read and heed

[luckyleftyme2]

Ifound this in the opinion sect. of the times record:

‘Largest tax shift ever’ is on the way

State budget mirrors national squeeze on working families
By Rep. Seth Berry
Published:
Friday, August 5, 2011 2:08 PM EDT
Let me begin with the good news in the new two-year state budget. The Legislature rejected the governor’s proposals to cut teacher pay, break our contractual promises to retired workers, divert tobacco settlement monies from prevention to other uses, and do away with health care for more than 30,000 Maine people.

Through tough compromises, we also avoided a state shutdown as in 1991. As recent national headlines remind us, playing chicken risks driving the economy off a cliff.

Though limited, there was even forward progress. On the Taxation Committee, both major parties agreed on every last budget proposal relating to businesses and jobs.

Notably for the Mid-coast region, we enacted new tax policies proposed by Rep. Bruce MacDonald to help fishermen and new policies proposed by Sen. Stan Gerzofsky to encourage aircraft work at Brunswick Landing.

These proposals, and a few others, will help to create or retain jobs.

Yet Maine people expect and deserve the full story — and a far better tax budget. By enacting significant and inequitable income tax cuts, then billing almost the entire cost to local governments and future legislatures, this budget contains the largest tax shift in Maine history.

Except for the business policies agreed to by all, the budget’s tax changes are a shift onto all who pay property taxes, all future taxpayers, and the middle and working classes who are already unfairly burdened by our tax code.

This unfair shift will cost jobs — not create them.

In the first two years, more than two-thirds of all state tax cuts are paid for simply by shifting costs to local government and property taxes. State funding to municipalities for property tax reductions is cut by more than 30 percent.

The property tax and rent refund is also cut by up to $400 per household, affecting more than 200,000 Maine families.

Adding unhelpfully to the tax shift, local school systems continue to see reductions to their combined state and federal funding.

As a former selectman and public school teacher, I know our local leaders have already done all they can to trim the sails. Cuts like these can only lead to reduced services, higher property taxes, or both.

By inflicting increases on the many, the budget does deliver benefits to a few. Tax “winners” will include nonresidents, some corporations and the very wealthy.

An average of $3,000 each goes to those making $360,000 per year, Maine’s wealthiest 1 percent. An average of $46,700 each goes to just 550 of Maine’s wealthiest estates per year, those worth more than $1 million.

Minimum-wage families, by comparison, receive $9 apiece — and very likely, a hefty increase in their rent or property taxes.

Making matters still worse, most tax changes are not yet paid for. Timed to start in 2013, these income and estate tax changes add an ongoing, unfunded cost of $200 million per year. This “buy now, pay later” scheme bypasses Maine’s balanced budget requirement. If paid for through property taxes, these added costs will more than triple the coming shifts of 2011 and 2012.

While a few dozen in Augusta give away money they don’t have and then crow about their “tax-cutting” accomplishments now, thousands of Maine families and businesses — in living rooms, offices, town halls, school boards, and future legislatures — will pick up the tab in the coming years.

If you’re reminded of 2001 and of the unequal tax cuts that helped lead to the Great Recession and to an avoidable debt crisis, you’re getting the picture. Many of the new income and estate tax cuts simply replicate the Bush tax cuts at the state level.

Seeking balance, I did present a compromise floor amendment to the budget in June that would have avoided these shifts and unpaid bills, while retaining all benefits to businesses and to the middle class.

According to analyses done by Maine Revenue Services, my approach would have reduced income taxes for at least 16,000 more Maine families and businesses overall. Because it avoided the major windfalls to the wealthy, it also would have cut the shift by more than half.

Though it helped more Maine families and cost far less, my compromise proposal was voted down. Still, I want to thank these local legislators for their votes of support: Rep. Mike Clarke of Bath, Reps. Alex Cornell du Houx and Charlie Priest of Brunswick, Rep. Bruce MacDonald of Boothbay, Sen. Gerzofsky of Brunswick and Sen. Goodall of Richmond

Maine will not prosper by further squeezing middle-class and working families. Nor will we prosper by giving away money we do not have. Targeted investments and a balanced, modern tax code are needed for Maine to create jobs and compete globally.

Increasingly, research shows that our national economy is too top-heavy. Analysis by Moody’s — one of two key firms now rating our national credit — shows that balance must be restored to rebuild our national and state economies.

While most Americans spend more of their money locally, the very wealthy — taxed less than at any time since 1928 — tend to invest more of their new money overseas. Money spent locally is typically spent two or three times over, creating far more local jobs.

my take on this is that lapue and his stoodges certainly blow off hot air which is often a smoke screen to the behind the scenes paybacks for their 15 minutes of glory.
If you check about the wealthy investing overseas you will find this is and has been the status for a few years.
these jokers have only one loyalty and bottom line= ME FIRST FRIG U!

[luckyleftyme2]

1. from another forum

I found this in the gen. discussion forum and thought it Worth passing on :

There are some people that feel that government should be run like a business or a family. I do not agree with this view however, I feel that you can use some parts from both to help government run smoother. Take for example money. Families take in income in the form of wages for the most part, business takes in income in the form of sales, and government takes in income in the form of taxes. When families find their wages are lessened they cut back and perhaps look for a part time job. A business with sales down would look to cut expenses and look for other avenues of sales. A government with tax revenue down would look at eliminating waste and perhaps raise taxes.

You and your party have decided that they will just forbid one half of the formula to run a good government. I feel this is very short sighted of you and your party. I need you to explain to me and the country this strange way of running a government. I should tell you at this time that the American people are both the owners and the customers of government. It seems that you and your party have forgotten this very important fact.

As long as you feel that government should not bring in any more income then I feel it is only fair that you never ask nor take another raise as long as you are in office. I think that is only fair.

I'd like to add to this: since most of the working class has suffered pay cuts or benefit cuts or no or low pay increases since 2004 while costs of fuel and food have increased at a much faster pace we should cut back the governor and his associates pay to the 2004 level!
I'm sure that we can do this through our elected legislature! the savings would help us reduce taxes! and we have until 2013 to adjust downward the win fall tax relief for the more fortunate in the state! I mean after all isn't this the maine heritages cry that government
is to costly and we need tax relief! seems that tax relief should benefit the lower income bracket not the upper!
PERHAPS A PEOPLES VETO MAY BE NEEDED TO ACHIEVE THIS GOAL!

[luckyleftyme2]

2. SELF DELETE

DUPLICATE DELETE