New Jersey tries to scare away millionaires using Marylands tactics

[Specop 007]

I see this stuff, and I wonder how Dems rarely get critized as the party trying to force its morality on others. Forcing others to be charitable against their will certainly appears to be playing morality police.

Whos louder, 16,000 people or 600,000?

As they say, democracies only last until people realize they can vote themselves money.

 

[rudder]

Let us tax our millionares equally across all 50 States, and tell them all to pay their fair share our get the hell out of the country. And even if they can move their residence easily, such millionares may find moving their assets out of State is not quite as easy.

The moral of the story is you need a good capitalistic backbone to support this regimes socialist agenda. The short term action of enabling rules to prevent millionaires from moving around... will long term affect those tax revenue creators.

And since you speak of fair share... lets get rid of the earned income credit (EIC). If you are going to tax people more for doing hard work and earning more... on the flip side you can take away the program that let the people who work less and get less.

 

[PokerGuy]

What drives me nuts is that the morons pushing this legislation keep talking about "making people pay their fair share". Of course, there's no definition of "fair", to them it just always means "pay more". Stupid liberals.

 

[Exterous]

Thumbs Up for Gov. Christie. If a hammer is the only tool you have, then every problem looks like a nail. If you think more government spending is the solution to everything, then increased taxed and fees is your answer to every problem.

Agreed. The solution to our budget problems is not overtaxing a small % of the population. The interesting thing will be to see if those 600,000 outvote the 16,000 and put someone in office who does think overtaxing a small % is a good idea to pay for things for the 600,000

 

[Adrenaline]

Exactly! I'm tired of states taking money from the productive people of society so they can hand it out to people who didn't bother to complete high school.

I am surprised you did not throw in "and have 5-10 kids" at the end.

Awesome veto. People that work hard should not be punished for those who refuse to do anything.

 

[Rainsford]

No doubt the majority of that loss in millionaire filings results from the recession.

Come on, at least READ articles if you're going to post them. In fact, the whole point of the Maryland article was that getting extra tax money from rich people is a bad idea not because it's "unfair", but because it's a lot of extra money that can go away during a recession. Given that so much tax revenue would come from a relatively small number of people, the government income is more susceptible to even small changes in the economy.

 

[ayabe]

More bitching about something that affects none of you.

 

[Rainsford]

What drives me nuts is that the morons pushing this legislation keep talking about "making people pay their fair share". Of course, there's no definition of "fair", to them it just always means "pay more". Stupid liberals.

I agree with the stupid label, but mostly because people who say "pay their fair share" are using the wrong argument. Even with a flat tax rate, rich people pay many times the tax amount of poorer people...it's hard to call that "not their fair share" by any stretch of the imagination. And in any case, as you point out, everyone has a different idea of what's fair...which leads to truly moronic tax debates.

The real argument for higher taxes on the wealthy is that it's the only way the system is going to work, period. Very few people on the left will use that argument, because it has no emotional appeal...but it's a much better argument if you ask me. You can't get blood from a stone. Trying to get more tax revenue from rich people might seem "unfair", but trying to get it from poorer people is just dumb.

And overall government spending is irrelevant. Lower spending should equate to lower taxes, but it should be across the board. Particularly since much of the money government spends goes to help average tax payers. So cutting spending, while only decreasing taxes for the wealthy, increases the overall financial burden on average people even if their taxes don't go up at all. That might seem more "fair" to conservatives, but it's not very practical.

Liberals often make a stupid argument in this debate, but the real dummies are the conservatives...because their whole position is based on "it's not FAIR", which I'm pretty sure stopped working as an actual reason when you turned 10.

 

[Linflas]

Whos louder, 16,000 people or 600,000?

As they say, democracies only last until people realize they can vote themselves money.

That is why the founders gave us a Constitutional Republic. It seems Franklin was prophetic when he observed "if you can keep it."

 

[Rainsford]

More bitching about something that affects none of you.

That doesn't matter, nor does it matter that the overall impact on the wealthy from this tax increase would be pretty minimal. It's all about symbolism, at least for conservatives.

 

[palehorse]

More bitching about something that affects none of you.

So we should only point out injustices, or support/oppose causes, that affect us directly?

Interesting philosophy... can I sign up for your newsletter?

 

[Linflas]

That doesn't matter, nor does it matter that the overall impact on the wealthy from this tax increase would be pretty minimal. It's all about symbolism, at least for conservatives.

Or reality if you happen to be posting from Montgomery County, MD which is where most of those that left likely lived.

After spending weeks grinding through a review of painful cuts and listening to pleas from a variety of groups for a reprieve, the Montgomery County Council on Thursday endorsed the final pieces of a $4.3 billion budget that cuts overall spending for the first time in decades and includes a plan that would also furlough police officers and firefighters.

Montgomery County Council endorses final components of budget

 

[Rainsford]

So we should only point out injustices, or support/oppose causes, that affect us directly?

Interesting philosophy... can I sign up for your newsletter?

Your position would make more sense if people were arguing an injustice on behalf of rich people. But they usually aren't. The overall rhetoric makes it pretty clear that most people who oppose higher taxes for rich people think THEIR taxes will go up as well.

Supporting something that doesn't directly affect you is fine, supporting it because you misunderstand its effects is pretty silly.

 

[Exterous]

More bitching about something that affects none of you.

Yes - no one is allowed to have opinions about things that do not affect you - EVER!

Although I would argue that the financial policies of any state in the Union affect anyone in the Union through direct or indirect means

 

[Rainsford]

Or reality if you happen to be posting from Montgomery County, MD which is where most of those that left likely lived.



Montgomery County Council endorses final components of budget

I'm not sure I see the direct link. Are you suggesting that Montgomery County would have had more tax revenue if they hadn't raised taxes on the wealthy? Can you prove it?

 

[palehorse]

Your position would make more sense if people were arguing an injustice on behalf of rich people. But they usually aren't. The overall rhetoric makes it pretty clear that most people who oppose higher taxes for rich people think THEIR taxes will go up as well.

Supporting something that doesn't directly affect you is fine, supporting it because you misunderstand its effects is pretty silly.

For the sake of debate, one should never assume that everyone else at the table is ignorant.

 

[Linflas]

Yes - no one is allowed to have opinions about things that do not affect you - EVER!

Although I would argue that the financial policies of any state in the Union affect anyone in the Union through direct or indirect means

The Maryland antics certainly had an effect on at least 1 state: Virginia. Northrop Grumman decided to relocate their HQ here rather than Maryland or DC in part because of the differences between the tax and business climates here versus Maryland and DC.

 

[Rainsford]

For the sake of debate, one should never assume that everyone else at the table is ignorant.

I don't have to assume, I've seen the arguments, talking heads on TV and bumper stickers. In fact I like to go into discussions with the assumption that people are intelligent and reasonable. It's just that after a while it becomes hard to pretend that everyone on the other side is fresh from debating Aristotle when there is so much evidence pointing the other way.

 

[Blackjack200]

Come on, at least READ articles if you're going to post them. In fact, the whole point of the Maryland article was that getting extra tax money from rich people is a bad idea not because it's "unfair", but because it's a lot of extra money that can go away during a recession. Given that so much tax revenue would come from a relatively small number of people, the government income is more susceptible to even small changes in the economy.

The article concedes that most of the reduction in millionare taxpayers is from the recession in the third paragraph. But the tone the article including nuggets like "The Baltimore Sun predicted the rich would "grin and bear it."" Are meant to suggest that the millionares are leaving.

What's wrong with reduced tax revenue during a recession/depression? You should collect less taxes during a recession. Of course, don't expect a WSJ editorial to cover that angle.

Read the NYT, the editorials aren't much better, but at least the news is still top quality, I've hear that the WSJ news reporting has really gone down hill since Murdoch.

 

[Linflas]

I'm not sure I see the direct link. Are you suggesting that Montgomery County would have had more tax revenue if they hadn't raised taxes on the wealthy? Can you prove it?

Montgomery's budget gap grows to nearly $1 billion

Montgomery lost $4.6 billion in taxable income from tax years 2007 to 2008. More than 82 percent of that drop comes from taxpayers with incomes of $1 million or more, county records show.


County data show that 216 millionaires who filed taxes for 2007 did not file with the state for 2008, compared with an average of 119 in previous years. While some of those not filing may have died or decided not to file a tax return, county officials said there is plenty of anecdotal evidence that Maryland's millionaires moved to more tax-friendly states.

 

[Exterous]

Your position would make more sense if people were arguing an injustice on behalf of rich people. But they usually aren't. The overall rhetoric makes it pretty clear that most people who oppose higher taxes for rich people think THEIR taxes will go up as well.

Supporting something that doesn't directly affect you is fine, supporting it because you misunderstand its effects is pretty silly.

I will be your anecdotal counterpoint and say that we do not make anywhere near enough to be considered 'rich' and am a very very (very) long way off from making $1 million a year.

I was unable to out specifics of the tax but it would be an increase of $40,000 from everyone making over $1million. I understand that it would most likely me more distributed that that but it seems a bit absurd to say that they have not 'paid their fair share' and demand ~$40,000 more from them.

I am not advocating increasing taxes on the poor (or poorer) so much as budgetary restraint on the part of the government. I am not an expert on NJ budgetary spending policies but I have to believe there is SOMEWHERE they could cut their state budget by 2.2% to make this tax increase unnecessary

 

[Blackjack200]

I'm not sure I see the direct link. Are you suggesting that Montgomery County would have had more tax revenue if they hadn't raised taxes on the wealthy? Can you prove it?

Montgomery's budget gap grows to nearly $1 billion

In other words, the answer is no. You can't prove it.

 

[Linflas]

In other words, the answer is I choose not to read and counter the links you provided. You can't prove it.

Fixed that for you.

 

[Blackjack200]

Fixed that for you.

Not really, no. The link doesn't work for me so if there's a part of that article that provides proof that tax revenues would have been higher with lower rates, you should quote it because the part that you quoted does not.

 

[Mursilis]

I don't have to assume, I've seen the arguments, talking heads on TV and bumper stickers. In fact I like to go into discussions with the assumption that people are intelligent and reasonable. It's just that after a while it becomes hard to pretend that everyone on the other side is fresh from debating Aristotle when there is so much evidence pointing the other way.

That's a very broad brush you paint with. I've known some very, very dumb liberals (and conservatives), but I've also met enough smart liberals (and conservatives) to know not to paint the entire group as idiots.