  Qweek Member Username: Qweek Post Number: 318 Registered: 07-2006 |
I received a couple emails regarding this petition, one from the Palace and one from Ticketmaster: Please Help Us Stop The Ticket Tax THEY ALREADY TAX OUR WORK. DON'T LET THEM TAX OUR PLAY. The Governor and the State Legislature have a plan to impose a new tax on tickets to all professional sporting events, concerts and family shows (including DTE Energy Music Theatre and Meadow Brook Music Festival) and movies that will increase overall ticket prices by more than $100 million per year. They are calling it a "Luxury Tax." But it's nothing more than a Ticket Tax on working families in Michigan. You can stop the ticket tax by contacting the Governor and your legislator today. Go to the website listed below to fine email links and phone numbers for your Governor, your State Senator, and your State Representative. Tell them that taxing time with your family is not on the playlist. STOP THE TICKET TAX NOW: www.notickettax.com 1-877-NO-TK-TAX 1-877-668-5829 Tickets for concerts and sporting events are already outrageously expensive, I feel like I'm blowing away. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Publicmsu Member Username: Publicmsu Post Number: 690 Registered: 11-2003 |
Doesn't ticketmaster already do this for us? Let's see... 16$ ticket, 8$ ticketmaster fee... will this new tax be a tax on the tax that already exists? Ticketscalper is the only legit way to sell tickets for above face value.. try doing it on the street and get arrested. The joys of capitalism.. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg Post Number: 951 Registered: 12-2005 |
Gov. Granholm and her cronies in Lansing are determined to tax every dollar you make twice - once when you earn it and again when you go to spend it. This just closes one of those "leaks" in untaxed spending and it will not be limited to movie tickets. If this proposal passes, "luxuries" such as sports, concert, and movie tickets, as well as golfing, bowling, and health club memberships fees will all be subject to the new 6% tax. "Blown away", indeed. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Charlottepaul Member Username: Charlottepaul Post Number: 1187 Registered: 10-2006 |
Look, we pay taxes on the food we eat, the cars we drive, a tax on cigarettes and booze, and a sales tax on everything we buy. Why should there NOT be a tax on tickets; why should they be exempt? I'd rather see a lower tax on things that people actually need to survive (like clothes) than continuing along WITHOUT a tax on ticket sales. Tickets are a luxury item in my world of thinking. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg Post Number: 952 Registered: 12-2005 |
quote: No we don't. "Food for human use not prepared for immediate consumption" is among the many current exemptions from Michigan's sales tax. So what was the point you were trying to make? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Futurecity Member Username: Futurecity Post Number: 596 Registered: 05-2005 |
"Look, we pay taxes on the food we eat, the cars we drive, a tax on cigarettes and booze, and a sales tax on everything we buy." It's just another example of the state stealing money from the hard-working people of this state - NOT to support any state improvements, but ONLY to support the fat salaries and enormous benefits ($42,000 per year average JUST IN BENEFITS) for an army of NON-WORKING, lazy-ass, BUREAUCRATS. Next time you go to a concert or ball game, feel good that you are supporting Grandstand's corrupt political agenda to reward the group that voted for her most. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg Post Number: 953 Registered: 12-2005 |
^^ I don't think that Granholm or her cronies are corrupt, they just think that the status quo on taxes and spending is the starting point for all discussions on what needs to change in order to pull Michigan out of its death spiral. In their discussions for public consumption, she and folks like Charlottepaul tend to obfuscate on the issues of taxes to make them sound like something different ("fees" or "investments") or already more pervasive than they currently are to make you think that this is just a minor tweak. They also have a mindset that demands that others with the opposing viewpoint justify why something should not be taxed ("Why should there NOT be a tax on tickets"). If no one speaks up and challenges the pro-tax crowd, we will eventually reach Charlottepauls' nirvana of "a sales tax on everything we buy" plus Granholm's (temporarily?) shelved "2 penny" tax on every service we pay for. (Message edited by Mikeg on June 24, 2007) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lukabottle Member Username: Lukabottle Post Number: 79 Registered: 12-2004 |
If you don't want taxes on luxury items, suggest an alternative. You aren't forced to goto these events. How much of your services do you want cut in the name of not increasing taxes. I don't have kids but I believe in a strong educational system. There is little support for mental health in the State. I suffer the effects everyday where I live where the afflicted self medicate with drugs. Tax luxuries and put it in the education system and mental health, and maybe 10 years from now we will be out of this hole. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Futurecity Member Username: Futurecity Post Number: 597 Registered: 05-2005 |
It is absurd to raise any tax in order to maintain $42,000 per year benefit packages for state bureaucrats in this economic climate. It is the corrupt feeding the corrupt. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg Post Number: 954 Registered: 12-2005 |
quote: You guys just don't get it, do you? It's not that I don't want taxes on luxury items, it's that I think it is a pointless exercise that ignores economic realities and appeals to those who like to wallow in class warfare. Create new taxes on luxuries and people will automatically stop spending as much on them - after all, these are not necessities and when their cost increases faster than folk's income growth, they will cut back on them first. Therefore, the amount such a tax will raise will be a lot less that Lansing thinks and it will have a negative impact on employment at theaters, bowling alleys, golf courses, etc. The Democrats in Congress learned that lesson the hard way when they enacted a luxury tax in 1990. They spoke passionately about how this meant that "the rich would finally be paying their fair share". So starting in 1991, Washington levied a 10% tax on cars valued above $30,000, boats above $100,000, jewelry and furs above $10,000 and private planes above $250,000. However, the new taxes took in $97 million less in their first year than had been projected because people chose to buy a lot less of these goods. Yacht retailers reported a 77 percent drop in sales that year, while boat builders estimated layoffs at 25,000. With bipartisan support, Congress repealed all but the car tax in 1993, which they eventually phased out on Jan. 1, 2003. As far as suggesting an alternative to a luxury tax, there are many budget spending items that the governor has taken "off the table" which could be funded with less expense (and no headcount reductions) if there was a willingness to take on the unions and make the necessary reforms. I believe that until all the the opportunities are captured on the spending side of the budget, there should be no discussion about tax increases. (Message edited by Mikeg on June 24, 2007) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Futurecity Member Username: Futurecity Post Number: 598 Registered: 05-2005 |
"there are many budget spending items that the governor has taken "off the table" which could be funded with less expense (and no headcount reductions)" That's because state bureaucrats supported Grandstand en masse. Now she is returning the favor by keeping them fat and happy for 4 more years. To accomplish this, she needs to find ways to steal more money from the hard-working people of this state by instituting NEW taxes. Her first attempt at theft, was her services tax, which failed. Rest assured, this latest theft scheme - the "Ticket Tax" will not be the end of it. The state employee benefit package alone (not including any salary) is $2.1 BILLION a year. It is going to take a lot more money from all of us to keep that pig trough filled. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 6103 Registered: 02-2004 |
YAY GRANHOLM! Tax all of the tickets to clean up Engler's deficit mess. I support the ticket tax and any other taxes in Michigan. As a matter of fact cut the salaries of all Michigan legislatures. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg Post Number: 955 Registered: 12-2005 |
quote: ^^ More obfuscation from the pro-tax crowd - who refuse to acknowledge that in the real world, a) looming budget deficits have to be painfully balanced by bringing spending in line with revenues, b) people's spending habits can be modified by tax policy. Charlottepaul and Lukabottle, how does it feel to have Danny in your camp? His rationale is no less simplistic and erroneous than yours: "Got state budget problems? Just raise revenues! We can excuse the governor from having to demonstrate any leadership on the issue by blaming it on her predecessor and while we're at it, just make a few false claims about his record and the current levels of taxation. Also, we can claim the moral high ground by saying that we need to do it "for the children" and mentally ill (even if all the increased revenue will just end up going to cover their teacher's pension and health care cost increases, it's still sort of true)." | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Detroitstar Member Username: Detroitstar Post Number: 657 Registered: 01-2006 |
Engler and Granholm are BOTH to blame for this economic mess, and anyone who disagrees is fooling themselves. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Udmphikapbob Member Username: Udmphikapbob Post Number: 364 Registered: 07-2004 |
MikeG, you sound the same on this issue as you and your buddies on Iraq - there can only be two sides, and if you're not against the taxes, you're for taxing everything under the sun and "soaking the rich", "class warfare", etc. Isn't it possible that sales tax revenues keep coming up short of projections? Isn't it possible that the state of the economy is changing, and that services and entertainment are a larger part of it than in the past? There WILL BE and HAVE BEEN cuts made. There also is a NEED for restructuring the tax system to reflect the conditions of the economy and bring in the revenues necessary to keep the state from devolving (further) into an under-educated, segregated, forgotten symbol of an industry gone by. I have partial season tickets to the Tigers, and don't think this tax is a horrible idea. It will cost me about $50 next season. The original poster says that tickets are already really expensive - that money goes to Mike Illitch, Bill Davisdson or the Ford family. If the tax leads to a drop in attendance, a.) I'll eat my hat, and b.) maybe they can bring ticket prices down accordingly. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg Post Number: 957 Registered: 12-2005 |
Maybe YOU feel better now, Detroitstar, but placing blame does nothing to solve the current budget problem. Hell, blame me if it makes you feel better. After all, my annual income taxes paid to the State of Michigan have declined 86% since 2001 when there was a budget problem and restructuring at my former place of employment. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 6105 Registered: 02-2004 |
Mikeg, Putting a tax on tickets sales will help the economic mess. Don't put the blame on Granholm for her proposal. We choose her to fulfill our public agenda and she's doing the work and staying the course for a better tomorrow. I would like to see more tax increase from haircuts to public parks, otherwise we could cut education, welfare to work programs and medicaid. Would you like that proposal to happen? Or would your prefer sticking the ticket tax? You decide. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg Post Number: 958 Registered: 12-2005 |
quote: Good for you. Because of the resurgence of the Tigers, I doubt that Illich will see any falloff in attendance at Comerica Park. However, you can bet that there will be incrementally fewer tickets sold to events at the Fox Theater if ticket prices instantaneously jump 6%. I'll give you a more concrete example of what can happen with this so-called "luxury tax". My personal budget for bowling each week is already at its limit. If prices go up any more, I will definitely be dropping out of one of the two leagues I bowl on each week. Incrementally, my decision means nothing, but collectively, another bowling alley or two gets added to the memory thread on DetroitYes. BTW, what does Iraq have to do with this issue anyway? What have I ever posted here about Iraq? I think you must be suffering from BDS. (Message edited by Mikeg on June 25, 2007) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Southwestmap Member Username: Southwestmap Post Number: 850 Registered: 01-2005 |
Please know that, if you buy an entertainment ticket in Chicago you pay an 8% ticket tax. Cook County adds an extra 3% on top of that. How about Milwaukee? We,, Wisconsin charges 5% sales tax on any athletic, entertainment musical and dance performances. Cinci? A 3% city tax on entertainment tickets. Cleveland? An 8% city tax on entertainment. If you don't believe me, look it up. As the guy said above - no one is forcing you to buy these tickets. Michigan has the worst of nearly everything because we haven't taxed as much as our neighbors. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Udmphikapbob Member Username: Udmphikapbob Post Number: 365 Registered: 07-2004 |
Sorry Mike - it's "Craigd" that I was thinking of. I was merely pointing out the divisiveness of the "no taxes ever" faction, in comparison to those who relate opposing the mess in Iraq to wanting to invite terrorists to Sunday dinner. The anti-tax, drown-the-government crowd tends to get a bit dramatic, and you seem headed down that road. Most people in the State want to see cuts and reforms in addition to some tax increases. What remains for the legislature to figure out is how to best balance those two necessary elements. Care to define "BDS" for me? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg Post Number: 959 Registered: 12-2005 |
Udmphikapbob, You decry the divisiveness of the "there can only be two sides" crowd and the "no taxes ever" faction by interjecting another "black or white" issue, Iraq. Pot, meet kettle. BDS = Bush Derangement Syndrome, a tendency to not only blame the President for the mess in Iraq, but also for everything else, including an opinion expressed by someone about state taxation policy issues that you happen to disagree with. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg Post Number: 960 Registered: 12-2005 |
quote: Wow! That statement is a simply stunning example of economic ignorance. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Southwestmap Member Username: Southwestmap Post Number: 851 Registered: 01-2005 |
Okay - Michigan does have great roads, great schools, great tourism advertising, great everything! We are famous for being on top of everything! | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 2729 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: Well, start refuting. Otherwise, you're just speaking in generalities and slogans. I find it interesting, though, that Michigan's universities have had to jack tuition up so much in recent years. Maybe it's because of all that state funding that was cut, which was necessitated by years of nothing but tax cuts? You can't compete in a global--or even national--economy if you put the State on a starvation diet. People and businesses aren't exactly turned on by a lack of services. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Detroitnerd Member Username: Detroitnerd Post Number: 1082 Registered: 07-2004 |
Boy, people in Michigan sure hate taxes. Do they also hate getting services from the government? Maybe not. I haven't seen any anti-taxers clamoring for a repeal of the gas tax, so our roads can fall further into disrepair. I also can't recall any anti-taxers condemning the possibility of a special tax being levied for a new hockey stadium. I'm thinking hard, but I also don't remember any anti-taxers saying we needed to completely privatize the school system so we can get rid of all property taxes that benefit public schools. I wonder why that is? Do you realize that if we eliminated gas taxes and public schooling, we might actually attract one or two more businesses to the state? Sure, they'd probably be Wackenhut prisons, but what the hell? Business is business. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lukabottle Member Username: Lukabottle Post Number: 80 Registered: 12-2004 |
Mikeg, Have you seen this website lately. http://www.michigan.gov/gov/0, 1607,7-168-21975---,00.html There have been tons of cuts. Cutting is not enough. I can tell you from the offices I interact with, that there is a freeze on travel for state employees. This is making it very difficult for state employees to conduct necessary business mandated by the federal government. I am willing to pay my part to get out of this hole. I know that this is not the entire way to fix the problem. Obviously there needs to be structural changes. Just throwing money at problems is never a long term solution. On a side note, I went to publicly funded universities so I feel I need to make my contribution. I also went to public schools so I may owe a bit more than some. I will continue to goto movies and concerts and not feel as if a small tax will change my behavior (and I am not even rich). Future City As far as the legislatures, alright, how do you want to fight this, are you proposing a part time legislature. What are you doing for this. Are you passing petitions. Are you educating your neighbors about the importance of voting. Tell me what kind of action you propose. I must apologize my biases since I get some of my information from MIRS and Gongwer instead of the Detroit News. I know the left liberal conspiracy resides in every dark corner. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Udmphikapbob Member Username: Udmphikapbob Post Number: 366 Registered: 07-2004 |
Dan, tuition at private universities is also way up. There is more to increased tuition than cuts in state funding, when it comes to our public institutions of higher education too. Not that the cutting and delaying of payments are helping matters any... I say this to remain consistent to my "there is a middle road" philosophy. None of the state's problems are ALL caused by one particular condition - unless you want to pin it all on Bush and screw with Mikeg... Mike, I do decry divisiveness - but I think it is more your scare tactics of "give 'em an inch and they'll take a mile" thinking that is more divisive than my pragmatic assertion that cuts alone cannot get us to a State of Michigan that is a leader in the 21st century. Would you prefer a graduated income tax to expanding sales taxes? People can choose not to spend money on tickets, they can't choose not to pay their income taxes. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg Post Number: 961 Registered: 12-2005 |
quote: The notion that we can simply tax ourselves out of a hole that none of are neighboring states are in and whose economies are doing much better than ours is simply laughable and deserves nothing but scorn. We learned a long time ago that when the patient is very sick, more "bloodletting" is not the answer. Surgery is needed on the spending side of the equation yet we all we got were a few nips and tucks with a lot of one-time accounting gimmicks. During this budget crisis negotiations, there were a number of large spending reduction opportunities that were taken off the table by the governor and never considered. At this point, to roll over and accept new taxes means that the needed restructuring will never happen. quote: Some "starvation diet":
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 2731 Registered: 10-2003 |
^^^You're table doesn't have any meaning. There is no mention of what kinds of services rendered for these amounts. The truth of the matter is that many states with higher tax rates than Michigan are performing much better. Reasonable cuts need to be explored objectively. But you cannot cut taxes into prosperity. And Ohio would beg to differ that they're not in a hole right now. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jfried Member Username: Jfried Post Number: 1008 Registered: 11-2003 |
is there a link on the state's website to the entire budget? is there an easy way to compare year to year spending on line items? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
_sj_ Member Username: _sj_ Post Number: 1917 Registered: 12-2003 |
Danindc, that is very true. However without even looking at the budget, there is fat to be cut namely in assistants to legislatures and their spouses. It budgets are always overfunded especially in this lax state. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 2734 Registered: 10-2003 |
Frankly, I like the idea of a part-time legislature. Virginia--perhaps the most fiscally conservative, best financially managed state--has a part time legislature that meets for about 3 months a year. If there is an important item, such as the recent transportation funding bill, the governor has the authority to call the legislature to Richmond for a special session. The full-time nature of Michigan's legislature just gives them more time to work on bad ideas, and removes them from the people they claim to represent. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
3rdworldcity Member Username: 3rdworldcity Post Number: 723 Registered: 01-2005 |
Danindc (post # 2731): Wrong again, as usual. Of course Mikeg's table "has meaning." You think it doesn't because it does not address "services rendered." So what? The table, with a couple of adjustments - shifting +/- signs where required to correct typos - merely points out that between 2000 and 2006 the legislature appropriated $2,900,000 net dollars OVER the governor's recommended budgets. My guess is that amount was not necessary or desireable except to satisfy the demands of special interests. Bet Lansing wishes they had that money back now. Can't cut taxes into prosperity? Of course you can. What do you think both Clinton AND Bush have been doing, and the country, except for MI, is very prosperous, despite the billions wasted at this point on the war, if that's one's view.. I do agree w/ you that we should have a part time legislature, w/ a commensurate cut in legislator's compensation. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 2736 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: So what? Those dollar amounts don't say what services were necessary, and which were not. It also doesn't show which sectors were underfunded, such as higher education. It also doesn't show things like the state of Michigan's woeful mental health care programs and the terrible transportation system. quote: Exactly. You're guessing. quote: Under Clinton, taxes were cut on the middle class and raised on the wealthy. Prosperity arose because budget deficits were reduced, freeing up capital for investment, and thus lowering interest rates. I would hardly characterize $400 billion annual deficits as "prosperous". And if you think Everywhere But Michigan is prosperous, perhaps you should look beyond the myopia of the pleasant peninsulas once in a while. Governments everywhere are straining to finance education and transportation, health care is a disaster, and the bottom is falling out of the housing market. These are hardly boom times. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
3rdworldcity Member Username: 3rdworldcity Post Number: 725 Registered: 01-2005 |
Dan: Please. The chart was not meant to show the things you think it should. I may be guessing, as we both pointed out w/ respect to the alleged govt waste, but mine are educated guesses. I define prosperous as (i) an up stock market, (ii) the majority of the populace making lots of money, and (iii) BEING ABLE TO KEEP A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF IT. Evidence of prosperity is the continuing increase in gasoline consumption in spite of high gas prices; that's when nobody really cares what gas costs, evidently. Prosperity is when all the idiots who think ethanol is a reasonable alternative to gasoline despite the fact it's far more expensive, directly and indirectly, don't care about the costs involved. Need I go on? (Please say "no.") Dan, when did you switch from being the Urban Planning guru to the expert on municipal fiscal planning and responsibility, taxation, and state and national budgets? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 2741 Registered: 10-2003 |
^The Dow Jones Index is a composite of the 30 largest publicly traded corporations in the U.S. It does not indicate prosperity on a personal level. Furthermore, the majority of the populace is NOT making "lots" of money. What's the median income in the U.S.--$40,000??? That's not a lot! I don't know how much money you make, nor do I care, but I have to surmise that if the biggest fiscal problem you have is paying a lot in taxes, then you're not doing too badly. Work on reducing your liability if you think you pay too much in taxes. quote: No, that is merely indicative of a physical infrastructure that requires a trip in a car to do something as simple as buy a loaf of bread. If you've been reading any kind of news in the past couple years, you know damn well that people aren't thrilled with $3/gallon gasoline. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg Post Number: 962 Registered: 12-2005 |
quote: Here is the Office of the Budget web site where I got those budget figures from (they only provide the 2000 through 2007 Budgets). To make a comparison of three or more years, you must open each annual budget document, find what you are looking for and then do the math yourself. Thanks to 3rdworldcity for pointing out the math errors in my earlier %'s. Here is a corrected and expanded table that also includes % change in Michigan personal income.
(1) source: BEA, US Dept. of Commerce My point with presenting the overall budget data is that, except for 2004 & 2005, the overall State spending continues to increase at a rate greater than or equal to the increases in Michigan citizen's personal income (and much greater when you account for the effect that increases in the cost of living have on their real disposable income). Those kinds of spending increases were not sustainable during the Engler years and you can see what happened in 2004 and 2005. In 2006 and now again in 2007, Granholm wants to increase spending in excess of of the personal income growth rate and the tax-and-spend apologists are beating the drums this year for a tax increase to enable it. Both Engler and Granholm have avoided making the hard choices that need to be made regarding the runaway costs for teacher and public employees pensions and health care. The Executive and Legislative branches during the Engler years could avoid it because income growth and tax revenues were high* and also by using accounting gimmicks. Yet now, with tax revenues falling, the current powers in Lansing think they can increase spending in excess of income growth plus avoid upsetting their unions by covering the costs (for now) with tax increases, including silly ones like this "Luxury Tax" which will do more harm than the revenue it will raise. Sooner or later, the hard decisions will have to be made. That is why I argue against any tax increases until they do get made. * [Despite all of the propaganda about Engler's "destructive" tax cuts and alleged budget "cuts", the overall budgets in those years never got smaller. Despite the tax cuts, revenues and spending grew year over year. What did change were the line item spending priorities and that is what the Democrats are still upset over.] | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
_sj_ Member Username: _sj_ Post Number: 1920 Registered: 12-2003 |
quote: You also can not tax yourself back into the black either. The State budget is fat and has a lot of areas of trim. But cutbacks are taboo here, can't do what is right because you might not get that treasured uaw endorsement next time around. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
3rdworldcity Member Username: 3rdworldcity Post Number: 727 Registered: 01-2005 |
Dan: "physical infrastructure?" What the hell is that or does it mean in the context you try to use it? You've got to not only read my posts but you have to comprehend them. I said that gasoline usage is INCREASING despite rising prices. Under your theory, that means moms are driving to the store to buy bread twice as often. Of course people aren't thrilled w/ $3 gas. Or, $2 gas. Many folks aren't thrilled w/ sex anymore. I can remember in college when gas went from 15 cents a gallon to 19 cents. I was NOT thrilled, I can tell you. I'm also not thrilled with the recent price increases at the Capital Grill either (prompted in part by the ethanol debacle)but there's not a damn thing I can do about it. Cut down on the frequency of my visits there? Possibly, when the economy as it affects me get bad. When gas prices get too high (estimates are around the $5 mark for 20% of consumers) then consumption will decrease. I'm not an economist (although that was one of my majors) that's a pretty elemental principle. As bad as things are in MI the rest of the country is doing much better. And, you're way off on that $40,000 median U.S. income (family, I presume, although you don't specify) too although I can't at this time give you the correct amount. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Qweek Member Username: Qweek Post Number: 319 Registered: 07-2006 |
I have been away from home for a bit with family matters and I must say I appreciate all the information and viewpoints that I am reading. We have more government than we can afford and it's time to start eliminating the excess to save our collective asses. No matter what side of the political bombardment team we play for we are really, in the end, on the same damn team. All of us in Michigan are taking a massive hit below the belt. It's getting harder and harder to make ends meet everyday, to save for the future, to plan for anything. I love it here, I want progress, I want a government that works for me but I feel like I am working for them. I found a good web site with many great articles: http://www.mackinac.org/articl e.aspx?ID=1663 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 2742 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: Or that people are moving further to the burbs, commuting further, etc. Gasoline is largely price inelastic in the U.S., thanks to the physical separation of land uses and overemphasis on the private automobile. On the other hand, I have the feeling that many people wrongly think that $3/gallon gasoline is just an anomaly, and things will soon return to the good old days of $1.25/gallon. Then, of course, you have your folks like Miss Cleo of this forum who complain about the price of gas, but are too stubborn to modify their behavior. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jerome81 Member Username: Jerome81 Post Number: 1516 Registered: 11-2003 |
Do you currently pay sales tax on tickets? If not, I don't see a sales tax as unreasonable. If you already pay the sales tax, then another tax seems maybe a little silly. You can't attack ticketmaster fees on this. That is their business, not something going to state coffers. Yes, it sucks, but I doubt the state gets any of the ticketmaster "fees". That needs to be left out of the discussion. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Astagafa Member Username: Astagafa Post Number: 9 Registered: 05-2007 |
As the old saying goes...if you want less of something, Tax It. What kind of tax policy supports calling taking your kids to a ball game a taxable luxury? They tax cigarettes and alcohol to discourage their use and to repay the costs of medical care. They tax our gas to pay for the roads. What purpose is there for choosing tickets except to raise and spend more money? There's a spending problem in Lansing and they need a fix. No other state in the region has a tax on tickets. Go to notickettax.com and signup. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Charlottepaul Member Username: Charlottepaul Post Number: 1202 Registered: 10-2006 |
For starters, pay for all the extra police officers at the sporting events maybe? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trainman Member Username: Trainman Post Number: 426 Registered: 04-2006 |
I support this tax, if we tha taxpayers come first and not government leaders who want pay raises, such the Livonia council members who refused to fight to save SMART. When the Superbowl came the buses were all jammed and there were not enough of them. The reason is because we do not tax ourselves enough in Michigan at the local level for public transit according to top SEMCOG officials. Thus, it only makes sense to add a 20 percent surcharge on all ticket prices to pay for SMART and DDOT. This will boost southeast Michigan's economy, create jobs, increase tourisms and attract many more conventions and quality shows because good public transit saves time and time is money. We all know that a good regional mass transit system is essential to this areas as we must compete with cities such as Chicago, Portland, Toronto, Boston and San Francisco. These cities attract many good shows because of good transit. So, it only makes sense to make sure SMART and DDOT are well funded by this new ticket tax first by writing to our elected officials. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg Post Number: 963 Registered: 12-2005 |
Lukabottle wrote: Mikeg, Have you seen this website lately. Either that is just more pro-tax obfuscation or you are simply naive and you ought to confine your posts to less challenging topics here on DYes. Those are not cuts! Most sensible people understand a "budget cut" to mean a true reduction from the amount spent during the previous year. Your so-called "cuts" contained in the Governor' Executive Orders 2007-1 and 2007-3 are mid-year reductions in the amounts departments had been appropriated to spend under the original 2007 Budget. I do not have the time or the interest to determine whether any of these reductions take an individual department's authorized spending below that which they spent in 2006. However, when I add up the total reductions in those two Executive Orders, they total $542 million dollars. The original 2007 budget was about $1.0 billion more than what was appropriated in 2006, so that tells me that there is room for another $458 million in Executive Order reductions before you can start giving us sob-stories about "tons of cuts". Since there has been so much disinformation and simplistic thinking offered in support of more taxes on this thread, let me restate what has happened in really simple terms. It's as if last year, your rich aunt told you that she was going to give you a gift of $10,000 cash on April 15, 2007. Since you have not had a vacation in years, on Jan. 1st, 2007, you book a $5,000 trip to Europe for June 2007 and a $5,000 trip to Hawaii for September 2007. But in March 2007, your aunt calls to say that she is sorry, but her stock dividends were reduced and she will only be giving you a total of $5,000. Now you are faced with the uncomfortable task of having to make changes to your travel plans. You still have $5,000 more than last year to spend, but not as much as you thought you were going to have. Your current year travel budget was reduced by $5,000 but your annual travel budget is still $5,000 more than last years. And NOBODY is going to be feeling sorry for you. (Message edited by Mikeg on June 25, 2007) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 9444 Registered: 10-2003 |
What percentage of the increases in that chart are due to health care and other legacy costs? Health care costs in the private sector are up how much in recent years. The numbers have meaning but certainly do not paint a complete picture. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Southwestmap Member Username: Southwestmap Post Number: 852 Registered: 01-2005 |
"No other state in the region has a tax on tickets. Go to notickettax.com and signup." Just because the Ilitch's say so doesn't make it true. Please know that, if you buy an entertainment ticket in Chicago you pay an 8% ticket tax. Cook County adds an extra 3% on top of that. How about Milwaukee? Well, Wisconsin charges 5% sales tax on any athletic, entertainment musical and dance performances. Cinci? A 3% city tax on entertainment tickets. Cleveland? An 8% city tax on entertainment. If you don't believe me, look it up. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg Post Number: 964 Registered: 12-2005 |
Southwestmap, Why do you insist on trying to justify a proposed state-wide tax on numerous types of so-called "luxury" purchases (entertainment, indoor and outdoor recreation and exercise) by using a dubious comparison to city and county ticket taxes that have been enacted elsewhere? Why didn't you also point out that Wisconsin's base state-wide sales tax rate is a full 1 percentage point less than Michigan's? Your half-baked arguments in favor of more taxes are unconvincing to anyone with a shred of intelligence. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lukabottle Member Username: Lukabottle Post Number: 82 Registered: 12-2004 |
Mikeg, Unfortunately most of my job interacts with only one department and I interned with one other several years ago so it may be a bit naive due to the lack of diversity. I have watched necessary major restructuring taking place, even when it came to the difficult position of people losing jobs. I personally am not a State employee. They are having a very difficult time maintaining services. Maybe I am naive in the fact that I am basing most of my opinions interacting with only two departments. All travel is restricted severely, even in-state travel. I am not talking about extravagant vacations.Unfortunately I haven't interacted with as much of State Government as it appears you have. Maybe you need to mobilize some voters to start attacking the departments you see as wasteful. Taking your kids to a baseball game is a luxury. It is not a necessity. I can lend you the money for the tax if you cannot handle it. I am not saying taxation is the only solution to fix the current situation. Obviously more restructuring needs to occur. Thank you for dictating where I should and should not post. You had shove your opinion where the sun don't shine. Obviously this is an emotional subject for all. Fortunately some of us are mature enough where we don't need to insult others to discuss a topic. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg Post Number: 965 Registered: 12-2005 |
Lukabottle, Of course state travel has to be severely restricted. Think about it - they begin spending on travel at a rate that is based on the assumption that their full 2007 budgeted amount will be available to them. Then, half-way into the year, the Governor (in accordance with the State Constitution) has to order budget reductions because revenues are coming in at a lower rate than what was assumed when the budget was developed. So now, with the travel budget half-spent, each department has to severely restrict travel to make up the reduction in the short time remaining. Furthermore, rather than spread out their budget reduction evenly across all line items, each dept. has probably tried to save jobs by making disproportionate reductions in discretionary spending accounts, like travel. Sorry if I offended you, but anyone peddling falsehoods like "tons of cuts" deserves to get called on it. Maybe next time you will do a little research before entering the fray instead of blindly repeating what others have told you. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Southwestmap Member Username: Southwestmap Post Number: 854 Registered: 01-2005 |
"Why do you insist on trying to justify a proposed state-wide tax on numerous types of so-called "luxury" purchases (entertainment, indoor and outdoor recreation and exercise) by using a dubious comparison to city and county ticket taxes that have been enacted elsewhere? " I was not making a 'dubious comparison." I was pointing out that the website developed by Olympia Entertainment contains knowing misinformation. Other cities and states do charge a tax on entertainment tickets such as for sports events and movies. In fact, such is the case in two of our neighboring states: Chicago does and Cleveland does. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Futurecity Member Username: Futurecity Post Number: 602 Registered: 05-2005 |
The larger question is: What are we getting for this new tax? Or any new state tax for that matter. Are we going to get better roads? Are we going to get better schools? Are we going to get new and better state services? The answer of course is Fx@k NO! The entire amount of this tax (or the previously defeated services tax) will be used to prop up the salary and ever-rising benefit packages of state bureaucrats! Knowing this, who in their right mind could support it? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg Post Number: 966 Registered: 12-2005 |
Southwestmap, You get all bent out of shape about an erroneous claim on somebody's web site but remain silent about the bald-faced lies being peddled by your fellow tax increase supporters. Not surprising coming from someone who thinks that "Michigan has the worst of nearly everything because we haven't taxed as much as our neighbors." Here's a clue for you, it's not our neighboring states who are "eating our lunch." We are losing our jobs and college graduates to states that, unlike Michigan, levy at most only two of these three types of major taxes: 1) personal income tax 2) corporate income tax 3) sales tax | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 2743 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: And which states would those be? Hell, Delaware doesn't have a sales tax or a income taxes. You don't see everyone moving to Wilmington, though, do you? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Southwestmap Member Username: Southwestmap Post Number: 855 Registered: 01-2005 |
I would not charactorize that claim on the Ilitch-sponsored website as merely "erroneous" - it is active falsifying of information. As to "bald-faced lies" being peddled _ I just know that I am willing to pay more in taxes to get more things that I want: improved roads, more land conservation, more help for the Michigan's aging population to stay in their homes, better libraries, etc. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Southwestmap Member Username: Southwestmap Post Number: 856 Registered: 01-2005 |
I would not characterize that claim on the Ilitch-sponsored website as merely "erroneous" - it is active falsifying of information. As to "bald-faced lies" being peddled _ I just know that I am willing to pay more in taxes to get more things that I want: improved roads, more land conservation, more help for the Michigan's aging population to stay in their homes, better libraries, etc. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mcp001 Member Username: Mcp001 Post Number: 2787 Registered: 11-2003 |
I knew that New Hampshire didn't have a general incomes or sales tax, but I wasn't aware that there were other states (i.e. Delaware) that were in the same situation. It's amazing that they can balance their budgets w/o those "necessary" taxes, but we can't! OABTW, this is a familiar topic. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 2744 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: I have a friend who grew up in Delaware. You know how they balance their budget? SKY HIGH property taxes. Works well when you have expensive beachfront property, and offer very little in the way of services. Popular rumor has it that the beach towns get about half their annual revenue by ticketing beachgoers for DUIs and open containers. |
