asterroc ([personal profile] asterroc) wrote2008-10-02 12:25 pm

Reasons to Vote No on Question 1

In November, Massachusetts ballots will have the question "should we repeal the state income tax." The supporters say it will give each citizen back an average of $3,600. For everyone else, consider that the income tax represents 37% of the state budget, or $12 billion. I urge all Massachusetts citizens to vote NO on this question (Question 1, and it will be on the back of the ballot with the presidents on the front). To this end, I'm going to post some reasons why you should vote against Question 1.

The reason of the day:

"The state could fire all 67,000 state employees - every prison guard and college teacher - and still have to find another $7 billion." --The Boston Globe

[identity profile] meig.livejournal.com 2008-10-02 04:55 pm (UTC)(link)
As much as I'd love to not have to pay taxes, I can see the stupidity in this. Where do people think the money is going to come from? Thin air?

...

Oh wait. That's where it is coming from for the bailout. My bad.

[identity profile] zandperl.livejournal.com 2008-10-02 05:21 pm (UTC)(link)
They think there is "a lot" of waste in the system. Never mind that there haven't been any studies showing how much is actually wasted.

[identity profile] spazzy444.livejournal.com 2008-10-02 05:21 pm (UTC)(link)
Well that is incredible.
I know one of the reasons TX has such a high property and sales tax is because we don't have an income tax, but surely that can't be all of it.

[identity profile] ayashi.livejournal.com 2008-10-02 05:25 pm (UTC)(link)
How do other states make up the difference?

[identity profile] zandperl.livejournal.com 2008-10-02 05:26 pm (UTC)(link)
And that's another one of my points. If they think the state is wasteful, what makes them think they'll take this opportunity to clean up the waste, rather than just raising the taxes by some other method?

The counter to my argument is that there is a state law called "Proposition 2.5" (said two-and-a-half) which caps the yearly increase in property taxes at 2.5% per year, unless the town specifically and temporarily decides otherwise. So my counter to their counter is that towns routinely pass Proposition 2.5 Overrides when the law is not convenient for them, so when the state income tax is repealed, towns will pass a slew of Proposition 2.5 Overrides and while I (a renter) may benefit tax-wise from the income tax repeal, my landlord will not.

Of course, I'm a state employee so I expect my job will be at risk if this passes.

[identity profile] zandperl.livejournal.com 2008-10-02 05:33 pm (UTC)(link)
What difference? How many states actually don't have an income tax?

Okay I just looked it up, and seven states in the US don't have state income tax, and I'm under the impression they make it up with sales tax and property tax (as mentioned by [livejournal.com profile] spazzy444 above for TX). IIRC NH doesn't have sales tax and only has some income tax (not on salary/wages, but does tax bank interest), and as a result they have high property taxes AND rank low down on how much money they pull in (#48 both in terms of $$/capita, and % of state budget that comes from tax). NH being a libertarian state (IIRC), I wouldn't be surprised if they as a result cut services.

[identity profile] kadath.livejournal.com 2008-10-02 05:37 pm (UTC)(link)
NH funds its government by property taxes, which results in sharp gradients in quality of services from one town to the next, depending on property values. NH also has a tiny population that's mostly located in the southern area of the state.

Other states hike their sales tax, and sales taxes are regressive and penalize the poorest citizens.

[identity profile] ayashi.livejournal.com 2008-10-02 06:00 pm (UTC)(link)
Interesting, thanks :)

If not for your post I wouldn't know what Question No 1 was just yet. But I've seen a lot of signs around Brookline, in yards "Vote No on Question No1, it's a reckless idea" and after reading your posts I agree!

[identity profile] meig.livejournal.com 2008-10-02 06:04 pm (UTC)(link)
Oh, i am sure there is. I think government in general is notorious for waste. I understand where people are coming from, but not paying taxes at all will completely lock up the system and nothing will get done. It needs to be a gradual reform and accounting.

I am still, always have been, for a flat tax system. Even though I think you probably get higher rate in a flat tax system you also don't get double and triple taxed like we do here.

[identity profile] weirdlilfaechld.livejournal.com 2008-10-02 06:47 pm (UTC)(link)
Nevada's state income tax = tourists.

[identity profile] zandperl.livejournal.com 2008-10-02 06:54 pm (UTC)(link)
What do you mean by "double and triple taxed"?

MA has a voluntary higher rate that you can pay (instead of something like 5.3%, it's something like 5.8%), if you're a socialist and think it's important to fund the state so the state can fund things like hospitals and homeless shelters.

[identity profile] meig.livejournal.com 2008-10-03 02:06 am (UTC)(link)
The fact that I have to pay state income taxes and property taxes, as well as having to pay state/local sales taxes on food and other items I buy (clothes, etc.) is double and triple taxing as far as I am concerned.

[identity profile] seekingferret.livejournal.com 2008-10-03 07:07 pm (UTC)(link)
I came across this last night for entirely different reasons, but you might find it interesting: http://elsa.berkeley.edu/~cromer/ and particularly: http://elsa.berkeley.edu/~cromer/draftbeast408.pdf

[identity profile] zandperl.livejournal.com 2008-10-03 07:13 pm (UTC)(link)
Huh! Interesting. I'll have to read it more, but the abstract definitely intrigues me.