Democrats push for taxing internet sales
- Thread starter Captain Sparrow
- Start date
- Status
Captain Sparrow
Banned
It's easy to sit behind your computer and say what could be cut from the federal budget. It's not that easy. Is the government as efficient as it should be? No. I don't believe anyone could ever accomplish such a goal. Do we need to add another factor into this crisis with the baby boomers by cutting social security and medicare? NO.
The Bush tax created what benefit? The national debt nearly doubled on his watch. Now we are in crisis mode and IT HAS TO BE FIXED PERIOD. You can cut, but from where?
As much as I believe you should be able to make whatever you want in America, I believe it is the benefit of the wealthy to be taxed higher. With the greed over these past few years, the wealth has stayed with a few and when the money ran out all around them, their fortunes also took a tumble. Is a billionaire going to hurt that bad if he is taxed a bit higher? Is he going to hurt if all his clientele can't afford to buy from him anymore? History shows we used to have MUCH higher tax rates.
Imagine if we didn't have to pay over 500 billion a year in interest on the debt? As far as I'm concerned, the rich caused this and now they should pay it back. There really isn't many options to fix this problem.
The Bush tax created what benefit? The national debt nearly doubled on his watch. Now we are in crisis mode and IT HAS TO BE FIXED PERIOD. You can cut, but from where?
As much as I believe you should be able to make whatever you want in America, I believe it is the benefit of the wealthy to be taxed higher. With the greed over these past few years, the wealth has stayed with a few and when the money ran out all around them, their fortunes also took a tumble. Is a billionaire going to hurt that bad if he is taxed a bit higher? Is he going to hurt if all his clientele can't afford to buy from him anymore? History shows we used to have MUCH higher tax rates.
Imagine if we didn't have to pay over 500 billion a year in interest on the debt? As far as I'm concerned, the rich caused this and now they should pay it back. There really isn't many options to fix this problem.
Panther ~PantherLotus said:
you're quick to point out those hoping this doesn't pass and go on the offensive in asking how to curtail spending but yet don't offer of your advice in the 2-3 posts of which you've called people out on.
Gaborn above has actually outlined some fairly reasonable spending reductions and I'm curious if you have any that are as good if not better?
The argument of this being implemented by a government who not only cannot balance a budget but are looking to expand revenue streams due to lack of taxes coming in due to lost jobs is scary. Now me personally.. I don't give a shit who is to blame, but the people taking actions are the ones that define the outcome. Adding yet another tax on people is quite frankly the most absurd thing the United States Government could do, but it's certainly not the last stupid move by them in a long shot.
As for myself... Living in the Northwest has the perks of no sales tax but bend over and touch the pavement taxes on property and income. The government will always get it's money somehow but to me taxing goods that in most states you already pay the state tax + shipping... An additional tax that uncle Sam doesn't need just doesn't make any sense.
I do have a question tho for those in the EU that pay the VAT.. What's the benefit that you see from paying it? Is it for social services such as medical, police and fire? Or is it simply to cover government shortfall?
Jason's Ultimatum said:
Yes, I'll go into a simple explanation. If a corporate tax is abolished, you instantly change the dynamics of the financial actions of every singly company operating or contemplating operations in the US.
Re-investments gain much more attractiveness against actions benefiting the stockholder in the short term, such as dividends. It gives further reason for a corporations actions to benefit society as a hole rather than stock holders.
Clearly getting rid of the corporate income tax would increase the desire of companies to establish a presence in the US.
It would be a fairly instant way of removing politicians from providing subsidies to corporations, creating a more competitive market, rather than subsidizing shit like tax credits for Exxon.
Make high levels of debt less attractive, as interest expense it tax deductible. Once again this is prove long term rather than short term growth.
It would give small businesses more of a fighting chance, as while the corporate tax rate if progressive that does not account for the fact that small businesses do not often have the resources to navigate the system, installing an inherit benefit to large companies.
Let me amend the corporate income tax though, it should still exist once a corporation's revenues reach 1% of GDP, then in the interest of economic diversity the corporation should state to be taxed with the idea of stifling its growth.
PantherLotus
Professional Schmuck
Gaborn said:
Let me get this straight:
1. Surrender defensive positions and/or wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, South Korea, Germany, Japan, UAE, etc? How do you suppose we should protect our national interests in world peace? In the few you mentioned alone, Our South Korean base is there as a deterrent to North Korea. Do you believe that deterrent isn't needed?
2. Dismantle the Department of Education and let states fund their own expense? How do you suppose Mississippi, Alabama, Kentucky, Arkansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Idaho, and North & South Dakota would survive without national funding? Or are you supposing they wouldn't? Do you not believe a national education system is the key to maintaining our international leadership in post-secondary education?
3. We should legalize and allow a federal sales tax on Marijuana? You're for a national sales tax? Color me surprised. Are you for the restriction of the good to specific citizens (21+), increased spending in regulating the industry and policing the roads for imbibed citizens?
4. We should pull out of the UN? Why? Do you understand the implication of that statement?
Should you be taken seriously, I would caution those that read your nonsense that your ideas would reduce the United States to an unimagined state of isolation, widespread poverty, social disparity, and general anarchy. And that's not even mentioning the political effects of deserting South Korea, Japan, and the Middle East. :lol
Captain Sparrow
Banned
BobLoblaw said:
I feel this chart needs to be combined with this GDP chart
It's like saying walmart as a whole corporation spends way more in cashiers than my one local grocery shop. Apples to oranges.
Sure we spend more than we should, but that chart fails to display just how big we are.
We have 18% of the world GDP and 48% of the world military spending....Captain Sparrow said:I feel this chart needs to be combined with this GDP chart
It's like saying walmart as a whole corporation spends way more in cashiers than my one local grocery shop. Apples to oranges.
Sure we spend more than we should, but that chart fails to display just how big we are.
Jason's Ultimatum
Member
More than half of corporations paid no taxes during a certain period of time:
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1249465620080812
Also, small businesses create over 70% of the jobs in this country, so the best solution is to make sure small business continue to flourish and encourage entrepreneurship.
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1249465620080812
Also, small businesses create over 70% of the jobs in this country, so the best solution is to make sure small business continue to flourish and encourage entrepreneurship.
Jason's Ultimatum said:
And that has proven to be a very bad thing, the main reason for our slipping into the business cycle becoming more violent and the longer we wait to correct the imbalance, it should be %50 or equal to savings, the more painful the Inevitable Correction Will Be.
Jason's Ultimatum said:
From the article.
The report did not name any companies. The GAO said corporations escaped paying federal income taxes for a variety of reasons including operating losses, tax credits and an ability to use transactions within the company to shift income to low tax countries
Small business do not have access to most of of the capabilities that allow this, putting them at a significant disadvantage.
Pctx said:
the entire point is that most people DON'T pay the state taxes. I certainly don't when i buy things from Amazon.
unless you are speaking of taxes in general and not specifically sales tax, then thats a whole different argument of taxing on a consumption based model and we've had a misunderstanding.
PantherLotus
Professional Schmuck
Pctx said:
1. I don't offer advice on how the United States government should raise revenues and cut spending because it's an extremely complex issue that requires spending years looking at the various economic, political, and theoretical realities of making changes to our tax codes, spending habits, and military obligations throughout the world. I don't offer advice because I'm not qualified, and more specifically, I point out that others that just chiming in with tired political memes aren't actually thinking about what they're saying. Or:
2. Which one of Gaborn's "ideas" were fairly reasonable to you? Dropping out of the UN, abandoning our military outposts throughout the world, or dismantling the Department of Education?
3. Is adding a tax REALLY the most "absurd thing the US government could do?" I can think of several others.
4. Your comments about "the government always getting its money" didn't make any sense to me.
PantherLotus said:
I believe that's the purpose of the UN, we can't afford nor is it our responsibility to do that job in perpetuity.
"our leadership in post secondary education"? I assume you're not including the Sciences in that fatuous statement. We've been declining across the board for YEARS to countries like Japan in the area of education. States should absolutely set their own policy and arrange their own budget to care for their own people. Getting Mississippi, Alabama et al off the federal teat might actually force the states to provide more of their own money for education, as it is too much of it is subsidized by the federal government which provides a disincentive to improve standards.
On the issue of marijuana? Yes I am for a "national sales tax" on that product. Of course I'm for an age limit on marijuana sales, whether 18 or 21 or somewhere in between. As for "increased spending on regulating the industy and policing the roads for imbibed citizens" the first is certainly a much smaller expense than the cost of maintaining the federal war on pot and the second is a decision that should be left up to the states themselves.
EDIT: I should add that I'm NOT for restricting marijuana by age for a patient if a licensed doctor feels it's useful. for example
Yes. Do you understand how expensive our UN obligations are? We're around 23% of their budget as it is, we can't afford that anymore.
Japan? Allow them to create their own army and provide them the incentive to do so. As it is they already resent our base on Okinawa.
slidewinder
Banned
The "business cycle" has become more violent purely because it's in the (short-term) interest of the financial sector of our economy to make it so. And that bit in the parentheses is the real Big Problem with our economy in general, and it'd only be exacerbated by the kind of corporation-pleasing answers you're offering.Gallbaro said:
PantherLotus
Professional Schmuck
Hey guys what do you suppose the definition of a small business is? Just making sure you know that in the US, it means "less than 500 employees and under $7 MILLION in revenue." Not exactly Mom & Pop's Gamecube Hut.
ClosingADoor
Member
Jason's Ultimatum said:
But they pay peoples salaries, and those are taxed. And sales != profit.
JoeBoy101 said:
Of course, and many of those deficits are at least partly due to declining sales tax revenue due to the shift in purchasing patterns for big-ticket items to internet retailers. There are a host of other issues too (underfunded, inflated pensions, outstanding debt from bond issues, etc), but the benefit of state sales tax is you have a much stronger voice in shaping how they are spent. The problem is it seems like 90% of Americans (at least young ones) pretend local politics don't exist and only care about bitching about the federal government (see: this thread).
Jason's Ultimatum
Member
Gallbaro said:
Okay, and? Companies like GE and MS are paying hardly any taxes due to putting their profits in foreign countries with low tax rates. The problem is the loopholes that needs to be closed.
Seriously, you Republicans make me sick when it comes to defending big corporations who outsource labor while destroying jobs within the country just so the CEOs can buy a few extra yahts and sip margaritas in the tropical islands.
That is a small business- usually very localized or very few offices and limited in the amount of capital they can acquire.PantherLotus said:
Gaborn said:
Sadly, this would not be the case in KY at least. Outside of Lexington & Louisville, Kentuckians would be doomed if the lost federal moola.
Kentucky has repeatedly shown a priority for tobacco, horses, & tax cuts for self employed businessmen.
PantherLotus said:
1. So we should assume you like our current wars? The vast majority of U.S. bases don't defend anything, including the one in South Korea. Kim Jong isn't afraid of a base. He is afraid of going into war against half the world
2. They would do what they do know. Fund education through property taxes. Do you know how education funding works. Your rebuttal is a baseless generalizations of a bunch of states you clearly know nothing about. NCLB has been a disaster, so I also don't understand why you are cheerleading initiatives like that.
3. So you support the drug war. Color me suprised.
4. Do you? The UN is a drain on many of our military resources since they are allowed to use them
How you can get widespread proverty, isolation and anarchy from reformed drug laws, more school choice and less military bases is astounding. Talk about Hyperbole
prodystopian
Member
PantherLotus said:
While this is true, a company I used to work for made their money by essentially underbidding the larger defense contractors like Lockheed, etc. When I say underbidding, I don't mean making the projects worse. Most were improvements, but the legacy programs were just getting too big, so the company was able to do the same job much cheaper.
I don't particularly like the company I was working for, but I want to point out that even on the higher end of that spectrum, the small businesses do provide some excellent competition to much larger corporations.
PantherLotus
Professional Schmuck
Gaborn said:
1. Why would you suggest surrendering our hard-fought military positions throughout the world and say that's the UN's job? The UN's job is not to protect our assets. Do you know why we have a military base in Germany? South Korea? Japan? UAE/Iraq/Afghanistan? Do you understand the financial cost of unrest, even if we are not militarily involved?
2. You don't know what post-secondary education is, first of all, which probably speaks to your education. (lol). Second, our institutions still rank among the highest in the world, and in fact, occupy seven of the top 10 positions on the planet. More importantly and perhaps more illuminative of our dominance, many of our recent nobel prize winners are actually foreign born. "Aha!", you must be thinking, right? Actually, that indicates that our nation is STILL the destination for the finest minds in the world who come for our wonderful university system and stay for the freedom to pursue research on their own.
Your wandering thoughts on letting states like Alabama and Mississippi fund their own education systems are simply nonsense, not to mention cruel.
3. It's funny to me that you're such an ass-hat teabagger against taxes and everything but you're for a national sales tax on pot. That's all. Otherwise I don't really disagree.
4. 23% of their budget? What % is that of our budget? Why can't we afford that any more? Why are we in it in the first place? Do you know what the UN actually is and what it does?
5. Japan. Why are we in Japan, Gaborn? Sometimes I wonder if you finished high school.
You're already required to report taxable purchases on your tax return if you haven't already paid the sales tax at the time of purchase.
Of course, no one does it.
The proposed changes are simply:
1) States, get your shit together so online merchants can't say "But it's too complicated to figure it all out for every state/zipcode/etc.!".
2) Merchants, fuck you. Do it.
Also, in this thread Gaborn has perfectly logical and reasonable suggestions that will never be implemented because people are dumb.
The US is broke because we're spending too much on other countries and individual states that need to take care of themselves.
Shit might happen? Too bad. There isn't an infinite amount of money, despite the fact that the government spends, spends, spends, like there is. You can give infinite handouts of puppies and rainbows and security blankets when you have a magic wand.
Of course, no one does it.
The proposed changes are simply:
1) States, get your shit together so online merchants can't say "But it's too complicated to figure it all out for every state/zipcode/etc.!".
2) Merchants, fuck you. Do it.
Also, in this thread Gaborn has perfectly logical and reasonable suggestions that will never be implemented because people are dumb.
The US is broke because we're spending too much on other countries and individual states that need to take care of themselves.
Shit might happen? Too bad. There isn't an infinite amount of money, despite the fact that the government spends, spends, spends, like there is. You can give infinite handouts of puppies and rainbows and security blankets when you have a magic wand.
gcubed said:
Two different things you're talking about.
I'm talking about the fact that most people 2/3 or greater pay state taxes which include sales tax.
This proposal would then end up "taxing" the purchases on Amazon or Newegg etc. of which we currently don't currently pay. My comment earlier about keeping things competitive is at the heart of this issue. Big or small businesses thrive on online orders and the ability to not have goods taxed, doing so would hurt business and ultimately as the consumer, we lose.
In terms of your comment on most people not paying state taxes... well, that's what the IRS is for isn't it?
PantherLotus said:
1.) Dogding but that's fine. I agree that making an educated opinion on the US government either here or else where is generally a long winded talk or debate which is why we have PoliGAF right?
2.) The one you left out which was tax on medical marry jane. I would also add that in order to appease everyone, the flat tax makes more sense in order to enforce and make sure everyone is paying their fair share as that seems to be the anthem being shouted from Washington as of late.
3.) More taxes in a time like this? yes. Absurd.
4.) Government getting money out of the tax payer is inevitable and will also happen. Taxes or policies, one way or the other, they'll find a way.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
This is a difference of opinion, not a difference of intelligence. Don't insult him like that, it's not nice.PantherLotus said:
PantherLotus said:
"our assets"? Seriously? It's not the US's job to be the world's police force. we can't nor should we be everywhere around the world.
I think your "secondary education" point is short sighted though. The DOE's primary concern is primary education, that's where the majority of it's funding goes and it's failing. The literacy rate in the US has been steadily declining for years. I think community colleges as an example do a great job in the US but that's not really the major focus of the DOE, although it is a factor in their existence.
Literacy rates have been declining essentially since the DOE was created in 1979. I'm not saying the DOE is to blame but it's an odd coincidence and the current system doesn't seem to be doing Missiissippi much good.
Nice, personal attacks. I find that usually speaks to the education level of the person I'm speaking with as well.
Yes I know what it is and what it does. Assuming that I'm ignorant because you disagree with me on a policy issue speaks more to your close minded narrow world than mine.
Because of WW2. But frankly, I'm not exactly worried if the Japanese are left alone by the US they're suddenly going to go crazy nationalistic and try to take over SE Asia for the glory of the Emperor again.
PantherLotus
Professional Schmuck
avatar299 said:
1. Not at all, but I understand the long-term implications of maintaining bases throughout the world. I mean, which of us hasn't played Civilization IV? Two side notes to this point--you said that KJI isn't afraid of a base. That's technically not true, or at least not provable, since we wouldn't know unless it was gone. I assert that if we weren't there, he would move to occupy and do as much damage as quickly as possible before pulling out, Sadaam-retreating-from-Kuwait-style. Second, it's funny you mention "half the world" in this point but you are against our membership in the UN.
2. No lies, I'm not an expert on how public schools are funded in every state--and I definitely don't (and didn't) support No Child Left Behind or its derivations. However, I do know that without federal funding, our public school systems throughout our many poorer states would probably collapse. Otherwise, why dismantle the DOE? Should there be no national standard of education?
3. Not at all. Just pointing out the funny when conservatives start wishing for national taxes and the dismantling of programs that have historically hurt minorities the worst.
4. How much of a drain on our military resources is the UN?
Jason's Ultimatum said:
But if you get rid of Corporate Income tax, guess what they have no incentive to "hide" their income, much lesser incentive to shift jobs over seas and a much greater incentive to reinvest in their companies rather then distribute dividends.
Are you really so thick headed.
Aside from that empirical studies have shown a government cannot expect to collect in taxes more than %20 of GDP, and that is already past a point of diminishing returns, as in the additional taxes hurt economic growth.
i'm more intrigued by the thought that we should simultaneously reduce our military footprint and ourselves as the global cop since, paraphrasing here, the UN serves that function (no, it doesn't), but also refuse to fund the UN since we can't afford it.kingkitty said:
so wrong, but so much fun to read.
slidewinder
Banned
If you were literate, you would notice that that is one of those Mechanical Turk-generated PageRank wormhole sites.Gaborn said:
PantherLotus
Professional Schmuck
Pctx said:
1. I stand by my assertion that it's much easier to say "cut spending!" than it is to actually name substantial cuts that are politically or militarily possible. I just like pointing out ignorant blathering.
2. I'm for legalizing and taxing pot. It's obvious and overdue. The rest of Gaborn's ideas are libertarian utopian ideas that could never work in today's geopolitical environment, or any, for that matter. More, the flat tax is one of the Right's favorite pet ideas, mainly because it would cut taxes on the wealthiest Americans while increasing taxes on the very poorest. Combine that with cutting education spending and we're envisioning a world where we refuse to educate the poorest of the poor and then punish them economically for being uneducated. Awesome!
3. It's been proven time and again that cutting taxes during a recession/depression is actually the most absurd thing a government can do. I don't know the result of the reciprocal, though. Just pointing out the hyperbole of "the most absurd thing a government could do," when we were barely 8 million votes and a heart attack away from having a Sarah Palin Presidency.
4. Cute, but inaccurate. The historical precedent has been that the wealthiest Americans and members of the largest companies, firms, and corporations are the ones that will continue to find loopholes, tax breaks, and ways to get out of paying their fare share. It might surprise you to know that the wealthy benefit the most from the government, but it's true.
SlipperySlope
Banned
TomServo said:
Agreed totally. It's what they do. It's how they convince the public that the spending needs to stay. It's also sad that most of the public falls for the bullshit.
Gaborn said:
What is that, some kind of joke website? Every indication is that overall literacy and educational attainment in the US has steadily increased over the past 60 years or so, with the high school graduation rate peaking at around 90% of the population or so since the late-70s. There has also been a considerable increase in the number of college graduates as well.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Educational_attainment.jpg
America is vastly more well-educated than it was 50 or 100 years ago, we're just more exposed to how dumb other people are because of mass media (Jaywalking, etc) so everyone thinks people are getting dumber.
Gaborn said:
Ah first off correlation doesnt automatically mean causation. Second, the reason you saw a decline in the numbers after 1979 primarily had to do with the way literacy was calculated. Prior to the early 1980s literacy was defined solely by the ability to read and write in English or some other language. That was changed to basic simple literacy. The definition of literacy and how it was calculated was changed to be defined as "the ability to read, write and speak in English, and compute and solve problems at levels of proficiency necessary to function on the job, to function in society, to achieve one's goals, and to develop one's knowledge and potential."
As for your idea to defund federal school funding. I laugh at that being from Louisiana. All you will see here is more inequality between the rich that can afford private schools and the poor who will get stuck with the republican legislature that honestly wants to defund education completely and send everyone to religious schools to learn about creationism. They will continue to cut public schooling and fund the voucher programs that are currently working antithesis to improving our education in the state. The poor will get dumber, the middleclass will be forced into spending more money to get into private schools and the gap in education will just widen further here.
PantherLotus
Professional Schmuck
Gaborn said:
1. You do understand that the entire planet is "our assets," right? Jingoism, imperialism, and Neocon fantasies aside, your rich republican brethren would at least acknowledge that a peaceful planet is more profitable than one at war. There's a reason we want peace in Europe and East Asia, but we don't really care about Africa, you know? MONEY. Sure, it's cynical (and awful and inhumane and a disgusting position), but it's a necessary reality of maintaining the best and most reliable (and most profitable) marketplace in the world.
2/3. Literacy rates "are falling" for a number of reasons, though I caution against comparing it to the creation of the Department of Education. EDIT: I see this entire point of yours has been thoroughly chastised and doesn't require further comment on my part.
4. Sorry I called you an ass-hat teabagger. Did you graduate high school? I'm currently working on my MBA at a top-20 school in the nation.
5. If you're avoiding answering about the UN to point out that my questions are indeed assuming you're ignorance, you're both correct and still ignorant. I'll repeat the questions for those that care to answer them (and perhaps offer sufficient reasons for our withdrawal): What % is that of our budget? Why can't we afford that any more? Why are we in it in the first place? Do you know what the UN actually is and what it does?
6. Do you not believe that North Korea, China, and Russia pose no international thread now or in the forseeable future? That's...unimaginative of you.
1. Real life isn't CIV. I can't believe I had to type that. There are tons of implications with NK going to war, with or without a base. For 1, NK at war would cut off their aid, essentially starving its own people. Kim doesn't want that.PantherLotus said:
But fine, well keep the south korea base. What about the bases in Germany. The bases in South America. What are we protecting their. Having bases is an outdated model, with no benefit for us.It s a benefit to those countries becuase of the economic boost they give, but not really for us.
2. Before the DOE, The national standards were whatever colleges demanded. Even now the national standard is essentially what public universities demand. Even with the DOE gone, you can still have a national standard. Public schools wouldn't collapse because they aren't solely funded by the fed. They will continue to be funded by local and state taxes and still be poor then if they are now.
3. Why is that surprising. Conservatives have argued for things like the fair tax for years now.
Nerevar said:
Fact: according to the government's own statistics, 14% of the population in 2003 could not read.
According to this site the illiteracy rate was about .6% in 1979
PantherLotus said:
First, I'm not a Republican. I want peace in the world too, but we can't hold the entire world's hand indefinitely either, and suggesting that the only way to have peace is to have the US with a huge presence around the world seems to be a bit of a fallacy.
I've got a bachelor's degree in political science.
Off the top of my head I'm not sure. I did a search, and according to this article (yes it's a FOX news article, deal with it or find another source if you wish) "The U.S. share of the 2009-2010 peacekeeping package is just under 26 percent of the total, or $2.01 billion up about $120 million from the previous year. The share can grow to 27 percent before it hits a ceiling mandated by the U.S. Congress."
Even if it's "just" 2 billion or so a year that's not exactly nothing, even though our budgets are in the trillions. It's also worth noting the biggest cut I proposed was in raising the retirement age for SS benefits.
As for what it does? A bunch of social programs, some of which benefit people around the world, some of which don't. A bunch of committees on different topics which reach some consensus, some of them powerful and useful, some of them discredited (the number of human rights violators on the human rights commission of the UN is always hilarious and sad).
To the US specifically? Not... really, no they don't. To some of our allies? Sure, but I see China stepping in if North Korea invades South Korea, it's in China's interest to have peace on the Korean peninsula as much as it is ours. I also can't see us doing much to help Taiwan, the troops we have there, although substantial, would not be enough if China truly wanted to act. As for Russia? They can make a lot of noise now but they're still a 4th rate power now and recovering from the after effects of communism. The only reason Russia is a player at this point is because they still have a substantial number of nukes, but they're not going to use them because they know they'd be obliterated if they did.
Nerevar said:
Really? Its no stronger than my voice in how my federal dollars are being spent, which is somewhere around lilliputian in scope. And, you're right, there are a host of issues but a big one for many states is, ironically, one facing the Fed: entitlements. Happily, my state has most of its state pensions funded (just shy of 70% I believe), but California and other states are nowhere near that level.
I'm not adverse to an internet sales tax or even a tax raise so long as I know it won't go squandered. I'm seeing little on the State Level to suggest that and relatively nothing at the Federal level (if we started talking VATs, for example) to believe that.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked