We need to let Gov. Snyder know his budget plan lacks true fairness
I appreciate your efforts to cover the issues in the paper of April 3 and to offer food for thought, as to the matter of "shared sacrifice" as defined by Gov. Snyder.
However the question "what is fair" when it comes to public policy/tax policy is an incomplete and somewhat misleading one. It reduces the issue to a single matter and of course the answer to the question depends on one's perspective.
Bill Ford (one of Snyder's endorsers) and I might well think differently about whether it is fair that he should be a CEO by heredity, regardless of his talents/capacity to do the work/mistakes of the past. The fact is that our social and economic arrangements allow for this, although they also limit his power/rights to run/ruin my life and to have more than one vote at election time. If I don't like the way he runs his company, I simply shop elsewhere and I am free to limit his power/behavior, by regulating and taxing him, providing I can convince enough people to vote my ideas in.
Context is very important to fairness ideas and our current context includes the "possibly unfair" circumstance that more and more of our resources/wealth is controlled by fewer and fewer people, which many believe is a threat to democracy. Is an "unfair", by some definitions, graduated income tax, therefore necessary to preserve our rights/democracy and is this preservation more important to most of us than the so-called unfairness of a graduated tax? a tax which in this context might be defined as fairest to the most people as it gives a chance at a quality education and adequate nutrition to make use of it? Is that which supports democracy most, also what is most fair?
What supports democracy most? Teachers who are able to focus on all our children's educational needs or teachers who are anxious/distracted by worries about the future of their own children, as they are less and less able to save for their education?
What supports democracy more and makes for the best service to the public? Citizens who can count on contracts made being fulfilled or citizen employees who can't plan their survival ahead because their employer believes that contracts are only that "much paper"?
To me, it is clear that Gov. Snyder and I define "fairness" differently and that his definition comes from his perspective about how a society should work and for whose benefit, especially when push comes to shove. Perhaps his ideas about business taxation are more right than wrong. Time will tell if that is the case, as long as money for regulating safety, public endangerment, etc., is covered and there are swift and costly penalties for violations, as part of the package
But his ideas about how to make up the lost "revenue" are definitely "wrong," from my perspective. Lessening taxes on businesses DOES NOT necessarily mean that INDIVIDUAL INCOME taxes on those individuals who "work"/run these businesses should not increase/be graduated. In this area we are all equal, one person, one vote.
It is up to us to make it clear to the governor how we want him to proceed in this matter. He claims we don't want increased income taxes therefore he is allowing this tax percentage to decline. If increasing it is what we believe to be "fair", it is up to us to take the time to make sure he knows, the "will of the people". We must offer something, not just fuss over details. There is an alternate plan to his and for now it lies in how to make up for the business tax "loss".
Later on we can go for more if we care to, such as a citizen initiated ballot proposal, for a graduated income tax. There will be another election and if now that we know what Snyder's values/philosophy are, who Rick is and how he thinks, we can "fire" him and undo his policies. Perhaps we will be more careful in the future about hiring "a pig in a poke," who refuses to do the job interviews /engage in the processes of evaluation before hiring and will treasure more our rights to pick our leaders, i.e., vote.
Etta Gluckstein Saxe, Ph.D. Ann Arbor
Comments
shepard145
Sun, Apr 24, 2011 : 12:12 a.m.
Marie deserved her encounter with a guillotine - letting the peasants get out of control like that! …as though she'd never heard of burning villages! Oh well, what's done is done. I think Snyder's IQ is higher then 174. Of course over 200 it gets dicey to measure. As you continue to study his bio, you'll feel better who governs you. …and you SHOULD feel privileged since I charge big bucks for my opinions ….again, to maintain my luxurious lifestyle. So you're about to join the real world!? Congratulations! Hopefully your career is based on math. The year I collected my last couple of degrees, the US was also in a recession but nothing as systemic as this. Fortunately for society, I was fine but still had only three offers. …I know - appalling. ….now it's time to go buy something made of luxurious velvet, trimmed with the fur of some endangered animal.
Erica
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 6:37 a.m.
I leave you all with this. "The school is the last expenditure upon which America should be willing to economize." ~Franklin D. Roosevelt
DonBee
Sun, Apr 17, 2011 : 2:26 p.m.
From a simple business point of view it takes some capital to rent a facility, put equipment in it (whether shelves for a store or machines for a factory), hire workers, train them and buy stock. Without the ability to accumulate capital (wealth) it would be very difficult to open businesses, and if you could not open businesses, where would people find jobs? Without jobs, how would people feed their families and pay taxes? Wealth is not by itself evil.
Basic Bob
Sun, Apr 17, 2011 : 5:52 a.m.
Let's go to the Bill Ford argument. Because Dr. Saxe dislikes Mr. Ford's company, she suggests that we should elect and empower a government powerful enough to limit his business and millions of people who directly or indirectly rely on his company's success. And this is considered fair, because no one deserves to inherit wealth. That is called "restraint of trade" and if a private business did this, it would be illegal. Also, bad for the future of Michigan, as companies like Toyota, Honda, and Nissan would not be subject to the same restrictions, as long as they did not locate their facilities within the state of Michigan. I believe that we are also free to choose a government powerful enough to limit the destructive power of false promises made to powerful and wealthy special interest groups supported blindly by Dr. Saxe. To follow Dr. Saxe's vision, we will have a failed state with no wealth-producing ability at all. We will be left with massive unemployment, no factories, no laborers, no engineers, but teachers and state retirees would be secure and happy at the top of the class structure. Property values will disappear as there will be no one to pay a mortgage, and all service businesses will close except for bars, liquor stores, and drug houses. An entire state that looks like the worst parts of Detroit. I'll take my chances with the trickle down theory. It is a far more compelling argument.
Kara
Mon, Apr 18, 2011 : 11:15 p.m.
Trickle down theory have never worked. If you actually look at the argument with a common-sense lens, it's hardly compelling at all.
David Briegel
Sun, Apr 17, 2011 : 11:32 p.m.
Ronnie Reagan raised taxes and the economy boomed. Bill Clinton raised taxes and the economy boomed. W cut taxes and the rest is history. We are living in the paradise your beloved trickle down myth has created. It is simply not successful! Lowest tax rates in 60 years. Highest profits in the modern era. The wealthy sitting on trillions in their bank accounts and all they want is more! ENOUGH! When will sanity prevail?
AnnArBo
Sun, Apr 17, 2011 : 2:50 a.m.
This is the last american sector to feel some real pain, the government sector employee. They have been the sacred cow for too long, everyone else has faced layoffs, cutbacks, salary and benefit reductions and far worse job loss's. The ONLY way to get this economy turned around is to encourage growth and job creation, and you need business friendly policies to do it. We need to quit vilifying the private sector, we've tried it the feds way and it NEVER works going in that "government can provide" direction. The feds have tried, and at best tread water on job growth. Without the rebound of the private sector, we are not going to be able to afford what we have overspent on for too long.
sparty2219
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 10:57 p.m.
I say we just start drilling for oil in the U.S. and start selling it to US!!!!
Erica
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 6 a.m.
Or we could just become independent of oil and save ourselves a whole lot of hassle in the long run.
shepard145
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 10:17 p.m.
Those supporting a flat tax don't understand the power government wields by forcing investment in areas where nobody would put there money if the market was left to judge. Nobody buys a VOLT, invests in elderly housing, buys a house, the entire green energy fraud or countless pork favorites special interests paid to have rammed into the tax code. In a 5 minute conversation about taxes, even the biggest flat tax kook would start creating exceptions for those areas HE felt needed extra help. No kids, a flat tax is not the answer but what we have now is not either.
shepard145
Sun, Apr 17, 2011 : 11:11 p.m.
It's not about fair, it's about RULING POWER. With regard to investing, there are some segments of the economy that, without government gifts of your tax dollars, would never see market driven investment. Judging which deserve the gifts, if any, is done by the government - right or wrong. For example, without historic tax credits, almost every tall building in Detroit (mostly abandoned) would be torn down - NONE could be economically restored and occupied. Is that a good thing? I don't really think so - most were always awful but judged attractive by someone other then me - but there are exceptions. Maybe when Republicans seep in November 2012, it's finally time to start asking those questions in the daylight.
Hot Sam
Sun, Apr 17, 2011 : 11:07 a.m.
"""Those supporting a flat tax don't understand the power government wields by forcing investment in areas where nobody would put there money if the market was left to judge""" We fully understand...and theirs nothing "fair" about it....
Lamont Cranston
Sun, Apr 17, 2011 : 12:39 a.m.
If no one would invest in it, why should the government (my tax dollars) invest in it?
shepard145
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 11:10 p.m.
I am not wrong and the government will never give up the control provided to them by deductions. Sure, a flat tax would be easier for everyone but that's not the point. ...and fortunately, a lot of lawyers are putting themselves out of business already - now if we would only stop electing them to high pubic offices!
DonBee
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 10:27 p.m.
Shepard145 - You are wrong, I want zero exceptions to my taxes, no deductions or anything else. Whether flat or graduated. Then we can decide where to spend money (which is what deductions, credits, etc really are) and write checks to those causes. Then the real cost of programs would be available for people to see and decide if they liked it. Right now we hide the cost of so much inside the tax code it is not funny. Here is my tax form: Line 1: How much money did you make (total income, no exceptions): Line 2: Multiple Line 1 by number from Table below: Line 3: How much money was deducted from your income for taxes Line 4: Subtract line 3 from line 2 - If the number is positive send a check with this form. Unfortunately it would put 1,000s of lawyers and accountants out of business. But, maybe that is a good thing.
shepard145
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 10:12 p.m.
You don't get it. ...and if only psychobabble were gold! LOL Talking in the mirror this morning, we imagined we could be elected governor and lead the state out of granholm's disaster by continuing her failed programs! ...maybe even add a few more hand outs "for the children!" Many seem to thing that Rick Snyder was elected (you did not vote for him of course) to lead by polling democrats in an attempt to figure out what narcissistic blow hards think they want next for Michigan. ...or ELSE, he will be forced out of office to make far more money running his own businesses. What a threat! LOL These delusionals are one of the state's greatest recovery obstacles. Over inflated self esteem should never be confused with knowledge, wisdom or competence, which is why remaining obstructionist bankrupting democrats need to go in 2012 and there after. You had an opportunity to make a positive impact on this state but instead you sat round in drum circles at the Governors Mansion with your toes in the grass, failed to understand the issues or how to solve them and made a mess that Republicans now have to clean up.
shepard145
Mon, Apr 25, 2011 : 9:49 p.m.
Income "receivers"? ..referring to those collecting welfare checks taken from those working and paying taxes? …or your hero obama's buddies at GE getting a taxpayer bale-out while sheltering billions in overseas profits and paying ZERO TAXES on billions of US profits? Or do you mean income "earners"? Those who are the most successful at providing valuable goods and services? Again, you don't need to refer to a movie or cartoon to understand how out of control democrat taxing and spending damages the economy. The top 1% pay 40% and the top 10% pay 65% of the taxes. That's not from some movie – they're facts. Even if people like you were successful seizing 100% of the "rich" income, it would never cover the money spent by the bankrupt democrat party and their union buddies. …but it's been done – they named their people's utopia the Soviet Union. What about reality so confuses you? On top of it, "the rich" are the people who invest their money in business that CREATES JOBS and make themselves more money. The motivations of families headed by single mothers are as varied as the rest of society. However there are indisputable statistics that show this method of raising a family is closely linked to poor educational performance in schools and rates of imprisonment across all races and income levels. Again, what is complicated about that?. ...Kara is more fun.
Erica
Sun, Apr 24, 2011 : 1:49 a.m.
Shepard145: I suggest you watch a documentary called "1%" which was created by the son of a very wealthy man in order to uncover truths about the upper 1% of income receivers. It could possibly open your incredibly deceived and closed mind. Also thank you for insinuating that single mothers greatest wish it to get government subsidies for their children. Actually those mothers are just as hard working as you are long winded.
shepard145
Sun, Apr 24, 2011 : 1:15 a.m.
PART II Like obama, granholm's failures can be traced back to a staff of incompetents and her very limited knowledge of economics. As the state's population and economic value rapidly shrank, she still wanted to hand out financial goodies to her friends. Her fascination with green energy is an excellent example of emotion over reality. Not everything she did was stupid – the film credits were one of her few rational ideas. "…the case of Synder he is completely caving in to, or rather perpetuating, the control that upper class, rich corporations have over money and subsequently people." LOL Really? So do you agree with your bumpkin hero Pelosi that the next booming economy will grow from the bottom up as people spend their government checks? LOL More central planning; "…There must be a punishment for not allowing the trickle down effect to actually occur though. We cannot just be giving our tax money to the rich of the rich and not see any benefit from it." Wow – those who push the class warfare agenda do not understand (or don't really care) how business and shareholder value works at all! I have friends who received MEGA grants who will get millions in tax credits if only they will hire more people, but they can't because the business is on life support. In fact, some companies still continue to laying people off just to survive. Nobody is giving the rich anything – they are simply TAKING LESS OF THEIR MONEY. Your assumptions assume "the rich" keep their money buried in the yard and the IRS should come pick it up. …when in fact it's invested in the economy!! How obvious is that? You also flatly ignore the small percentage of "rich" paying the vast majority of taxes in this country as well as the fact that taking ALL OF THEIR MONEY would never compensate for those not working and government spending the earnings of future generations. You have a long way to go.
shepard145
Sun, Apr 24, 2011 : 1:11 a.m.
There has been no shortage of spending on education. To the extent that they truly exist, the failure of pubic education took decades and is due to the great feminist experiment and democrat vote buying schemes that convinced the less educated that nuclear families are irrelevant. Particularly ugly is the fact that quality of education is based on parental support more then schools, which is of no value to politicians and grant grubbing academics. Single parent households headed by women are a statistical disaster with respect to children's education and criminal behavior but they vote democrat to keep those checks rolling in. "…over confidence in the auto industry to hold up our entire economic system.." The cornerstone of Granholm's economic policy was to expand Michigan's economy beyond the auto industry so I don't know where you get that…..and under Engler, it was shrinking but not crashing as it did with the democrat's economic collapse of 2008. Sounds like you want big business to be both the cause of economic decline due to their lack of charity and the solution to it's improvement contingent on Soviet style central planning. LOL So you need to explain to yourself how in 2006, 4.3% of the earth's population created more then 25% of it's gross domestic product…..and presumably that can be "fixed" with government assistance? LOL
shepard145
Sun, Apr 24, 2011 : 12:14 a.m.
Marie deserved her encounter with a guillotine - letting the peasants get out of control like that! …as though she'd never heard of burning villages! Oh well, what's done is done. I think Snyder's IQ is higher then 174. Of course over 200 it gets dicey to measure. As you continue to study his bio, you'll feel better who governs you. …and you SHOULD feel privileged since I charge big bucks for my opinions ….again, to maintain my luxurious lifestyle. So you're about to join the real world!? Congratulations! Hopefully your career is based on math. The year I collected my last couple of degrees, the US was also in a recession but nothing as systemic as this. Fortunately for society, I was fine but still had only three offers. …I know - appalling. ….now it's time to go buy something made of luxurious velvet, trimmed with the fur of some endangered animal.
Erica
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 5:55 a.m.
If only capitalizing "LOL" for no apparent reason was worth gold. Then you could consider donating all your extra money that you currently spend on your "luxurious lifestyle" to help put our failing state back on its feet. Personally I think there are many contributing factors to the current decrepit nature of Michigan, including, but not limited to, the responsibilities of previous governors. The main causes of our downfall have been: lack of adequate funding to public schools (and therefore the betterment of our lower class's education), over confidence in the auto industry to hold up our entire economic system (they failed huge costing hundreds of billions of dollars in losses, and loss of jobs state-wide), and a general disinterest that people have towards the problems of others. These factors are beyond the scope of the governor's power but at least Granholm was attempting to alleviate these problems, and her failures can be traced back to a resistance from large companies and lobbyist rather than her person. In the case of Synder he is completely caving in to, or rather perpetuating, the control that upper class, rich corporations have over money and subsequently people. Because we are in a state of crisis, certain measures must be taken to spring back and I completely understand the need to jump-start business. However a tax cut to businesses does not necessarily mean that they will be hiring new employees, or that they would not turn around and outsource their jobs to less expensive job markets. I think that a better proposal might be to cut taxes only for a year and if a company hires a certain number of new employees their cut can remain intact. There must be a punishment for not allowing the trickle down effect to actually occur thought. We cannot just be giving our tax money to the rich of the rich and not see any benefit from it.
Kara
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 5:32 a.m.
ok annarbor.com, i've read your conversation guidelines and i'm really curious as to why my comment was removed. shepard145, don't worry i certainly wasn't insinuating that you should have your head chopped off because you're annoying. what i did say is that you can have the last word, right after this comment. and i was wondering where in tarnation you got your information about rick snyder's IQ. i googled "rick snyder's IQ" and got nothing relevant. so I googled "rick snyder's IQ 174" and the second result was a page with a comment that said something about the commenter's IQ being 174, but from the search result it is easy to mistake that for snyder saying his IQ is 174. so i can see how you might have been mislead. oh and I also mentioned that i feel privileged because i am a piddling college student who is about to graduate and you're a bigshot with a luxurious lifestyle who gets paid for his opinions, but you're still letting little ol' me get under your skin. maybe my comment got blocked because i used the word "guillotine?" let's see if it gets removed again.
shepard145
Thu, Apr 21, 2011 : 9:14 p.m.
His IQ is above average like a blue whale is a bigger mammal then my grandmother. In a pure sense, you're right, IQ is not an indicator of capability but combined with the rest of his history, he makes granholm's qualifications look silly. I never said the Republican Party has no corruption – read what I wrote again slower. I said they are much harder on their people and have a far higher ethical standard. People do pay for my crappy opinions – it's not my imagination – its real money that pays for my luxurious lifestyle. …and since I don't care how I'm perceived here because writing here at all is charity – I should get a tax deduction or muffin basket – something. I've not read Plato but have read Glenn Beck's book "arguing with Idiots" – same thing. Your opinion can relax because I'm a fiscal conservative but socially moderate. For example, I'm definitely in favor of more strip clubs opening in the state and oppose the 3 foot rule – pivotal issues like that. I have chunks of virtue! ..but I'm also related to the Hapsburgs (Empire) so it's my nature to want to order people's heads to be chopped off when they annoy me. ….how envious I am of those who enjoyed ye good 'ol days.
Kara
Tue, Apr 19, 2011 : 3:29 p.m.
I know enough about Snyder--none of it has proven to me that he is better than any other politician. Great, his IQ is 174. So that means he is above average in intelligence. What does that fact really say about his governing abilities? Nothing. You're blind if you're going to deny that the Republican party has any corruption. Yeah, go ahead and twist my words. At least I'm not sitting on my high horse thinking I can do no wrong and that people should pay me for my crappy opinions. Sorry, but the fact that people pay you doesn't make you seem any more credible, but at least you got that little bragging fact in there. It only reinforces my poor opinion of most conservatives when someone like you spews out insults, totally biased "facts", and refuses to admit there are possibilities other than the ones you endorse. Go read Plato's Euthyphro. Maybe you'll learn something about being a virtuous person, because you apparently need a lesson in it.
shepard145
Tue, Apr 19, 2011 : 2:11 a.m.
Granholm refused to make the hard choices necessary to reduce government as the state's economy continued to shrink and she had hundreds of reasons why she was unable to lead us effectively. Yes, that was her fault. Your assumptions are a shrug as though nothing more could have been done. LOL So Granholm gets the kind of fat pass given to obama by his Kool Aid guzzling zombies. To the contrary, Republicans have very high ethics standards for their own – probably too high. They call for resignations of congressional members over almost trivial protractions while democrats circle and protect their criminals and freaks. That's just a fact. So you know nothing about Snyder and why Michigan voters elected him? LOL Do your own research – it's a good opportunity for you to learn something about those who govern you. His IQ is 174 but that probably means nothing to people who also don't know anything about testing. Look up his college education. I don't see the nobility in not knowing anything and freely admitting it. I don't care how I look to readers here. Smart people pay a lot of money for my "opinions" but AA dot com gets it for free...so you all owe me. LOL
Kara
Mon, Apr 18, 2011 : 11:12 p.m.
I don't support Granholm more than any other person I know almost nothing about. I was simply saying that she was not the person who caused the debt crisis in the first place, much like Snyder is not--but who knows, if he can't fix it perhaps everyone will be blaming him for it in a few years too. And I would argue with them that it wasn't his fault either. So, you're saying democrats make wild unproven claims about Republicans...but then you're going ahead and accusing them of having "zero standards for their own corrupt politicians." You're inconsistent. Or perhaps a better word is biased. But I agree with you; democrats certainly have a lot of corrupt politicians on their side. So do republicans. You can't actually be thinking that one side has corruption and the other side is a gift from God. Personally, I hate politics and I think everyone involved must have something up their sleeve. What kind of basis do you have for saying Snyder is the most intelligent governor ever elected? Do you know about all of our governors? Have you looked at his IQ test? People just spewing off their opinions like it's fact are irresponsible--you have no idea how smart he is compared to anyone else, and no one has any idea if what he is doing is right for our state. It very well may turn out to be, but people who go around so sure of themselves are just making themselves look close-minded and blind. To be able to admit fallibility seems like a much greater virtue than to have so much pride one cannot admit of other possibilities.
shepard145
Sun, Apr 17, 2011 : 11:04 p.m.
Snyder is the most intelligent governor we've ever elected by a wide margin and his goals for the state are well known. He is now working to accomplish those goals but to many uninformed (especially in Ann Arbor), reality based management may appear baffling, frightening and confusing – that's natural. Those protesting simply need to educate themselves. I doubt democrats can suffer enough politically for the damage they've done and continue to do to this nation. Yea, we heard the "Bush ran for President to make money" routine for eight years with zero evidence – apparently, just like "Bush Lied" none is required. While the left continues to make up wild unproven claims about Republicans, they have zero standards for their own corrupt politicians, which generally makes their opinions laughably irrelevant. …so Granholm was in office for eight years but the economy under her was someone else s fault! LOL Wow, you must have had very low expectations for her lawyer/governor skills! Glad she's gone to bankrupt California – and stay out.
Kara
Sun, Apr 17, 2011 : 12:16 a.m.
If you're insinuating that Snyder is doing something altruistic in being our governor, think again. Pretty sure he's making more money being governor AND running his businesses than he would just running his businesses. . And please, why do you lump together everyone who is a democrat into one hated group? Why don't you judge people for who they actually are, rather than by some superficial political category? And btw, Granholm didn't get us into this mess, Republican Gov. Engler did.
Hot Sam
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 8:51 p.m.
What is really unfair is the twenty thousand page statist central planning behemoth we call the tax code. We need a Fair Tax or flat tax and an end to all the credits, deductions, and other nonsense... Like I said in another post, they have the middle class so addicted to getting a bone now and then, they are afraid to go after the prime rib!
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 7:32 p.m.
With comments by Gsorter being the exception to the obvious rule, it appears there is no conservative reply to this letter that is remotely intellectual or serious. Instead we get: --"If you are guilt ridden ERMG why don't you get out your checkbook and send in some money , make it payable to 'The State Of Michigan'?" --"Liberals must love dribble." --"Just one hour east of here is a nice, Socialist haven for the rest of you." --"Fidel Castro could fix this problem. Do you think he would run for governor?" --"I think it would be 'fair' to have a graduated income tax based on educational levels. Somehow people with Ph.D.s have 'lucked' into more education than most of us and therefore they should pay a higher rate. " --"New plan. Imprison the top 10,000 households in America and divide it to the bottom 150 million households" [said with clear sarcasm]. Brilliant, folks. Just brilliant! Good Night and Good Luck
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Sun, Apr 17, 2011 : 12:44 p.m.
Economists hate the word "fair" I understand their frustration. But "fair" enters into this discussion because the governor said he wanted everyone to share the burden and because he did not want the state picking winners and losers. Unfortunately, there are those who will not share the burden (me, among others) and the state has picked winners and losers. Hence the discussion about fairness. Good Night and Good Luck
1bit
Sun, Apr 17, 2011 : 11:54 a.m.
Interesting document, thanks for the link. I don't really base what is "fair" on what other people are doing. Although I agree a graduated tax makes sense, I also don't believe it is "fair" as Dr. Saxe seems to argue. Semantics, I suppose...
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Sun, Apr 17, 2011 : 2:56 a.m.
1bit: The tax on pensions has been justified by some by their citing the fact that all but four state do the same. Notwithstanding the fact that that is incorrect (I believe the number is closer to 13, meaning that 37 do tax pensions), the same logic applies to the graduated income tax, as 35 states have graduated income taxes. Source: <a href="http://www.taxadmin.org/fta/rate/ind_inc.pdf" rel='nofollow'>http://www.taxadmin.org/fta/rate/ind_inc.pdf</a> If you look at the above document, you will see that all but two of the states with a graduated tax have their lowest rate set lower than Michigan's flat rate. You will also note that some VERY red deep states, and many in the deep south, have a graduated tax and have top rates substantially above Michigan's 4.35%. Personally, I don't see the problem. Good Night and Good Luck
1bit
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 8:29 p.m.
We live in an unequal world. Life is inherently unfair. We are born with abilities or born in situations that advantage some more than others. All of our human machinations cannot (and some would argue, should not) level the playing field. I don't mind paying a graduated income tax. Not because it's more "fair" but because it is the right thing to do. As I mentioned above, there are different ways to assess fairness and I don't believe that the graduated tax is "fair" at its essence. If one does not want to justify it with morality, perhaps social capitalism theory sounds better. The wealthiest amongst us are also the ones who are the most charitable. But yet they are constantly vilified for their success. They are not all cheats and scoundrels. And in tough times, they are asked to carry an even greater burden. Why should they when all it will generate is another round of vilification and another request to carry a greater burden?
cook1888
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 7:05 p.m.
I think it would be "fair" to have a graduated income tax based on educational levels. Somehow people with Ph.D.s have "lucked" into more education than most of us and therefore they should pay a higher rate. Great job Governor. Everyone needs to live within their means, including the government and public employees. Americans use to be noted for their ingenuity in solving problems, now many just want more money to throw at them.
Lamont Cranston
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 6:56 p.m.
What is fair is that each and everyone contribute. The "tax the rich" rant is just another excuse for "I want someone else to pay my share." Times have changed and this economy is forcing the Governor to make tough decisions. Rather than accepting that we have to cut back government services to fit the amount of money that we have, people just want someone else to pay.
Kara
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 6:06 p.m.
Personally, I think fairness has a lot to do with government, especially democracy. Our problem is that we're living in a representative democracy, which basically has become an oligarchy because politicians work for the rich, who then run the country. Fairness isn't really a concern any longer, but it should be. Snyder is whatever. He's a business man, so I'm not surprised that he's doing what he's doing. What I do know is that trickle down effect has never worked, will never work, and that cutting funds for education is the last thing that should be done, not the first option. People are selfish and jealous. All I hear are complaints about teachers having more benefits than others and redistribution being "unfair to me." Teachers are government employees, so they get government benefits. Why isn't anyone complaining about the benefits our state representatives/senators receive? If you were in a poor household without the opportunity for advancement, you would no longer think taxes were unfair to you. But you're not so you don't care. For some reason people are still under the illusion that one can easily rise from rags to riches if one puts in the effort. Thus, all poor people must just be lazy freeloaders. No, they're not. Do you know any poor people? I do, and they're some of the hardest working people I've ever met. And they have crappy jobs that no one else would do. They provide your life the nice level of cushy-ness it has today. I really have no idea what people thought was going to be different when Snyder said he would run the state like a business. Politics already is a for-profit business, duh. What a way to dupe the citizens.
Robert Stone
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 4:59 p.m.
The thing people don't get is that "fairness" isn't really the problem. What really matters is how well the general population is doing, not if someone is wealthier than you are and if that seems fair. People need to start thinking about cause-and-effect. Millionaires don't just have $1 million stashed under the bed. The money gets used in such a way that it makes more money, whereas if the money is taken away and used by the government it is not used in a way that generates any sort of profit or growth. And the owners of the money aren't the only ones who end up with a profit. Their money is made available as loans and investment which give other people without money the opportunity to start businesses, create more jobs, etc. In other words, private funds crate sustainable wealth generation, growth, relatively permanent jobs, and increasing numbers of jobs whereas when the government spends money it might give one person a job, but that person isn't generating any profit for the state so that the state can hire more people later. I really don't care how much money the top 1%, or whatever, of earners makes, but if taxing them more leads to less economic growth, fewer jobs, etc, for everyone then just based on pure cause-and-effect it's hardly beneficial to the other 99% if they end up losing more in terms of earning opportunities than they gain in wealth "redistribution". So it would be best if people were more interested in cause and effect and performing an actual cost-benefit analysis on this than being envious of people who are wealthier than they are. Another issue is that when you raise taxes at the state level people can just leave and take their money and their business to other states rather easily. You have to compete with other states in terms of tax rates. Tax revenue can significantly decline even when tax rates increase.
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Sun, Apr 17, 2011 : 3:15 a.m.
"Another issue is that when you raise taxes at the state level people can just leave and take their money and their business to other states rather easily." If that were true, people would be moving to Michigan rather than leaving it, and our economy would be thriving. Michigan has one of the lowest tax rates in the nation and, of the 43 states that have an across-the-board income tax, it is one of only 8 that does not have a graduated tax. Source: <a href="http://www.taxadmin.org/fta/rate/ind_inc.pdf" rel='nofollow'>http://www.taxadmin.org/fta/rate/ind_inc.pdf</a> Good Night and Good Luck
Gorc
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 11:19 p.m.
Robert I am giving you a standing ovation right now. I have a problem when the accumulative jobs of the Federal, all States, and all the local governments employee is over 22 million people in our country. And we have only 11 million manufacturing jobs...it's crazy that the government is a growth industry and that the private sector is limping along.
Basic Bob
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 4:52 p.m.
Fidel Castro could fix this problem. Do you think he would run for governor?
Mike Ball
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 4:45 p.m.
"Perhaps his ideas about business taxation are more right than wrong. Time will tell if that is the case..." Time has told, loudly and clearly, and the facts are decidedly not in favor of Mr. Snyder's ideas. Since the disaster of Reaganomics, through the pillaging of Michigan by John Engler, and the relentless assault on the middle class by Bush II and the current crop of republicans, we have seen repeatedly that handing tax cuts or cash subsidies to corporations or to the very wealthy never does "trickle down." They simply pocket the cash, usually without so much as a "thank you." No jobs are created, and there is no benefit to the rest of the world - unless you consider the people who sell them their platinum salt shakers. It is puzzling that otherwise intelligent people, like Rick Snyder and his supporters who are attacking Dr. Gluckstein Saxe here, are still willing to buy this outrageous lie.
snoopdog
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 4:08 p.m.
"What supports democracy more and makes for the best service to the public? Citizens who can count on contracts made being fulfilled or citizen employees who can't plan their survival ahead because their employer believes that contracts are only that "much paper"? " "However the question "what is fair" when it comes to public policy/tax policy is an incomplete and somewhat misleading one." Dr. Etta, You ask "what is fair" ? I can tell you what is not "fair". As a taxpayer who employs public teachers through taxation of my income, it is not fair that they have pensions that allow them 30 years and out. It is not fair that they have and get "Cadillac" healthcare till the day they die. It is not fair that they get 9-12 plus sick days a year, it is not fair that they get personal days off, professional days off, step raises every couple years. It is not fair that they pay almost nothing toward their health care (Saline teachers pay ZERO toward their healthcare. It is not fair that taxpayers who in 2011 have none of these benefits are called "hateful" and "selfish" as they ask teachers and other union state employees to do their fair share to reduce costs and save public education. Good Day
Erica
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 6:36 a.m.
Its also probably not fair that they have to fight for their position every single year and never know if they will be hired on again in the fall. What I believe is unfair is that the children are most hurt by these cuts. What did they do to have their school closed or have their (supposedly) public education be ripped from their very grasp by those wishing to gain a few extra bucks this year. Saving public education is NOT about raising benefits for teachers it is about improving education for CHILDREN. A better educated society is a "productive" one.
David Briegel
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 6:37 p.m.
1bit, Now that is the right attitude. Instead of bringing everyone down in a downward spiral, America used to lift everyone up to better standards. No longer will America be that shining city on the hill. It seems to be the vision to bring America down to Chinese standards! Instead of everyone pulling in an upward direction we are going down. Our citizens should not have to worry about health care or retirement while protecting the privilege of a few!
1bit
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 6:21 p.m.
The counterargument is that maybe the problem isn't what the teacher's get, it's what the rest of us don't get.
Kara
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 5:27 p.m.
Do you really want the people who teach/raise Michigan's children to be poor, unhealthy, uneducated people? If we take away all the perks of being a teacher, WHO will want to be a teacher anymore? Only the people who don't have any college loans to pay off, which means they certainly aren't as qualified to teach as the ones we currently have. If teachers don't have healthcare or sick days, they will have to come to work sick. And that means they pass that sickness onto the children. Do we want that? Further, I don't know of any teacher who actually uses all of those sick days anyway, if your number is even accurate. They don't get cadillac healthcare until the day they die. So we are cutting costs to education to make the conditions for teachers worse? Do you not realize that that is the LAST thing that is going to change? Opportunities for children will disappear way before teachers' healthcare and sick days.
ArgoC
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 3:29 p.m.
I would like to see the pain of what's coming spread fairly. Seems like the wealthy end of the spectrum will be smiling all the way through the transition we have to go through.
Gorc
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 2:27 p.m.
I'm middle income earner and I don't believe it's "fair" that my hard earned dollars (taxes) are redistributed to less productive citizens in our society. It is difficult enough for me to take care of my families current financial needs and prepare for our future needs as well when to much of my earned income is taxed. I can prosper without the governments help and it is only "fair" that rest of society does the same. I hope Gov. Snyder keeps cutting cost and if he does he'll get my vote for four more years.
Erica
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 6:29 a.m.
What "key factor" are you speaking of? Are you referencing productivity as a sign of wealth? Let me propose this to you. Medical researchers are some of the least paid, most productive people in our state and when they ask for a government grant to do MEDICAL RESEARCH (which benefits your family to be sure) and are turned down because there is no money being allocated to that field right now are they simply being unproductive? Or perhaps a poor high school graduate who has excellent grades and work ethic is forced out of college because they are no longer receiving a much needed student grant that was once funding by the tax on businesses. Is that person also lazy in your eyes?
Gorc
Sun, Apr 17, 2011 : 12:35 p.m.
It's a key factor that allows me to make greater opportunities and security for my family.
Kara
Sun, Apr 17, 2011 : 1:16 a.m.
Is productivity only defined by how much money someone makes?
Moscow On The Huron
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 2:17 p.m.
Gov. Snyder is doing the people's work. Well, the work of the people who want a future for Michigan, at least. Just one hour east of here is a nice, Socialist haven for the rest of you. It's not that far of a dive. You can get there on less than one tank of overpriced, foreign gasoline.
John
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 6:15 p.m.
Gov. Snyder is doing the rich people's work. Fixed that for you.
gsorter
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 2:16 p.m.
Is it fair that businesses in Michigan are taxed on REVENUE, not profits, with the MBT? Is it fair that a company could be bleeding red ink, and still get stuck with a big tax on that money-losing revenue. Is it fair that Michigan has a quadruple whammy with a business tax (MBT), income tax, sales tax, AND 2%-3% annual property tax? Almost no other state has all these taxes in place. I do believe it is fair that the Governors plan includes a 6% INCOME tax on businesses, which is actually higher than the personal tax rate.
towny
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 2:12 p.m.
The Corporate Lobbyists are the real culprit to the demise of this nation and government. That's right lobbyist's control this government. The corporate oil lobbyists especially. This oil dependent nation should of been promoting alternative energy 30 or 40 years ago. Except, for the oil lobbyist's control of our government. You want to look deep look at the real problem look at the effect this oil dependence has had on this country.
Townie
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 2:04 p.m.
Rick's budget is in line with all the other Republicans in other states and at the national: heavily favoring the wealthiest and corporations. Rick's rich, his friends are rich so this seems totally fair. No surprise there - that's their core constituency, the folks who give them the biggest campaign contributions. Remember Bush joking at a campaign stop (with an dinner audience of wealthy people who had paid thousands to be there) about 'the have and have mores'. He thought it was really funny. The wealthiest and corporations have been able to shift the burden of taxes from themselves to the middle class and lower income folks. To them it's 'fair'. It never ceases to amaze me that there are folks who have seen their incomes stagnate (and working harder for less) continue to support this. I guess if you ignore the facts you get to pay. Our democracy has become a plutocracy and on one seems to notice.
David Briegel
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 1:39 p.m.
Further, the recent lament of the privileged against unions bargaining with politicians MUST be compared with the wealthy contributing in a now unlimited manner to the same politicians who determine the level of "fairness/unfairness" in our tax structure. We are expected to believe that their "support" of our public officials is to buy good govt rather than to curry favor for their own wealth protection. None of which has anything to do with truth, justice and the former American way!
David Briegel
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 1:30 p.m.
For far too long we have had to listen to the failed mythology of trickle down. Somehow if we just give more to the privileged few that their benevolence will all just trickle down and everything will be just wonderful. Well, with the lowest tax rates in the last 60 years, the greatest profits in the modern era and the largest accumulation of wealth in modern times we are right here in the ruins of the abject failure of that philosophy. Reagan raised taxes and we boomed. Clinton raised taxes and we boomed. Bush cut taxes and we crashed! At some point you have to question the sanity of that philosophy. Quit pretending that tax fairness is an extreme position. We always talk about how much is paid by the wealthy. Yet, the Effective Tax Rate is no where near what a middle class worker pays. This system is simply not fair. There is no desire to "eat the rich" or imprison the rich. Those analogies are not helpful. Graduated tax is required with fewer deductions and limits on deductions. There is nothing radical or socilaist about tax fairness.
Erica
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 6:20 a.m.
I totally agree with you in every respect. @towny: Capitalism has just become a more neutral term for feudalism. Is that any better or worse than socialism? In my mind both are failed systems of government. If you look at the facts we are no longer living in a true capitalist society (and perhaps never were) because the large conglomerate corporations are in control of everything. They may not seem like monopolies because they work under several different names, but that is what they are.
David Briegel
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 5:25 p.m.
Then Ronnie Reagan was "unfair". We seemed to do well then. Just more illogic. Just keep beleiving the same illogic and you will see a revolution sooner. Let 'em eat cake is not a long lasting philosophy!
towny
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 1:38 p.m.
It is both radical and socilist. A graduated Tax system is unfair. Opinions, everyone has one.
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 1:29 p.m.
If Snyder's plan isn't fair, what is? Tax the rich? What is "rich"? How much should they be taxed? Just saying "it's not fair" isn't enough; you have to provide alternatives. What does your "fair" budget plan look like? Forget the loaded words "tax the rich" How about taxing me and all like me? My state income taxes are set to go DOWN this year, as are those for all us EXCEPT the elderly and the poor. Their taxes will go up. And my military pension will remain untaxed. I make out like a bandit with the governor's budget. Hardly "fair". Good Night and Good Luck
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 7:50 p.m.
I see we have graduates of Harvard Business School posting here. One person writing a larger check will not solve the problem. Ten million citizens paying $100 more per year (< $2 per week) will go a long way toward solving the state's fiscal problems. I'm willing to make that sacrifice (in my case, about $8/week for my family) in order to help my state to recover. Too bad that others are not. Good Night and Good Luck
Mick52
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 7:25 p.m.
If your situation makes you feel bad, you can pay more in taxes. They will accept it.
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 6:16 p.m.
Ferd: thanks Stun: another typically brilliant post. Good Night and Good Luck
stunhsif
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 6:04 p.m.
If you are guilt ridden ERMG why don't you get out your checkbook and send in some money , make it payable to "The State Of Michigan" ?
ferdcom
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 4:01 p.m.
I agree with you (unusual for me). However, I am one of those "elderly" whose taxes will go up because I have been making out like a bandit for years. I have income from social security and investments of over $80.000 a year and since retirement income has been mostly exempt I pay less than $1,000 a year on average in state income taxes. Less than a working family with half the income. Not all retirees are starving old coots who deserve a free ride.
towny
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 1:24 p.m.
It's called Capitalism. Give it a try. Everyone can play. That's fair.
Aaron Wolf
Sun, Apr 17, 2011 : 8:26 p.m.
How utopian an ideal. Too bad that reality is the more important subject for discussion to actually pragmatic folks. The capitalist utopia is as much a myth as the socialist one.
joe.blow
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 1:18 p.m.
New plan. Imprison the top 10,000 households in America and divide it to the bottom 150 million households. You'd see that the bottom 150 million would instantly become productive members of society, because it wasn't a lack of effort and motivation that was keeping them down, it was a lack of free money. Free money to all, that's what we need in this country!
Kara
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 5:06 p.m.
So you think that people are poor just because they are lazy? Really? How about you pull your head out of the dirt and realize that your life would be far less luxurious without those 150 million households doing the work you refuse to do. Sure some of them are on welfare, but do you really think people would rather be on welfare than be able to work at a job that gives them a living wage? Being on welfare is barely living.
joe.blow
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 4:38 p.m.
Adam, stop speaking with logic, it's about helping those who are too lazy to help themselves and punishing those who worked hard. We'll just take more money from the rich to pay for the prisons. But, we'll have to take a lot of money, because the guards will need big union bucks.
Adam Jaskiewicz
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 3:09 p.m.
Who would pay for the prisons if the top 10,000 taxpayers were in prison?
joe.blow
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 1:46 p.m.
Thank God, the biggest insult anyone could ever give me would be accusing me of voting Obama.
towny
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 1:32 p.m.
I caught it just giving it back.
joe.blow
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 1:31 p.m.
@towny. lol, I was hoping people would catch the sarcasm.
towny
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 1:21 p.m.
You must be a Democrat. Must of voted for Obama.
joe.blow
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 1:12 p.m.
I've e-mailed his campaign several times telling him to keep up the good work! Everyone wants a neutral budget, but no one is willing to have something they like cut, he's willing to make the hard decisions. FOUR MORE YEARS!!!!
towny
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 12:37 p.m.
What is fair to one might not be fair to another. Gov. Snyder is faced with many difficult decisions to right this state from a long road of bad management. In the end most will see that the decisions made concerning this state of michigan are needed and will prove to be what is needed to make this state competitive again. Unfortunately, many of gov. snyder's decisions will not be favorable to many individuals. We have the right person in charge now who will make the difficult decisions needed. The Governor has said all along he will run this state like a business. You have to look around and open your eyes the same old same old is and has not been working. Look at what has become of this once strong and beautiful state of michigan. We are last or close to last in many of this nations economic ratings and standards. With Gain there will be a little Pain
Kara
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 5:40 p.m.
Towny, you have no idea if what Snyder is doing will "prove to be what is needed to make this state competitive again." No one does. He's not running the state any different than any other politician: cuts, cuts, cuts. But I guess politics is a business in itself, so technically he didn't flat-out lie. Making the rich richer when most of Michigan is poor does not seem like the answer. If we want a thriving state, let's do something about Detroit. If we rebuild Detroit it will create lots more jobs and will boost our economy by making Michigan a place people want to move to/stay in. But you're totally right about the fair thing--but there is a Form of Fair which could be fair to everyone, if people would care about their fellow men instead of only themselves.
John B.
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 12:32 p.m.
Our (effective, net) Income Tax rates in this country are very low. Just look anywhere else in the developed world. The top 400 households in the USA make as much money each year as the bottom 150 MILLION households. Those 400 people have accumulated wealth at a staggering rate over the past thirty years, accelerating greatly since he year 2000. They are severely undertaxed. It has been the largest money grab of the past century, at the expense of everyone else. What we have right now is a government by, of, and for the top 1-2% of our citizens, the rest of us be damned. Is that fair? Is it appropriate?
David Briegel
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 9:15 p.m.
You know what Don, a lot of us do. Furthermore a lot of us don't mind paying our way in a society from which we have benefitted so greatly. That's the rub with all the greedy that only want more and to heck with the rest of society. You have to be able to look back and look down. That is the dilemma we face in a nutshell.
DonBee
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 7:57 p.m.
From a Michigan budget standpoint, anyone know how many of those 400 households are resident in the state? If the answer is zero, then this will not help the Michigan tax situation. Jeff Irwin wants to raise taxes on people who earn the top 20 percent in income in the state. He says they are the rich people. According to the census bureau, the top 20 percent of the households for income starts at about $80,000 a year. If your household makes $80,000 a year, do you feel rich?
joe.blow
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 1:14 p.m.
Do you like extremes at all? I bet the top 100 Chinese households makes more than 90% of the world combined. We should just imprison the top 400 households in this country and take their money and give it to the bottom 150 million. I'm sure the bottom 150 million will change their lives around because it wasn't a lack of motivation and effort, it was a lack of free money that kept them down.
towny
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 1:11 p.m.
Sounds like communism to me. Confiscate personal property.
5c0++ H4d13y
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 1:05 p.m.
"The top 400 households in the USA make as much money each year as the bottom 150 MILLION households." So true. The government should fix this by confiscating personal property of private individuals with the only justification being that "it's not fair". ;-( As a first step we need to repeal the Bill of Right. It just gets in the way.
Adam Jaskiewicz
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 1:03 p.m.
I wouldn't say that it is. But I sure as heck don't know what the answer is. Sounds like you do, so at what rate would you tax the top 2%?
towny
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 12:51 p.m.
It's called Capitalism. Give it a try. Everyone can play. That's fair.
Adam Jaskiewicz
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 12:07 p.m.
If Snyder's plan isn't fair, what is? Tax the rich? What is "rich"? How much should they be taxed? Just saying "it's not fair" isn't enough; you have to provide alternatives. What does your "fair" budget plan look like?
John
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 6:33 p.m.
here you go Adam <a href="http://lmgtfy.com/?q=fairtax" rel='nofollow'>http://lmgtfy.com/?q=fairtax</a>
Macabre Sunset
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 1:46 p.m.
I believe Etta's "fair" tax plan means less taxes for Etta, more for everyone else.