "same old, same old" is fairly straight forward. Make the "same old" taxes go away instead of adding new ones (like on pensions) and we won't need to talk about them at all. Or at least make the arguments for the changes more sophisticated (as in convincing). For example drop the "most other states" hack. Is that the mission ?? To be like all other states !! But what do we do about all this great lakes frontage ??? Fill in the great lakes,,, why ???? Most other states don't have em !!!!! Wanna fill loopholes without regard for who it involves ? Well,,, if you can respond to those who are trying to say the pension tax argument should be more sophisticated to set thresholds at poverty levels or grandfathered for some income level of those 80 yrs old or above,, by saying something simplistic like "we know this will create hardships on some" (new budget director just before answering a question about his $250k salary),,, then why is it not an acceptable hardship to tax the imputed imcome realized when you walk from a mortgage or use an agreed on short sale ??? Heck,,, that's "income" too,,, "some states do it" !! There are lots of more more sophisticated ways to produce revenue. Sales tax all the internet sales "like some states do". Or just come out and say that you are going to tax pensions (for example) because there is nothing anyone can do about it !!!!
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 11:42 p.m.
"I am a taxpayer and I am broke." I love all of the "broke" taxpayers who, apparently, have hours on end to spend blogging on A2.com discussion boards. Maybe if you used your time a little more wisely . . . . ? Good Night and Good Luck
:)
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 11:27 p.m.
Governor, Please read this with an open mind. I am concerned about my job. I voted for you in hopes that you would make the State a better State. Michigan is my home too! I have worked since I was 13 or 14. I have contributed to society in a positive way. I went to college and have an education. I grew up with dreams and hopes, like yourself. Why are we taking away jobs, crushing dreams, breaking promises? I want you to look at everything happening around you..... Look at what this world is coming to. This is a time when your FIRE and POLICE departments mean the most. What will happen when chaos arises? when criminals are breaking into more homes, hurting more people, starting more fires for insurance money? Innocent lives at stake... Why aren't we trying to find a way to create more jobs, instead of trying to find ways to save money? If you can create more jobs, then there will be no worries about taking away jobs. Am I correct? Job creation is directly proportional to money and taxes coming in. Taking away jobs will create a trickle effect, like what happened to Wilmington, Ohio when DHL pulled out. It was devastating. We need more jobs in Michigan. We need to improve on things, not depress things. Education is supposed to be the most important thing to a growing economy. We are making education seem like a burden. I am just trying to understand. It is imperative that you continue to give Lansing, the Capital City, the revenue sharing it deserves. Come ride with the Fire Department. See what we do. See how we bring security to people's lives. If you lay off firefighters and police officers, you will not only affect the individual who is laid off, but you will effect the whole family, co-workers included (not only financially but our life safety). As I stated, this is a time when you will need your police and fire departments. We work hard and will continue to work hard no matter what, however, we can't if we don't have a job.
Monica R-W
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 3:21 a.m.
Incredible. Regardless of the comments submitted, including mines, this is the best commentary I have read on the subject of Gov. Snyder's fiscal budget proposal. For one, I RESPECT the hard work job that you do. No offense, but sitting in a office in Lansing or in a Board of Director conference room, does not save lives. Firefighters police and correctional officers do this everyday. It is at many times a thankless job and personally, I believe after the years put in, doing a real public service that ones' life in put on the line, everyday...you and your fellow firefighters deserve a retirement/pension. Along with police and correctional officers. Thank you again for what you do!
:)
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 11:28 p.m.
Let's look deeper. How can we get the people who are unemployed out there and working? We need EVERYONE to contribute to society, big or small. We can't afford to not educate our public. How about this proposition? If you work you get benefits. If you have worked your whole life you get benefits. Answer this question please? How can our government have a conscious after serving a full term get life-time benefits? OK...so I work my whole life and I may not have benefits when I retire? While people in the government work 2-4 years and get life-time benefits??? Something is wrong here. I am serving the City, the community. I think I am making an impact on someone's life. I am putting my life in jeopardy either in a fire, between shootings, or coming into contact treating a sick person with a contageous disease. All I ask is that you create more jobs...have your team brainstorm ways to bring Michigan back to life through job creation. Thank you for reading this... Sincerely, Yours truly, Hardworkinginmichigan
Juliana
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 11:18 p.m.
I agree with John Truscott. Where you have to make savings but not repel the film industry. I don't believe the tax credit will repel the film industry as often you have to have the film budget in place and fully financed before you can make any use of the tax credit, all it does is allow you a contingency with your budget and spending. Ask any <a href="http://line-producer.us" rel='nofollow'>http://line-producer.us</a> and they will confirm the same, it's not really a tax break unless you have the opportunity to pay less tax in the first place. It just means that after you've budgeted how much it will cost and your spending, you get that much credited back. California is doing the same thing, but you still have to get the film budget fully funded to it's full extent before you can take advantage of the scheme.
DonBee
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 3:29 a.m.
Juliana - Michigan wrote the film companies checks for roughly 40 percent of what the film company spent for every day they filmed in Michigan, less any tax liability. Michigan lost over $100,000,000.00 to the film industry last year - that was how much larger the checks were than the taxes the state took in from all sources associated with the movies.
leaguebus
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 11:16 p.m.
The gap between the rich and poor in this country is the largest of all the developed nations in this world. Tell me that Snyders budget won't increase that gap in Michigan. Just google "gap between rich and poor in America" and see for yourself. It is amazing to me the greed and avarice exhibited by those who are trying to "balance" the state budget. What happened to compassion for people less well off? Its obvious it is going the way of Obamacare if the Republicans have their way.
Awakened
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 12:15 p.m.
The US also has the highest gap in GDP between us and the developed countries. We have for a century. Let's not fix the part that works.
DonBee
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 3:26 a.m.
Please define "Developed" Countries - G8, G20 or some other club? Yes, in the pure UN 10/10 index the US has a higher gap than the Western European Countries, but lower than 70 other countries. But if you buy the GINI index as a better indication of the distribution of wealth, than the US does fairly well according to the UN. We fall in the middle of the G20 countries.
Pika
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 10:35 p.m.
Why does "shared sacrifice" only include the working class while coorporat elites get massive tax cuts?
mun
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 9:41 p.m.
Apparently, "shared sacrifice" means middle class and working class sacrificing for the Rick and his corporate cronies.
DonBee
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 1:40 p.m.
Monica - C corps do not get tax breaks. They lose tax breaks, to the tune of about $2 billion dollars over the next 3 years. The $1.8 billion in reduction is all on small businesses - the 750,000 in the state. It is about $3,000 a company. Snyder is not a billionaire, he might be a $100 millionaire, but not a billionaire, he did not make the Forbes list of the richest. Monica - I would suggest you go and read the document that the Governor issued on his budget and not the other materials that have been created by people with agendas.
1bit
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 1:39 a.m.
Monica: 1. You do not understand the proposal. LLC's which are currently double-taxed by the MBT (and the small businesses and owners) are the beneficiaries. Large corporations are taxed more, not less. 2. Gov. Snyder is not a billionaire. What difference does it make how much money he has?
Monica R-W
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 10:50 p.m.
@Don Bee, can you rightful explain to me and others why Gov. Snyder's budget proposal raise taxes on everyone, including small businesses, but provide tax breaks for C/S Corporations? Seriously, most small businesses are LLC's and do not sell or manage stock offerings. Another part of small businesses are sole operations ran by family members that would not need to sell stock at all. With this, Gov. Snyder proposal goes after small business, who are the real job creators, in Michigan. Until anyone from the dark side can explain were this make sense, I will keep my Independent point of view that supports Michigan Workers and Small Business. Also, I am not impressed in the least my Gov. Snyder taking $1.00 salary as Governor. He is a billionaire right? The question to ask is did he sell his corporate stock investments that he would directly benefit from if his 1.8 Billion tax break for C/S Corporations are passed by the Republican state Senate and House. Probably, not so much......
DonBee
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 10:15 p.m.
mun - Where are your facts? Do you have any? Governor Snyder is taking $1 a year in salary. Most of his "Cronies" are in private business. Show me where they benefit from restructuring the state.
C. S. Gass
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 9:36 p.m.
"Meanwhile, members of the military are the sole class of society whose pensions would not be taxed under Snyder's plan" Good, finally the military gets one tenth of the respect it deserves. Did you sign up to possibly die for you country? I didn't, but I'm glad someone did, and they deserve so much more than no taxes on their pensions, but this is a start. We can continue to throw money at failing cities adn school districts (which we've been doing for years) and hope they recover. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. Or, we could let them fail, reorganize and get their collective 'crap together', admit that what they were doing wasn't working and try something else. The status quo frankly stinks, is too expensive and cannot be maintained. So it's really not an option. Tax the rich? Sure, then they'll leave. That's just plain stupid and socialist. Wait, that's redundant... I don't like Snyder's plan either, but I don't like it because it's necessary, enevitable I would say, because the well is dry people...
Awakened
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 12:13 p.m.
Military pensions are exempt by Federal Law. I want to fix our government. I started by learning how it works.
sig.melvin
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 9:12 p.m.
well Doubleday dictionary: sacrificeThe act of making an offering to a DEITY! Loss incurred or suffered without return! Well loks like w eget Nothing of Value in retrun! Since we all live and work in michigan we spend All our money here, so taxes would only reduce our spending..so old poeple no longer go to the casinos and the STATE would loose there share... let examen the books. and see what we really have , since the legislature for years took fro peter and gave to paul .the system is so misup that none of the legislature KNOW What is What. Time to get new BOOK, Bookeeping get new Contract open for new Bids(Road and bridges) etc. cut the budget for the Prisons by 25% . prisoner only get to et twice shower once a week etc.. here is a hint.The $ 84 Million that DTE wasnt to use to replace meter at the residents ..should by for SOLARPANEL on each and every public house and schoolbuilding..then sell the energy back to DTE for a profit,instead for more taxes. plus no replacing the meters would save our planet, we dont need more garbbage . mercury in our landfills.Buidl the FASTRAIN so we have more tourist comming and going.The golden Spike is still not running after 30 year, Where is the money going?
Louhi
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 8:18 p.m.
Alternativeview99: Here is the link of the budget analysis per your request: <a href="http://www.michigan.gov/.../2011_Guide_to_MI_Financial_Health_01312011_" rel='nofollow'>www.michigan.gov/.../2011_Guide_to_MI_Financial_Health_01312011_</a> 344193_7.pdf This gives a detailed analysis of how your money is being spent, with figures supplied by the state. I suggest we all read it before applying our opinions in an uninformed manner. Lu
tim
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 7:09 p.m.
The pain should be spread across ALL of the population in way of income/sales tax. There is no silver bullet that is going to save Michigan we just need to decide what kind of state we want and then pay for it. Manufacturing will not return to michigan because business owners don't want to deal with the union culture (weather or not you believe in unions). Both people and businesses want the same thing (MORE MONEY) both want to pay less in taxes and less in products and services. We just need to decide what kind of state we want and pay for it -- WE ALL need to pitch in.
Dog Guy
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 6:51 p.m.
Tax cuts and spending cuts will help, but what our state legislators are doing is entirely different. The RepubliCraps in Lansing have all-but-unanimously voted to create a "Jobs Fund" which will give our tax money to businesses selected by a central planning committee. This method of stimulating the economy did not work for the late USSR or the late Chairman Mao. An economy is stimulated by customers waving money in front of suppliers. If there is a need for, say, a conference center hotel, the suppliers will supply one without intervention by an omniscient government. Or, another example, if a superlative politician needs a photo opportunity, GM will sell him a Volt. The only demand which Michigan government has stimulated is for tax giveaways.
alternativeview99
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 6:21 p.m.
I can't help but believe that we wouldn't be having a debate about who needs to give up more if the top 10% of the wealthiest in this nation only took 30% of its income (as they did between 1950 and 1980) instead of the 90% that they take today. Please check out the facts (not my opinion) at the Economic Policy Institute, <a href="http://www.stateofworkingamerica.org/" rel='nofollow'>http://www.stateofworkingamerica.org/</a> All I hear is talk about which group of hardworking middle class citizen is going to pay even more while the very rich continue to take more and more a share of this country's income through complex policies of regulation, taxes or the lack thereof that they expect us to believe are for the good of the average American. All I see is a redistribution of income to the very wealthy of this country. Can Rick and any of his supporters offer FACTS and studies that would prove the income gap has NOT gotten larger in the last years following all these policies and practices of derugulation that they say are for the good of the average american by supporting business? Looking at the facts, I have to conclude that not taxing the rich has NOT made the middle class and poor better off. It simply allowed the income gap in this country to increase by distributing more wealth to the wealthy. Guess what group actually gained income during the recession? So, if we need money to balance the budget, why aren't we looking at those who now take 90% of the income, instead of the 30% they took in the past? Why isn't it "fair" to ask these people to pay by taking only 30% again.....or even just 60%? Why is the 90% they currently take not up for discussion as part of a budget plan and cuts?
Awakened
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 12:10 p.m.
I agree! If they want to make that kind of money they should take their business to another country! Oh. Wait.....
DonBee
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 3:18 a.m.
alternateview99 - I reviewed your source and their sources. It does not compute. The sources they cite don't say what they say they say. The top 0.01 percent of all households (the super rich) take about 5 percent of all income. The top 10% take about 38% according the US Census bureau, that number is out of date, since the last income survey published was in 2006. I might believe you are talking about wealth (how much the household is worth if you sold everything they had) but I cannot find any sources that will give me that kind of number.
1bit
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 1:34 a.m.
Someone who makes $40,000 a year in the State of Michigan pays about $1,740 in taxes. Someone who makes $4,000,000 a year in the State of Michigan pays about $174,000 in taxes. They both get the same services from the State of Michigan. In fact, those who pay less in taxes generally get more services than those who pay more. Rick Snyder has been in office a few months. If you don't like where things have headed then you can ask Gov. Granholm about it. But she doesn't live in Michigan anymore...
SalineDion
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 5:52 p.m.
No. Stop. Stop using the term "shared sacrifice" because that is an outright lie. I am NOT willing to accept "shared sacrifice" because it is no such thing and what is happening throughout this country is not a "fair" way to balance our state and federal budgets. What Republicans propose here in Michigan and in other states and on the federal level in not "shared sacrifice." In what capacity have the wealthy in this country been asked to sacrifice? They were given windfall tax cuts in 2001 and 2003. The wealthy in Michigan have seen their tax bill decrease nearly every year since the days of Engler. What we have here is an attack by the "haves" upon the working poor and the middle class. Class warfare of the most despicable kind. That is a Republican "core value" and what we should always expect from them.
JS
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 5:42 p.m.
At the risk of sounding like a Godless socialist.... What's the difference between 50 million and 10 million? Come on you ridiculous millionaires, s#!% or get off the pot. The wealth controlled by the top 5 percent of this country could do amazing things if put towards improving the infrastructure and the general quality of life in our country. I think the level of greed and hoarding of wealth on our planet is getting a little out of hand, don't you? For anyone to find it acceptable to walk down the street with a net worth of more than $10,000,000.00 while ignoring someone who has nothing is absolutely disgusting. I can see that hard work deserves rewards, that's frigging fine! You have ten million dollars to spend and invest any way you see fit. Buy a Ferrari fine. Buy a 10,000 sq. ft. home, you deserve it for all your hard work (although nobody actually needs it). But if you aren't doing things to make the quality of life better for your fellow man then you are not a friend of mine, to put if mildly. Seriously people. Opulence is out of fashion and if you are one of the people I am referring to, shame on you. Everyone laughs at that DirecTV commercial with the guy in the huge mansion with his tiny giraffe talking about "Opulence, I has it!" Simply disgusting. Lastly, to the people who have the ability to fix these problems and yet tighten their money grubbing fingers even more: Do something, be generous, greed is one of the ugliest qualities one can have. I promise it feels really good to know you're making the world better for everyone.
1bit
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 8:30 p.m.
What DonBee said. The wealthy pay more in taxes, give more to charity and create more jobs than the rest of us. You WANT the wealthy to spend their money! That's how it works - if they just put it under their mattress then that's the problem. No, the big mansion isn't for me but thank goodness someone with extra cash on hand wanted to spend their money on it!
DonBee
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 3:31 p.m.
I would suggest JS that you are not following what Mr. Gates and his friends are doing, committing almost all of their wealth to worthy causes. Most folks with money, do support worthy causes, in a big way. Check out the buildings on the U of M campus named for donors, donors who gave the university a significant portion of their wealth. The people who have mostly stopped giving are the folks who make between about $30,000 and $60,000. They feel pressed right now by the economy.
JS
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 2:50 p.m.
I don't believe I ever alluded to that Mr. DonBee, and feel free to quote me here. If I ever win $50 million in the lottery, or through any thought of mine, I pledge to give $40 million of it to a reputable charity to be used locally to improve our community. Keep in mind the 50 million/10 million example I gave. If the after tax purse was $50 million, you could give away 40 million dollars and still be filthy rich! I never said that wealthy people should give away everything they have worked for, but as the class that controls the wealth of our nation, they are sure letting it go to pot while knowing they have millions upon millions tucked away. I don't see why any one person needs so much when it is obvious that so many others have so little. Compassion seems to be slowly dying in our country and it is sad and pathetic. "As for your name and body, which is the dearer? As for your body and your wealth, which is the more to be prized? As for gain and loss, which is the more painful? Thus an excessive love for anything will cost you dear in the end. The storing up of too much goods will entail a heavy loss. To know when you have enough is to be immune from disgrace. To know when to stop is to be preserved from perils. Only thus can you endure long." ~Lao Tzu
DonBee
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 3:08 a.m.
So JS, money means nothing to you? If you were to win the lottery tomorrow or patent an idea worth millions, you would go to a local charity and give it all away?
Wolf's Bane
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 5:40 p.m.
There is no such thing as a fair "shared sacrifice" solution. Gov. Snydex, clearly is trying to appeal to the mass of ignorant voters out there who are quite clueless as to what this really means. I think the "shared sacrifice" analogy would work well if this were a socialist state and we were all equally taxed and all made the same amount of money per year and all had the same expenses. Clearly, this is not the case, so the "shared sacrifice" concept does not work. Funny, a Republican talking likes a socialist? Ha! Want to be fair? Tax those of us making 100k or less nothing about 15%, tax the folks making between 101k and 250k about 35%, and tax anyone in Michigan making 251k and over 65%, including huge corporations. Problem solved.
1bit
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 8:33 p.m.
Why exactly do you believe your proposal is fair? Do you think incentivizing laziness is a good idea, or do you just not believe in hard work or the American Dream?
Wolf's Bane
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 12:30 p.m.
Hey, I was only saying if we were to be fair. I didn't say it would work.
DonBee
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 3:06 a.m.
Sorry Bill - It won't work. The top 20% in the state starts at $70,000, so you leave more than 90 percent of the households out of the tax picture this way. Then you have to deal with the fact that if you add social security, medicaid and federal income tax on those over 250,000 - there is not 65 percent left to collect. How about a realistic plan?
paul b
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 3:26 p.m.
Most people will retire with an IRA or 401k instead of a pension and income withdrawn from these accounts will be taxed. It is not fair for pensions to be tax free.
paul b
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 3:31 p.m.
never mind: If you read further, you will note that IRA's and 401 K income is exempt to levels which are increased every year. I ran a trial Turbo Tax return and discovered that the deduction for 2010 is $45,120 for single filers and $90,240 for married filers
Monica R-W
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 3:17 p.m.
It is about high time the theory that lower business taxes spur growth in a state. Nevada has no state income tax. Yet still, Nevada has the highest unemployment rate in the nation. Florida, another state with no state income taxes. Yet, Florida's public schools are the worse in the nation. How can you invest in future job growth without a educated work force? For all of the problems that Michigan has, educating our youth has not been one of them. The reason why Michigan let the nation in unemployment previously (we are in fifth place now) was the decline of the automobile industry in 2007. It is amazing right after corrections in the pay structure (which the UAW agreed too) and productivity models, Ford, GM and Chrysler are building better cars than trouble recall pledged manufacturer Toyota. And ironically, they did not need to destroy their unionized workforce to return back to profitability. Businesses need to stop blaming economic mismanagement decisions on its' workers and, take the blame in the Board of Directors' rooms across the United States and in Michigan. There is no reason that businesses cannot hire right now -as there are 600,000 plus unemployed job seekers in our state and another 15 million plus across the nation- that are waiting an opportunity to be productive and working. Governor Snyder's version of so-called 'shared sacrifice' is a disaster in the making for Michigan. Either everyone share in the pain -including businesses by higher taxes- or nothing. His version of 'shared sacrifice' did not work for Gateway when he was CEO -the company went out of business and moved to China- and it will not work for our great state of Michigan either. <a href="http://www.firericksnyder.org" rel='nofollow'>www.firericksnyder.org</a> -Learn about the effort to recall Gov. Snyder from office.
1bit
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 8:36 p.m.
Mike K: FYI - GE does pay taxes (<a href="http://www.propublica.org/article/setting-the-record-straight-on-ges-taxes)" rel='nofollow'>http://www.propublica.org/article/setting-the-record-straight-on-ges-taxes)</a>.
DonBee
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 3:04 a.m.
Johnnya2 - Nice, how about you run some numbers on your plan. 109,000 roughly high school graduates (another 16,000 drop outs) - $11837 for tuition (note: no books, rooms, meals, fees, etc here) yields a cost to the state of $1,290,233,000.00 additional dollars we would need for the state budget (note: all the existing aid would still have to be given). Times 5 years in school yields a total annual cost to the state of $6,451,165,000 Using Canadian Health Care numbers we would need to spend $4089 per person in the state for health care. Since it is single payer, we can assume the state will pay. The population you are insuring is 9,883,640 - so the total cost is $40,414,203,960 Total your two ideas and we get a total of 46.8 billion dollars - that means more than doubling all taxes in the state. Sales Tax to 13 cents, Income tax to 9 percent, Corporate taxes to 12 percent, etc.
johnnya2
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 10:45 p.m.
Mike, Glad you asked. Here is how Michigna solves al their problems. 1. Single payer universal health care 2. Post secondary education for all people who graduate from a state of Michigan high school. This will attract a business that does not want to deal with health insurance and knows it is covered. Most businesses will gladly pay higher taxes for this. In fact, Michigan competes directly with Ontario for manufacturing jobs. Most of those jobs go to Ontario DESPITE the higher tax burden. Wanna guess why? Simple, Health care The education aspect will attract employees to move to the state. MOST parents want their kids to attend a college or post high school institution. The parents that most value this are generally the people who leave the state when the economy goes south. I would also end the criminalization of drugs. I could cut the prison population AND increase tax revenues over night by ending the ridiculous nature of picking and choosing winners in which drugs are good (those made by man like Viagra) and those made by nature (pot) Mandatory minimums would be abolished and privatizing prisons would NEVER HAPPEN. Some things should not be done for profit. I would raise the gas tax by at least 50 cents, to encourage better use of energy and I would also end the crazy favorite status of the realtors and end the stupid mortgage interest deduction on any taxes. Why should that interest be considered "better" than the interest paid for a car, or a credit card? If you choose to buy a house why should I help fund it with your choice to pay interest on it. I would also stop giving ANY tax breaks to those who make the choice to procreate. Your kid does not mean you get an increased deduction. YOU and your partner made that choice, why should the rest of the people pay or help pay for your choice to procreate. This is just a start.
average joe
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 10:17 p.m.
"It is about high time the theory that lower business taxes spur growth in a state....." But then you go off & talk about states with no "income" tax. Aren't these two differant things, or don't these states have business taxes either?
Mike K
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 9:39 p.m.
Well Monica, I am a registered "non party affiliate" as well. It is laughable that you pass such judgement because I disagree with your quest to recall Governor Snyder. I of course agree that corporations must pay their fair share of taxes. I am appauled by what has happened to General Electric recently. If you wish to cloud the issue of Arizona, be my guest. The bottom line is that States do indeed compete for business and jobs. It's a l reality.
Monica R-W
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 6:50 p.m.
See Mike, I am a Independent. Your statements all over Ann Arbor.com lend to the evidence that have an agenda here, at thats' straight line to the Conservative GOP point of view. As for Arizona, they also have a immigration problem that is out of control. They are cutting state medical programs to fund organ transplants (you know Mike, the ones to save human lives that Conservative GOPers claim to love...except if they are adults or living children) due to the immigration issues in the state. Arizona also made the news recently for one of their citizens shooting Congresswoman Gabby Grifford (D) while trying to attend a basic connection/communication event with her voters. Back to my original point Mike. If you believe that taxes should be increased on working and retired Michiganders, cuts should rightful be made to state local Government entities/unions and business tax exemptions are gutted for our state smallest businesses; then you should be able to clearly see that the same version of 'shared sacrifice' must be made to C/S and other corporations, justly and fairly. Instead, Mike...you are promoting an agenda of funding rich lifestyles and Board of Directors corporate budget mismanagement decisions, off of the backs of everyone else in our great state of Michigan. That is what makes me a Independent and you tolling the same tired Republican lines which are being exposed more and more by the day, as lies.
macjont
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 6:38 p.m.
Mike K. In case you missed it, the community is already divided. Monica's truthful statements are not the cause.
Mike K
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 4:04 p.m.
Thanks for the reply JohnnyA2. Arizona is MAKING solar panels and computer chips, not CONSUMING them. I agree that education is important, but as I said elsewhere today, one can question the investment in terms that people are FREE TO LEAVE Michigan. So we invest in them, then the move to ARIZONA where the SUN and the JOBS are. Michigan needs private sector growth to create jobs, would you agree to that? What's your idea to make that happen?
DonBee
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 4:03 p.m.
Johnnya2 - First Solar makes solar cells, most of their production ends up in Ontario, because of the subsidy the province offers, not in Arizona. GE and IBM have both located significant facilities here because they can hire SKILLED and EDUCATED employees for less than anywhere else in the US. But they have limited the size of the facilities because of taxes and fear of union actions.
johnnya2
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 3:51 p.m.
You can tbe serious Mike. You take two examples of states that are failing with low taxes and then blame it on a service economy? Here is why Arizona can do better with solar. THEY HAVE MORE SUN. In fact, lets look at some of the worlds largest and most profitable companies. Google in California, Apple in California, Chase in New York. The only reason North Dakota, Texas and Alaska can get away with what they do is because of something Michigan just does not have OIL.. This is not somethign that can bbe controlld by a governor. Finally, your own statement proves why Rick is bad for Michigan "businesses are hiring, but those hires are for educated and skilled employees" So you cut funding for things that make employees SKILLED AN EDUCATED? Thanks for proving our point. Rick Snyder is a failure as are most republican ideas. How many jobs were created under GWBush and how many under Clinton. I think we all know the answer. Tax cuts have NOTHING to do with jobs
Mike K
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 3:41 p.m.
Monica - most of us already read your piece. Please stop dividing our community based on your politics. If you want to learn how states gain business, just look at Arizona which landed two brand new plants for Intel and First Solar. How did they do it? First Solar's competitor, Evergreen Solar, is picking up their plant in MA and moving it to China. Why are these two companies building in AZ? FL and NV are bad examples. Both are service based economies, and FL has a high retirement population. By the way, businesses are hiring, but those hires are for educated and skilled employees. All of the good middle class production jobs went overseas to low cost countries. Rick will be the best Governer MI ever had.
Denny
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 3:06 p.m.
It seems to be the norm these days that Michigan elects govenors (Granholm, Snyder) that come in blazing to cut everything from the budget and then leave everyone else to figure out how to do it. So what does the govenor do for his pay? Most states have a tax system based on how much a person makes but MI still has a flat rate tax. The rich sit there and laugh while we all fight among ourselves over who will pay for the education here. It isn't fair for the poor to pay the bulk of our taxes.
average joe
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 10:09 p.m.
If you are poor, you probably do not pay income taxes period, Much less "the bulk of our taxes".
Grant
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 2:20 p.m.
Think for-Yourself: I could be mistaken, but if you read the Michigan Constitution Act 281 Section 206.3, first, you will read that state enacted retirement plans are exempt. Wouldn't we require a Constitutional Amendment to change this? If you read further, you will note that IRA's and 401 K income is exempt to levels which are increased every year. I ran a trial Turbo Tax return and discovered that the deduction for 2010 is $45,120 for single filers and $90,240 for married filers. If you consider a teacher retiring with 30 years with an average of $75,000 that person could receive retirement of $33,750. Thus this amount would also be exempt under current laws.
Basic Bob
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 11:37 p.m.
Grant, this is not in the Constitution. It is in the Income Tax Act of 1967. This can be changed by the legislature at any time. In 1967, there were no 401k plans.
Grant
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 4:46 p.m.
Dear Terminal: First, I was responding to comment written by "Think for yourself" written earlier. Please take the time to see his-her response to my earlier comment above, is prior to this one. You generalize, but you haven't put forth any of your own research. Are you a little short on substance?
Terminal
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 4:29 p.m.
Funny that you lead with "think for yourself" when all you're doing is repeating gross generalizations and half truths.
julieswhimsies
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 2:10 p.m.
Snyder's proposed budget would slash business taxes by $1.8 billion, raise $900 million through increased taxes on pension, axe most of the business tax credits and individual tax credits, and levy major funding cuts for higher education, public schools and municipalities. Feed the wealthy and tax the people who can least afford it. Funding cuts for education is a HORRIBLE idea, if we want an educated populace. Declaring himself Michigan's Dictator really galls me, as well. Democrats who voted for Snyder because he claimed he was not a politician, are you happy now! He was/is a wolf in sheep's clothing!
Wolf's Bane
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 5:41 p.m.
He is far more dangerous. :/
julieswhimsies
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 4:09 p.m.
Granholm is no longer Governor, Snyder is responsible for everything that fell in his lap. (As was President Obama's fate, as well. ) Snyder is simply compounding the problem. If the article mis-stated facts, you should take issue with A2.com.
DonBee
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 3:59 p.m.
Julies - The article is not quiet correct. The cut on business taxes is $1.8 billion from the current taxes. When you then take the loopholes, deductions, and abatements back that Governor Snyder is taking back the net effect is about $700 million in reduction. The $1.8 billion is money collected not a business profits, but inventory, equipment and property (think the contents of a factory), and gross receipts. Most of the reduction goes to the 750,000 small businesses in the state. Ford, GM and other large businesses mostly pay more. As the promised abatements, loopholes and deductions expire over the next 3 years the value of business taxes returns to about what it is now. You can thank Governor Granholm for most of the deduction and abatements.
johnnya2
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 2:06 p.m.
Please explain why military pensions would be exempt? They are GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES. The same as a postal worker or person at the Secretary of State. Oh thats right, military members tend to skew republican, so you need to cut them some slack. These are people who have SINGLE PAYER SOCIALIZED MEDICINE. They get free government money for education. I guess killing people is more valuable in this country than helping poor people as a state employed social worker, protecting people as a state employed prison guard, or teaching your kids as a teacher.
Awakened
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 11:34 a.m.
They are exempted by federal law. Respondeat Superior. The State cannot tax them.
godsbreath64
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 6:48 p.m.
No-Fault or Tax Corporatism.
DonBee
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 3:55 p.m.
Johnnya2 - On this I agree with you. NO income should be exempt, regardless of the source. As a retired military person (who does not draw the pension), I think everyone should be taxed equally on income.
godsbreath64
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 2:31 p.m.
Canons of Constituency. Some are peacemakers, though.
Joel A. Levitt
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 1:54 p.m.
The Governor's plan is not only unfair, it is foolish. It's based on the foolish assumption that taxes are more important to business than an educated labor force, a safe environment and sound infrastructure. Here is an example: "Michigan paid out $117.2 million in film tax credits, according to a recent study by accounting firm Ernst & Young." Wrong, Michigan didn't pay out a cent. What it did do, it didn't tax the film industry, which has little or no capital investment in Michigan. If he does tax them, they will leave. We won't get the $117.2 million nor will we get the taxes now collected from their resident employees and from the Michigan businesses which service them. We will lose jobs and money, and no one in Michigan will benefit.
Joel A. Levitt
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 5:30 p.m.
Mike K, I agree, we must encourage Michigan business, by, among other measures, rationalizing Michigan business taxes (particularly, doing away with with the tax on gross receipts). What is foolish is rationalizing Michigan business taxes at the expense of the other vital needs of our businesses. I also agree that we need a lot of money for education, for infrastructure, etc. In the near term, I advocate raising the income tax rate. In the long term, like you, I advocate making it a graduated tax.
deb
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 4:58 p.m.
YOUR WRONG!!! the state did pay out the money. Why would you mislead people??
DonBee
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 3:53 p.m.
Mr. Levitt - The state writes checks to the film companies when they file their forms, if they don't owe that much in taxes. Last year the film companies owed about $12 million in taxes, so the state wrote checks for about $105,000,000.00 The state promises about 40 percent of the cost of filming. It does not matter if the equipment is rented in Michigan, or the people working are from Michigan, on any day the movie company is working in Michigan all the expenses from that day are can be claimed for the rebate.
Mike K
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 2:02 p.m.
Joel - in our system, business hires individuals. The government can only build so much "infrastructure". I agree that an educated labor force is a positive thing, but there is no guarentee in this investment. The educated are free to work anywhere. They can leave MI. In fact, anyone can leave. And of course a safe environment is desired, but only so many agencies are needed to regulate. How are these things going to provide growth? In our model, the private sector is the employer. We must do what we can to promote private sector growth. See my post above.
Shannon
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 2:02 p.m.
I learned that for every dollar the state invests in the film jobs, they get 28 cents. How do you run a business without money??
outdoor6709
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 1:53 p.m.
The problem is we get our economic theory from politicians. Lets face it, they LIE most of the time or maybe worse they do not understand economics. If you believe in Kensian theory which says more government spending is good then why does US/Michigan have an effective unemployement rate of 15% (real rate vs. massaged rate by government to make the masses think things are better tha n they are). Paul Krugman despised government deficits until a democrat became president, then they were great. The theory that lower taxes are better also hits a point where lowering taxes does not help either. So we need to figure out where that in between point is. However if you look at taxcuts in 80's mor money came into the government as business activity increased. <a href="http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np" rel='nofollow'>http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np</a> You also need to remember that business do not pay taxes, they pass the taxes along to their customers in the form of higher prices. Government loves business taxes because taxes on business hide the true cost of government spending. Ask any economist, If they were going to start over, Would the perfect tax system have lots of loopholes or be flatter and a larger base? If they are honest they will say more taxpayers lowr rates. We had 8 years of politics giving their friends breaks with no improvement in the economy of Michigan. We voted for change, but are unwilling to give change a chance. Please say goodby to your children as they leave Michigan for jobs elsewhere.
DonBee
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 1:53 p.m.
Last year the state had more than a billion dollars in stimulus funds, they are gone this year. Last year the Federally mandated Medicaid bill for the state was $700 million less than this year. Last year average home values were higher than they are now. Last year the state used a number of accounting tricks to close more than $300 million in budget holes. This year none of this is possible. State and local employees what they got last year plus raises. Suppliers want what they got last year plus a bit more. In short, everyone wants more. There is no more. Until folks propose something that could work, Governor Snyder's plan is the only one on the table. There are serious problems with what the Governor has put on the table, but I don't see real solutions to those problems. So until there is a serious alternative, I have to ride the horse the Governor offered up.
DonBee
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 2:42 a.m.
Breathy has no solution - just keep the status quo, that way he keeps all his toys. But the status quo is broken, so we need to move forward. The dogma of the past does not work Breathy, come up with a real plan or deal the cards that are dealt.
godsbreath64
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 1:14 a.m.
If you are referring to me appleseed, he moves on. That is viable. If your claim Sick is outta ideas once his fascism is rejected, you are spot on.
Marshall Applewhite
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 12:54 a.m.
So in conclusion, there isn't any viable alternative that he can think of.
godsbreath64
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 11:20 p.m.
For the 16th time donny he needs to see he untenably violated the constitution. The only fair thing now, is to see the writing on the wall, think of the family and go back to his comfort zone of outsourcing MI jobs, rummy tax breaks and the like. You feel November's electioneering is paramount to the constitutional charge and it simply is not. You can step away from your dogma key any time now, for this is fact. The People have rights to self determination, et. al. and such are under palpable seige by Sick and The New Gauleiters. You can walk your dogma bunny all you want. Facts are facts. He ducked the public's request to anything but perfunctory debate. He is only now "debating" to coopt some hologram he has a mandate when he doesn't. Elections mean nothing when you fail, refuse, or neglect to return the constitution charge whether your dogma bunny hops all night, don. THE FACTS DON"T CHANGE. Sick is toast and needs to take the hint and split. Why put your family through this?
DonBee
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 10:10 p.m.
Let see - He was elected by a good majority. He said everything was on the table. He has put forward what he thinks is a great budget and a way forward for the state. The opposition has offered no alternative that actually hangs together. While I don't like parts of the Governor's budget, the reality is right now there is no alternative on the table. All the opposition does is whine and throw a fit. Dogma, Dogma, Dogma...How about a real alternative godsbreath64?
godsbreath64
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 7:37 p.m.
sorry, Don. You can ask, but governors have resumes, honest mandates and most importantly duty to constitution charged.
DonBee
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 6:50 p.m.
godsbreath64 - So If I don't agree with what his replacement wants to do, I should be right in asking for them to resign and that would be the right thing to do? Dogma wins again. Compromise loses.
godsbreath64
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 3:45 p.m.
That sounds about as rich as Cheney saying his administration weren't responsible for when the twin towers dropped even though it was on their clock and he PERSONALLY ordered military air power[NORAD] to Canada that morning with "Bin Laden likely to strike" warnings weeks prior. So your technique needed the surprise that just isn't (t)here. The businessman is deliberately decimating the markets until the People give up the precedent of self determination, et. al. Because (t)his business does not enjoy market or public confidence he must do the ONLY FAIR THING and resign (see title).
stunhsif
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 1:48 p.m.
I fully support the Gov and what he is doing. It is fair and reasonable for all. There is plenty of "fat" to cut from all public sector jobs , mostly in pensions and healthcare costs and having the employees pay more. Pensions should be taxed because they are income, period. As many have said, this lousy state is the only one which has lost population, people go where the jobs are. The jobs are disappearing because Michigan is not attractive to business, big or small. The still powerful "union" mentality will not allow this state to recover any time soon. I for one am going to cut my losses within the next several years and move to Utah, where I lived as a kid until we moved to Michigan in 1972. The only thing keeping me here is my frail mother and waiting for my wife to graduate from college but other than that, we will be leaving for sunnier, warmer climes , a much healthier economy , lower taxes and cost of living.
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 11:43 p.m.
Need help packing? Good Night and Good Luck
sbbuilder
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 1:47 p.m.
I am a small business owner. Most small business owners I know thrive on very, very small margins. One or two percentage points here or there make a very big impact on the bottom line. If you have an operating profit of three or four percent, a two percent swing in expenses could halve your profit. We also no longer operate in an insulated environment where competition is only local. Competition seems to be coming from all over, and from farther and farther away. So, a tax break as proposed by Mr Snyder would go a very long way towards stabilizing many small businesses. What owner would not pass on an opportunity to re-invest and grow their business? Grow or die is the maxim of the day. I would like to hear from any of those who dislike Mr Snyder's plan who also currently own a small business. Have a good Sunday.
macjont
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 6:30 p.m.
My small business depends upon income generated by retirees and others whose personal income is limited. The tax shift Snyder proposes will keep substantial numbers of people from coming into my store. I fear the loss of this income more than I will welcome Snyder's "tax break." As for investing and growing my business --- that won't happen while Snyder is drying up my customer base.
Shannon
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 1:34 p.m.
How did we get to the spot we are in?? If we had Businesses located here we'd have employment, the State would "take in " revenue from taxes. We have to start at the beginning and rebuild our engine to drive the economy. Unfortunately this means taxes on income. "Fair?" By whose definition? Lets stop whining (as we lose more of our family members to places where than can find work). Give the Governor a chance to make a difference...it can and it will get worse if we don't.
Mike K
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 1:20 p.m.
I would agree that a progressive income tax would not be a problem. As for the business tax, Arizona has landed two huge companies in the last month and a half. Intel is building a new $5 billion plant there that should employ some 1000 people, and First Solar also announced a new plant. If you want the jobs, you have to be competitive with other states. These developements will put 1000's of middle class American's to work, and will create a web of service sector jobs to boot - all creating tax revenue. The left needs to understand that this model works. The alternative is that the state makes chips and solar panels.
Carole
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 1:18 p.m.
Food for thought -- a senior citizen here commenting--first off I have a pension and draw social security but because I'm still employed, I pay state (not on pension) and federal taxes that include a part of my social security funds because totally all my income it puts me in the bracken that requires that I do so -- so be it. What is fair? Depends on who you talk to. But was just wondering if the following could not be done which would not require redoing all the tax forms, setting up new departments etc. Tried to find the total number of Michigan residents in 2010 census -- unsuccessful so used 2008 which was 10,003,422 -- did find that our number have dropped so rounded that number to 10,000,000 - divided it by 5 (round about number for a family) came up with 2,000,000 -- now I would not be opposed to everyone family in Michigan paying a one time amount say about $100 sent directly to the State of Michigan Treasury to help offset the deficient. Perhaps those who are well off and can afford it might offer to pay $200 -- but still all of us would be taking a part in helping out. But, along with that I would very highly expect the government to be fiscally responsible with further expenditures. What I am totally opposed to is continuing taxing the poor and middle class folks who continue to struggle and who I believe in the future will continue to struggle further to just keep their heads above water. As for myself, doing just fine for my needs are small. Recently, did hear that state senators and representatives took a pay cut -- is that true?
Awakened
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 11:32 a.m.
There is also a proposal in the State Senate to make the legislature's health benefits match that of government employees. Currently their benefits are much better.
outdoor6709
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 1:57 p.m.
It is my understand legislater took a 10% pay cut for 2011. Per Fridays Frank Beckman's radio program.
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 1 p.m.
Speaking of taxes and fairness - Freep has a great story today about how Public Universities in Michigan have raised salaries by 30% the last 5 years and increased administrative (non-teaching) positions by 19% while maintaining hefty tuition increases too! Does that make sense? Is raising a salary "investment"? No - it is not. Is increasing non-teaching positions "investment" No - it is not. Teaching Students in the Classroom is investment - and when State dollars are on the table it is hurtful to see greedy Universities simply continue pay increases as if the economy is just fine. Michigan lost nearly a Million jobs under Granholm - there is no one left who can pay your 7% annual increases. <a href="http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110327/NEWS06/103270503/Amid-tougher-times-spending-payroll-soars-Michigan-universities&odyssey=mod" rel='nofollow'>http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110327/NEWS06/103270503/Amid-tougher-times-spending-payroll-soars-Michigan-universities&odyssey=mod</a>|newswell|text|FRONTPAGE|p I am a taxpayer and I am broke.
Terminal
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 4:26 p.m.
Still have enough money for a cell phone texting and broadband, I see. Life is tough ain't it?
Mike K
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 1:25 p.m.
Amen - I am a taxpayer and I am broke.
average joe
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 1:22 p.m.
The universities are crying now because they will have to dip into their 'reserves' to cover these increases. The 15% cut to higher education proposal is not all that bad when you figure that only 19% of EMU's budget comes from the state, which amounts to less than 3% cut to their overall budget.
joe.blow
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 1:10 p.m.
It's much easier to throw mud at your opponent and ignore the facts.
Hot Sam
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 12:39 p.m.
Of course "fair" would be a flat tax without any deductions, deals or any other nonsense. However, stuck in the thousands of pages of codes, most of which which are there to help the rich pay less, is a little something for everyone. They have the middle class so addicted to getting a little bone now and then they are afraid to go after the prime rib...
lbechard
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 12:22 p.m.
Liberals live in a fiscal fantasy world where all those big bad corporations that provide jobs and prosperity are evil. "Tax the rich, Tax the rich", is the battlecry. Who are the wealthy? The answer is anyone who makes more than they do. Wake up! The public education funding gravy train is over. I consider Rick Snyder's proposals as fair as the state's current economic condition warrants.
DonBee
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 6:46 p.m.
More than 50 percent of the ARRA (Stimulus) money went to state and local governments, Medicaid, unemployment payments and other non-infrastructure payments. In short less than 30 percent of the stimulus money was directed to "Companies" of any sort. As to the bank bailout, well surprise, surprise, the Government actually got more money back from the banks then they gave out. If you had put the money in bonds you would have needed more than 7 percent interest to get what the Federal Government has gotten to date.
Terminal
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 4:24 p.m.
Mike K is wrong. the vast majority of all the federal bailout and stim money went to corporations and CEO bonuses
Mike K
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 1:29 p.m.
Well spoken! I think though that the liberals who actually feel this way are more left than the mainstream liberal, but I may be splitting hairs. Certainly, some are more vocal than others, but I too am tired of "tax the rich" talking points. Look up where most of the stimulus money went. It was used to keep the gravy train running. Don't worry though, we can always print more money to give to the states.
Terminal
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 1:08 p.m.
If I hear the "gravy train" analogy one more time I'm going out to buy some dog food because that's what we'll be eating if Snyder has his way.
joe.blow
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 12:14 p.m.
If you Liberals want to be angry, be angry at GE. They made multi-multi-billions last year and didn't pay one penny in taxes, in fact they got multi-multi-multi millions in tax credits back!!!!! Wait a second Jeff Immelt (GE CEO) has taken many photos with Obama, donated millions to liberal campaigns and owns the biased networks of MSNBC and CNN. Come on Liberals, go get him, a rich dude who didn't pay ANY taxes. There are poor people who have to pay their far share, yet GE got money back!!! Where is the liberal anger?
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 11:39 p.m.
GE has had an army of tax lawyer (literally hundreds) and an army of lobbyist (literally hundreds) working the halls of Congress for decades. This is not a new issue. GE has been getting these breaks for years if not for decades. It is news now because the so-called liberal media (including all of NBC's cable affiliates but NOT the NBC Nightly News) decided to make it news. Good Night and Good Luck
joe.blow
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 7:20 p.m.
It's become apparent that liberals don't understand the conservative argument. Conservatives aren't for NO taxes, they're also not for lower taxes for the rich. Conservatives are for everyone being treated equally, with some exceptions (ultra poor). Thus when people attack corporations who employ thousands, conservatives are usually on the side of the corporation, however it really torques a conservative off when a large company pays nothing, thus not it's fair share. Liberals on the other hand, want a hand out for whom ever or what ever they like, thus GE.
DonBee
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 6:43 p.m.
Macjont - Nice try and usually true, but in this case, the Democrats cut GE slack on a number of items over the last 2 years...net result is GE now pays no taxes. President Obama is championing several new deductions that GE can take advantage of to get a refund from the Federal government for prior year taxes. You are mostly right, normally it is the Republicans, but in this case it was the Democrats.
macjont
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 6:24 p.m.
What am I missing? Liberals are angry at GE. It's conservatives who support a system that permits the "GE problem."
Mike K
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 1:33 p.m.
Actually, one of the Wisconsin Dems who lost called for Immelt to lose his seat on one of Obama's teams. I got a kick out of that. Not left enough I suppose.
joe.blow
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 1:09 p.m.
GE spent millions on lobbyists to get special tax breaks by the Obama administration and liberal congress. These laws didn't exist until Obama took office. So yes, I blame the laws. I would be fore getting rid of all loop whole laws and make EVERYONE pay a flat tax (I would even be okay with a slightly progressive tax with a MAX tax rate). GE didn't benefit from a low tax rate, like what Snyder is proposing, they benefited from special laws created just for them for payback from campaign contributions.
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 1:08 p.m.
GE is in Obama's pocket - I would not expect them to pay taxes or to be audited.
Terminal
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 1:06 p.m.
What political party favors tax breaks for corporations and CEO's? And now Snyder wants to give corporations like GE another tax break
Brad
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 12:53 p.m.
It seems like the thing to be angry about would be the laws that allow GE to avoid paying taxes in the first place. You know, tax laws that are overly generous to business like Rick is proposing.
MB111
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 11:59 a.m.
Of course its unfair. When I am affected, it is unfair. As long as other people have to sacrifice, its fine.
joe.blow
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 11:56 a.m.
I'll be voting for Snyder the next time he runs, he's actually trying to fix the problem. People are upset that he's cutting business tax rates, but what he's doing is keeping them in the state and keeping people employed (maybe people would rather collect unemployment?). He's also ditching Unions which are pretty much worthless for a health state, I've never seen a union worker leave the state because their benefits were cut, they know that leaving would equal a major pay cut, unlike businesses who leave. I don't want to see K-12 education cut, but I understand it for now, it's up to the local governments to man up and make there own schools nice. I'll pay increased property taxes on a local level if it means a healthier state. Thank You Rick Snyder, God Speed.
macjont
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 6:23 p.m.
The problem: local governments are no longer empowered to "make [their] own schools nice." Taxing authority has been removed to the state.
Grant
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 11:45 a.m.
In the taxing off senior citizens, the claim that Social Security would be excluded is very much not true. The truth of the matter is that Social Security is deducted from the gross amount the school retirement system pays an individual, as they reach the age of 62 in order to make the retirement payment less. For example: If the gross school retirement is $2,000.00 and the Social Security payment is $500.00, the state pays $1,500.00 and the retiree receives $500.00 from Social Security. In other words: not only is Snyder attempting to tax retirement, he is incorrect when he says Social Security for these people would not be taxed. Present recipients of the exempt forms of school retirement were given the assurance of the non taxable nature of the retirement system when they chose to become a part of. Read the laws that were enacted that clearly state this fact. As I am not as familiar of other exempt retirement plans, the bottom line is that individuals, when they chose the various jobs, and stuck it out to retire in these plans were given a promise. To take away that promise is tantamount to a lie and in many cases will inflict serious financial harm on people who have educated, policed and saved our children from the dangers of fire. This major so called fair taxing should be prospected to those who enter the professions. That way they will know what they are "signing up for" just as the current retirees did.
DonBee
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 1:25 p.m.
If you are single, living in a paid off home and not disabled, your first $10,000-$15,000 in income is tax free, because of standard deductions on the Federal Income Tax form. So since social security for most folks falls in this range, the Governor is technically correct. Remember the largest amount of pension payment by age group goes to the people between the ages of 50 and 60 - more than 7,500,000,000.00.
ThinkForYourself
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 12:19 p.m.
Grant, What should we do with the taxed 401k earnings for all of the people who write and manufacture the text books that educate our children, as well as those that manufacture all of the communications, safety equipment and vehicles that save our families.
joe.blow
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 12:05 p.m.
Maybe he could take a page from the Obama book and call it a "fee" instead of a "tax." Then he could put the IRS in charge of collecting the "fee" because they're the best equipped for "fee" collection.
David Parker
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 11:30 a.m.
The states with lower taxes grow the most. MI biz tax is excessive & hard to understand or explain. So if u had a choice to start or move why choose MI? Obviously a lot of biz's & people are voting with their feet and move elsewhere. hence why the census showed MI only state losing population in last 10 years. So if you are not a MEA or other gov't member why stay? Snyder budget proposes a way to survive as a state. The question isn't about being fair, it's about survival.
Marshall Applewhite
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 10:11 p.m.
David, you have to realize who you're arguing with here. These are people who believe money is infinite, and this state has a hidden pot of gold somewhere to fund all their little pet projects. They do not operate within the bounds of reality, and therefore are not really worth wasting your breath on.
mun
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 9:37 p.m.
@Mike Nowak The last 2 paragraphs in that link say it all! "Clearly, the states with the highest college attainment are more prosperous than those with the lowest overall or business taxes. The ranking that matters most to our future prosperity is that Michigan is 34th in the proportion of adults with a four-year degree. A prosperous Michigan depends most on preparing, retaining and attracting talent. That's what policy makers and candidates should be debating. Because if we don't get better educated, we will be a poor state."
mun
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 9:33 p.m.
Then why isn't South Dakota the most populous state of the union? They are considered the most tax friendly. Nevada has no state income tax, yet they have the highest unemployment rate in the nation at 14%.
macjont
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 6:21 p.m.
The problem, David Parker? Simply stated, you are wrong. High tax states: Massachusetts and Connecticut. Low tax state: Mississippi. If Mississippi is survival and the other two states are failure, I'll take failure any day.
AMOC
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 3:16 p.m.
David - You are so right. Last year I started a business with a partner who lives in Ohio. We researched the difficulty of registering a partnership / corporation and tax rates in both states, and decided Ohio was MUCH easier than dealing with Michigan's Business Tax. It would have cost us an extra $200 in accountant and attorney's fees to set up our small consultancy.
DonBee
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 1:22 p.m.
Try this the business tax code runs thousands of pages with all the legacy tax abatements, loopholes and changes. In many cases the regulations name companies by name. The tax includes gross receipts, not profits, capital equipment, and inventory. So if you have a factory, a warehouse, or anyone pays your company - you pay taxes - unless you have a loophole designed for you. Fixing this complex mess is a key step forward. Ford, GM and other large companies will pay MORE, small businesses like Downtown Garden and Hardware will pay less. I could easily see the rate everyone pays go up with the simplified tax.
Terminal
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 12:29 p.m.
Your right, it has nothing to do with fairness. It's about survival of the richest at the expense of everyone else. Nice try David, but smart people aren't buying the myths anymore.
SpamBot1
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 12:17 p.m.
@Mike N. Nice link! I am amazed that so many are crying that businesses need lower taxes for our state to prosper, but there is not evidence that suggests that, just republican talking points. Even in this article, they mention that lower taxes will not promote the necessary job growth, but the comments are filled with lies about how we need to lower business taxes.
Mike Nowak
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 12:11 p.m.
You got any facts to back that up? Try reading this: <a href="http://domemagazine.com/blogs/extrapoints/ep071009" rel='nofollow'>http://domemagazine.com/blogs/extrapoints/ep071009</a> Stares taxes and business prosperity are nit correlated.
joe.blow
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 12:03 p.m.
No, it's about giving tax breaks to the rich. We should tax them into staying. How about a 300% leaving Mi tax, then we could keep them here and tax them into being middle class, which works well for major employers! We could also try to tax rich people in other states, just because they don't live here doesn't mean they shouldn't pay Mi tax, those rich people are sooo trying to get out of paying taxes, evil.
SpamBot1
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 11:58 a.m.
How do you define "excessive" and "hard to understand"? Why would businesses move to Michigan? I see that you believe "low taxes" are the only reason to locate to a state. I believe we should pride ourselves on offering a large pool of highly educated people and great cities for employees to live in. However, with Snyder at the helm, both are becoming very difficult.
Cash
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 11:24 a.m.
Another day...same subject. Selective sacrifice is what's proposed. Whether you agree with the selection of tax increases proposed by Snyder and the trickle down economic theory is up for debate but has been debated almost every day here with no result whatsoever. Frankly, I'd like to take Sunday off of the "same old, same old". Everyone have a great Sunday!
Moscow On The Huron
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 2:58 p.m.
Cash, catch up, man. Most of us figured out the day it was launched that AnnArbor.com is not a news source. One more recent clue is that they just laid off the person who was their only real journalist.
1bit
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 1:30 a.m.
Agree with you Cash, the article is designed to generate heat - not light.
EyeHeartA2
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 1:35 p.m.
Cash - It pains me to say this, but....2 thumbs up to your post! Bravo!!!
Cash
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 12:36 p.m.
Answer to question: One last time....I came here because I am still looking for a news venue.....not a message board shooting to get multiple "hits" over news content. But alas, no such luck.
Terminal
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 12:34 p.m.
Arguing about Snyder's budget is #3 on annarbordotcom's list of hit makers. Don't feed the animals!
Moscow On The Huron
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 12:24 p.m.
If you want to take Sunday off, why did you come here?
jcj
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 11:50 a.m.
I'm with you Cash. See ya Monday!
godsbreath64
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 11:14 a.m.
Signing legislative attempts to void binding municipal contracts, undesired election returns and charters in noncompliance is PURELY WANTON by definition. He may get a muligan in business, but not in municple terptitude. Under no uncertain terms, the only fair thing to do is for the guv to RESIGN immediately. The law-abiding Michigan he rivals MUST prevail. This is a TAX SHIFT, not a "budget" issue. It is about resuscitating he and his party's credibility. He has graphically violated public trust and settled constitutional law. In lieu of the foregoing, ANYONE will return more of their charge to uphold them. The mainstream media has been covering this story for almost as long as the guv has been employed in the public sector. This same false choice is being jammed down every state with a counter-republican executive. The People did not cost the states the tax revenue base. The people who are being relieved of their tax obligations were. The guv's corporate peers did. After Snyder has moved on, his replacement will have a public sector resume that won't insult the masses. Public and market confidence will return. The only fair choice is for Snyder to resign before the start of this week.
godsbreath64
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 3:23 a.m.
What is so hard about the post Snyder Michigan? We all have plans, his are just wanton. So he has to go. Are we at 20 times yet and you never dispute he is illegal. Ergo, the post Sick Michigan is on deck. He won't serve more of a term than Sarah Playin'. Good luck, don. I know it is hard for you.
DonBee
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 2:39 a.m.
Boy Breathy - flowery language, you must be an english teacher. Tax shift? Not really, in 3 years the corporations will pay more than they do now, as the abatements expire. As to fairness, why is it fair for a 50 year old who is "retired" to pay no tax and a 50 year old who is working to pay tax? Why is it right to have over 1000 units of government that serve less than 2,000 people? No Breathy - we need to move forward, not on. But then you don't have a plan do you - you just want the Status Quo, I guess because the status quo is good to you.
godsbreath64
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 2:23 p.m.
Donny, just admit you are on the wrong side of this, history and what ever else. We are letting unadulterated corporatism solve the nuclear crisis. How's that working out for everyone? Michigan needs an intervention almost as much. This is a TAX SHIFT, so start with abandoning the narrative. When you decode all of those words of yours, day in and day out you only get boilerplate circumlocution for hegemony that avoids the axiomatic of constitutional self determination. You both can point to no experience before or during his 90 DAYS and only yell FIRE in a crowded theater to get an unprecedented wanton way. He has got to go, both for the sake of the once Great state of Michigan and his family. The former doesn't seem to matter to yourself because your only proximity to this is likely the windfall you are being denied to date. For Michigan, he was not up to the task. Move on.
DonBee
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 1:17 p.m.
If you had to choose between going bankrupt, which will void contracts, charters, bonds and put assets at risk for court appointed sales agents. A bankruptcy that would mean that you would need years to be able to afford to issue bonds again, and that would have a ripple effect on every other town or school in the state. -OR- Bring in a financial manager that could do the contract and charter changes without having the long term impact on borrowing and the ripple effect on the rest of the state, realistically which would you prefer? No, the Financial Manager law is not even close to perfect, but if Detroit or Hamtramck go bankrupt, Ann Arbor's bond rate is going to go up. Get your representatives to submit a bill to fix the ugly in the Financial Manager law.
mmppcc
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 10:47 a.m.
"Republicans say that higher taxes on wealthy citizens would hurt the economy." Apparently, we're supposed to believe shifting the burden to those who can least afford it and bankrupting public education is it what will help the economy. How do Republicans get voters to believe their lies? How do they get them to vote against their own interests?
5c0++ H4d13y
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 4:57 p.m.
New Jersey already tried soaking the rich. The rich moved and the cash never showed up for the state. Should we repeat the failed policy of New Jersey?
johnnya2
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 2:02 p.m.
You want proof that raising taxes HELPS the economy? You only need to look to Clintons first term. Raise taxes on wealthy, created more job than any other president this century and had a budget surplus. GWBush cut taxes and had the LOWEST job creation of any president in this century and left with huge deficits. How hard is it for people to see this? I guarantee the ONE way Edwards will create more jobs. HIGHER DEMAND. If schools can not afford new text books, or there are less college students who need to buy books for classes guess who loses customers.
DonBee
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 1:10 p.m.
What is wealthy? If Jeff Irwin's graduated income tax goes through - in Michigan Wealthy will be defined as making over about $70,000 a year if you don't have a mortgage or children at home. Does that sound wealthy to you? Most teachers, skilled trades and other jobs that we used to classify as middle class would be classified as wealthy. That should tell you something about the state of the Michigan economy.
Terminal
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 1:03 p.m.
And a wealthy man would not hire a poor man if it cut into his profits or ability to take a vacation to Paris.
Moscow On The Huron
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 12:26 p.m.
I've never been hired by a poor man.
cinnabar7071
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 12:01 p.m.
"bankrupting public education"? When were we even close to bankrupting public education?
joe.blow
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 11:59 a.m.
Define wealthy? Do you mean corporations? Have you wondered why there haven't been any new car plants in Michigan in quite sometime? Must be because corporations see the taxes in Michigan as too low and think there aren't enough unions. Your right, we should bring them in by promising higher taxes and increased unions!