Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 73
Thanks Tree18Thanks

Thread: You’re Better Off in a State With a Higher Income Tax

  1. #61
    Conservatively Liberal NiteGuy's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    17,044
    Thanks
    12449

    From
    Teardrop City
    Quote Originally Posted by NightSwimmer View Post
    The state of Kansas is going to hell in a handbasket, as they learn this lesson firsthand: Sorry, Johnson County kids, but Kansas is broke | The Kansas City Star
    And that was a year and a half ago.

    Democrats and moderate Republicans have finally gotten tired of Brownback's shenanigans, and have begun RAISING taxes so they can at least put kids back in schools, and keep the lights on.

  2. #62
    New Member Pureinheart's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    590
    Thanks
    150

    From
    USA
    OP- where to begin? Honestly, you have been spoon fed the liberal agenda for far too long.. there are no words concerning this absolute indoctrination. And we wonder why the nation is in the state it is in ... SMH big time

  3. #63
    Veteran Member EnigmaO01's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    17,140
    Thanks
    9121

    From
    Indiana
    What I find disingenuous is the federal congress critters want to give me a break on my federal taxes when it's my state property taxes that are milking me for everything I've got.

  4. #64
    Banned Camp
    Joined
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    21,748
    Thanks
    12025

    Of course, but there is no point telling the brainwashed right wing about that. Countries with the highest quality of life pay the most taxes. You get what you pay for. And people are so stupid thinking they don't get far more in value than they contribute with all the government provides

  5. #65
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    14,470
    Thanks
    3875

    From
    AK
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Sampson Simpson View Post
    Of course, but there is no point telling the brainwashed right wing about that. Countries with the highest quality of life pay the most taxes.

    You get what you pay for. And people are so stupid thinking they don't get far more in value than they contribute with all the government provides
    Simpleton comparisons to some European country not only aren't winning the argument, they're not relevant. The topic isn't how much the federal government should tax us. The topic is about how states should tax.

  6. #66
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    14,470
    Thanks
    3875

    From
    AK
    Quote Originally Posted by EnigmaO01 View Post
    What I find disingenuous is the federal congress critters want to give me a break on my federal taxes when it's my state property taxes that are milking me for everything I've got.
    What about that is disingenuous?

    Quote Originally Posted by NiteGuy View Post
    And that was a year and a half ago.

    Democrats and moderate Republicans have finally gotten tired of Brownback's shenanigans, and have begun RAISING taxes so they can at least put kids back in schools, and keep the lights on.
    Tax policy at the state level is sometimes experimental. Whoever it is that believes decreasing the tax burden will attract business and grow the economy enough to offset the lost revenue, that's a hypothesis, and there are no guarantees that's what will or won't happen, because it ultimately depends on a multitude of other factors such as what businesses and industries decide to do. Same applies on a city level. If my city slashes taxes because we're on the shortlist for Amazon's 2nd headquarters and we want to win their business, whether that policy becomes effective or not ultimately depends on whether Amazon picks us. If Amazon picks us, citing optimism about our area's pro-business leadership, the tax cut strategy would be wildly successful. But there are no guarantees with this stuff. It's not a definite win nor is it a definite fail. Voters in these places need to decide whether to take this risk slashing short term government revenue in the hope that long-term growth will offset it. The risk on the other side is less likelihood of long-term growth.

  7. #67
    Banned Camp
    Joined
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    21,748
    Thanks
    12025

    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    Simpleton comparisons to some European country not only aren't winning the argument, they're not relevant. The topic isn't how much the federal government should tax us. The topic is about how states should tax.
    stupid deflections, that's your idea of winning an argument? LOL

  8. #68
    Senior Member
    Joined
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    10,781
    Thanks
    2772

    From
    California
    Quote Originally Posted by EnigmaO01 View Post
    What I find disingenuous is the federal congress critters want to give me a break on my federal taxes when it's my state property taxes that are milking me for everything I've got.
    Mr. Enigma,

    Perhaps you should talk to your state representatives about that.

  9. #69
    Chubby Member
    Joined
    May 2006
    Posts
    9,622
    Thanks
    3021

    Has anyone else noticed that when some simplistic data set appears to support one's position, they hold it up like it was carved in stone by God, and when that same data contradicts one's position, they tell you that it's not that simple, that there are lots of variables, that the situation is complicated, that there are a lot of different facets, we have to consider this and that...

    And then the same person when another simplistic data set supports their views, "This is the answer! It's totally cut and dried! Oh, sure, try and distract us from the obvious truth..."

    Seems like most people are perfectly capable of seeing that reality is complicated and accepting that simplistic approaches and solutions are not adequate in the real world. But we tend to quickly grab ahold of things like this study when it appears to support us, as irrefutable evidence that Position A is the One True Answer.

  10. #70
    Senior Member
    Joined
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    10,781
    Thanks
    2772

    From
    California
    Quote Originally Posted by splansing View Post
    Has anyone else noticed that when some simplistic data set appears to support one's position, they hold it up like it was carved in stone by God, and when that same data contradicts one's position, they tell you that it's not that simple, that there are lots of variables, that the situation is complicated, that there are a lot of different facets, we have to consider this and that...

    And then the same person when another simplistic data set supports their views, "This is the answer! It's totally cut and dried! Oh, sure, try and distract us from the obvious truth..."

    Seems like most people are perfectly capable of seeing that reality is complicated and accepting that simplistic approaches and solutions are not adequate in the real world. But we tend to quickly grab ahold of things like this study when it appears to support us, as irrefutable evidence that Position A is the One True Answer.
    Mr. splansing,

    That is why I always use data from reputable sources, and which can be supported in my debate.

Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 3rd February 2015, 10:48 AM
  2. Maine to consider getting rid of state income tax
    By bajisima in forum Current Events
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 8th January 2015, 05:40 PM
  3. Governors attempting to get rid of state income taxes
    By bajisima in forum Current Events
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 22nd January 2013, 02:07 PM
  4. Replies: 20
    Last Post: 5th May 2012, 04:07 AM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed