Showing 1-11 of 11
You pay for state/federal funding one way or another.
If taxes are lower, the cost of everything else will just increase to compensate.
Sometimes, I think it would be better to pay a flat rate up front, than stand in line all day to find out the cost of a car tag has gone up $10 or $20.
Ultimately, we will pay one way or another. We all just disagree on WHEN we have to pay for it--up front(liberals) or an adjusted price (conservatives).
I don't know if you're on to something or not, PJ. Maybe you should just slow down a little. :)
"You pay for state/federal funding one way or another."
That is so on point. Unless we're willing to do away with basic services--like schools and medical regulation--we are going to have to fund the gov't. I just think the way we do it here ends up costing us more. Don't even get me started on how the sales tax on things like baby food (baby food!)adversely effects the poorest among us.
Stay in Tennessee, and particularly in Nashville, and you will realize why the state income tax is such an inherently stupid idea. You would still have the nickle and diming and an income tax and the sorriest public services in the world if we imposed a state income tax of 99 percent. Until deadweight and light weights like the Bredesens, Purcells, Ramseys, any thing on our school board, name a name from either party, are shown the door on a permanent basis, the only way to control government is to force it to survive on as little as possible.
We already have a state income tax.
It's just not a tax on wage income.
It is the Hall tax on dividend and interest income.
Second you are talking about things being paid for and fees collected by different levels of government. A state income tax is not going to incentivize local governments to quit writing speeding tickets.
And then there is the whole issue that a lot of the activities that taxes are collected for are not actual "services" at all - they are merely transfer payments out of the pocket of one set of citizens and into the pockets of another set of them.
Furthermore, there is no direct connection between those who ARE getting services and those who are financing them. Government services are not charged out on a user fee basis (as they should be).
No one's income is "service" provided to them by the government.
Evidently poor PJ can't read or he would know his annual license renewal form advises he can receive his renewal by mail for a measly buck.
I tried to renew by mail last year and my stickers never arrived. The result? Tickets!
Then you have truly pissed off someone at the clerk's office. I (and hundreds of thousands of others) have successfully renewed by mail, both stickers and metal tags, for over thirty years. Apologize to someone!
I once had a client based in Portland, Oregon that was talking about moving its corporate headquarters to Nashville. After a miniature mutiny in which almost every employee in the HQ said they would quit rather than move, the CEO tried to argue about what a great, livable city Nashville is. The employees said that it wasn't Nashville they didn't like, but that they didn't want the perceived TAX INCREASE. Again, the CEO asked what in the world they were talkng about. Overall taxes in Nashville, Tennessee are much lower than here, he argued, not to mention the price of real estate. They replied that was only true before one considers the extra $30,000 per year they would have to pay to put 2 kids through private school, because they believed Nashville doesn't (or "didn't" - it was quite a few years ago) provide a viable public school option. Up there, they could send their kids to public school and get a college prep education. (I don't know if that's true or not, but that's what they said) They felt they couldn't do that here, and they saw the tuition as effectively an additional tax related to living in Nashville.
I'm not sure where that takes me regarding the above issues. It's just something I found curious. Good article PJ.