Enjoy Your Tax Cut

screw the states, the feds need to hang on to their bailout money for the airlines, right?

I agree with Scrat that just because many states are floundering since the market collapse, it shouldn't be up to the federal govt to bail them out. That's why we pay state and federal taxes seperately. Otherwise, lets just pay one tax and let the fed run everything.

I live in NY and I am not looking forward to the beating that I expect to take next April. They have already increased the sales tax .25% and reinstated the clothing sales tax.

McGentrix
Have you forgotten the biggest bite of all, if you are a home owner. Up to what amounts to a 25% increased real estate tax.
Presently the police and sanitation inspectors are issuing summons for every antiquated and ridiculous law on the books inorder to cover the short fall. We the people of NYC are under siege by the New York City Gestapo.

Yeah, like in California, we're looking at a 38 billion state deficit, simply because the state didn't know how to control its spending when times were good. They didn't save for a rainy day, and they now want to INCREASE TAXES to pay for their incompetence! They must learn to control spending, no matter what the economic environment. c.i.

Wow, ci, you almost sounded like a Republican...

No, just common sense. It seems neither party has any of it. c.i.

Not here at least.

CI - Mark your calendar! WE AGREED ON SOMETHING!!!!! Excellent comments (my opinion of course)!!!


"All we are saaaaaaayiiiiiiiing, is give peace a chaaaaaaaaance...."

Is it poor planning and waste that put the city of NY on the ropes or could it be the stock market and it's associated collapse where a good portion of the cities revenue comes from. Could it have been 9/11 that brought commerce in parts of the city to a standstill. Or possibly tourism which slowed down considerably because of the fear of terror. Or the unfunded mandates of the federal government. And let's not forget the costs associated with security. What do you think? Remember the city of NY also took it on the chin for the rest of the nation. You all talk about 9/11 we lived it.

au - Am I wrong, or did NYC receive substantial aid related to 9/11?

How ironic your sneer at "liberal thinking" here, how quickly you seem to have forgotten the whine of Republicans of just a decade about about "un-funded" mandates . . . you seem to either just not get, or to be willfully ignoring the original burden of this discussion, that the taxpayer, whether or not they live in a state about which you sneer that they are mismanged, are going to be paying out a good deal more in taxes because of the budget cruches--so what's wrong with taking the money we already gave the Feds, and giving it to the States, so that any putative tax cut the citizens enjoy doesn't vanish as a result of the measures taken to cut state budgets? A family of four, with no investment income (for whatever their 401(k) or IRA situation may be), and an income of less than $50,000 a year, is going to get $800, and not in any direct sense, just an additional deduction when they calculate their tax burden, eight to ten months from now. How long do you think it will take for increased sales taxes, gasoline taxes, state income taxes, municipal income taxes, and other such taxes and imposts to eat up $800? The suggestion that inasmuch as the Shrub and Company are so eager to make themselves look noble by "giving back" the taxpayers' money, it is just as reasonable to give that money back in the form of "shortfall" relief to the states, and will likely produce a healthier effect in the liquidity and bottom line of the majority of households, is by no means an unreasonable or unfair suggestion. Of course, if that family of four makes $25,000 or less per annum, they will be paying the increased taxes at the state level, and getting no tax relief from the current measure. And, finally, the family with significant investment (and i assure you that the investment would have to be significantly large in the current market climate to generate $500 in dividend income), however, will be getting some serious tax relief on their investment income, and more to come down the road--and as surely as they will also pay the increased state and local taxes, those are regressive taxes in most part, and have never had the same impact on the liquidity and bottom line of househoulds with large incomes, a minority of the population to be sure. Of course, the small income household with investment income stands to benefit, though not very damned much, unless,of coure, they got in on the ground floor of the Cosmodemonic Universal Oilfield Service Corporation of Greater Texas, State of Halliburton.

Setanta - Forgive my sneering, it is counterproductive.

I agree that unfunded mandates are a bad thing. (In fact, I think that funded mandates from the feds are likewise a bad thing. With few rare exceptions, the feds should not be sending mandates to the states.)

Having written that, I have to go back to the fact that some states are doing fine, even given the unfair and unjustified burdens put on them by unfunded federal mandates.

I live in NY State as I stated earlier, I also pay Federal taxes. I do not want any of my money to go to California (or any other state)because they couldn't get a budget that worked. I don't live in California and I don't care if that means the people there are inconvienenced. If they don't like it, they can move. We all have that option.

I am pissed beyond belief that the NYS representatives can't even get a budget in on time, much less balanced. I will once again reflect my attitude when election time comes. If I ever lose my job, I am planning to move out of NYS.

scrat
yes! After much effort by our congress people. However, it was far less than was lost and the costs imposed by the 9/11 attack an it's aftermath.
My post was written to dispel the rubbish being floated that the states problems can be traced directly to mismanagement. It was brought on by many things not the least Bush's policies or possibly the lack thereof. He would appear to be under the impression that the economy will heal itself. I on the other hand believe we are in for a big shock when people see that although the stock market has improved the unemployment picture continues to get worse. Where are all the jobs? Manufacturing is becoming a memory and now the back office jobs are flowing out of the US. Processing of all types, insurance, banking and the like is flowing to India.
Can you flip a hamburger if so you may be able to find a job. If you are healthy maybe a stock clerk would be up your alley. And by the way you older guys need not apply.

au - Which of Bush's policies do you believe have caused or contributed to state budget crises, and how?

Scrat
Policy, the only policy he has is to cut taxes for the wealthy and hope it will trickle down to the rest of us poor peasants. The only thing that is trickling down is between his legs.

Here's some simple math for study for those who think "most tax paying Americans are going to benefit from this tax cut" and "stimulate our economy." Some recent statistics have shown that the 'average' American's net worth is about $85,000. Let's presume that half of that is the net value of their home, therefore, $85,000 minus $42,500 leaves $42,500 for 'other investments.' Simply put, how many people owns stocks that pays tax deductible dividends? 10%? 15%? Let's be generous and say 20%. Okay, 20% of $42,500 is $8,500. What would be the average dividend payment? 2%? 3%? Okay, let's just say 4%. Four percent of $8,500 equals $340. Say that the original tax rate on this dividend was 25%. 25% of $340 is $85. Now, with this new tax cut, the tax on this dividend is reduced to 15%. 15% of $340 is $51 a net grand savings of $34. How in the world is this going to "stimulate our economy?" c.i.

au - I had hoped you had an intelligent, factual basis for your stated position that you could share.

You call that "Simple"? :wink:

Scrat
I am trying to point out to you that his only economic policy is tax cuts. Do you think that will solve our economic difficulties. The only thing he has succeeded in doing is ringing up enormous deficits.