Katus still pushing for a tax that's not sales or property.... I wonder which one that is...
The Rapid City Journal has an article in today's paper where Tom Katus is invited to talk about his tax views. And not only does he continue to try to abdicate his responsibility as a legislator to make a decision... not only is his plan still a thinly veiled attempt to get an income tax on the books... But he also makes a great case as to why he's a democrat.
Why? Because he thinks things should be different for different people:
First off, Katus is continuing to try to dump off responsibility for fixing the system off on his goofy BRAC tax-commission. As opposed to doing the job he was elected to do. We don't elect legislators to openly abdicate responsibility for making difficult decisions. If they manage to do it successfully, we sometimes even call them statesmen. Instead of taking responsibility, Tom wants to abdicate it.
Second, Tom's doing everything to talk about the unfairness of every tax out there - inferring that the one he's not mentioning must be the answer to our problems. (psst... it's the income tax). Except Tom knows the second he tries to openly advocate it, he's toast. Hence, point number one where he tries to have anyone but himself make the decision...
And third, and most illustrative why he's out of touch with most everyone in South Dakota - check out his statement: "Sales tax is known to be the most regressive of taxes; i.e. the poorest of the poor and the middle class pay the same 6 percent of state/city sales tax as do the wealthy."
I can hear the masses calling... "No! No!.... Save us from the tax that everyone pays equally, Tom....." A tax that everyone, regardless of class or income, pays equally is regressive? Rubbish. Hogwash. And B.S.
I'd say it was the opposite. Not just a little, but the utter and complete opposite. In fact, I'd say it was actually quite progressive. Even a grade school child can understand that if you're spending less, you pay less in taxes. If you spend more money, you're going to pay more in taxes.
It cuts across all social strata and income levels. Your taxation is directly proportional to your income and consumption. No loopholes. No shelters. Just a flat tax charged at the point of sale.
Even those who receive services funded by these taxes are going to pay at least something. It's going to be a pittance as compared to the middle or upper class, but it makes them a stakeholder in the process as well, as opposed to simply being someone who draws off of the system - they contribute too.
But according to Tom, true equality isn't fair.
Says a lot, doesn't it?
Why? Because he thinks things should be different for different people:
Two major sources: sales (45 percent) and property tax (44 percent) comprise 89 percent of state and local tax revenues (SD LRC; FY 2006). Sales tax is known to be the most regressive of taxes; i.e. the poorest of the poor and the middle class pay the same 6 percent of state/city sales tax as do the wealthy. Schools levy 59 percent of local governments' property taxes. The Governor's Advisory Commission on Taxation (1988) concluded, "Property taxes are high and...assessments unequal and unfair (and) current tax sources are inequitable."Read it all here.
and...
Solution: To adequately support our elders and teachers, we need a BRAC-type bipartisan democratic Tax Review Commission "with teeth in it." I have experience in implementing such democratic processes and would be pleased to elaborate further in a subsequent column if the Journal provides space.
First off, Katus is continuing to try to dump off responsibility for fixing the system off on his goofy BRAC tax-commission. As opposed to doing the job he was elected to do. We don't elect legislators to openly abdicate responsibility for making difficult decisions. If they manage to do it successfully, we sometimes even call them statesmen. Instead of taking responsibility, Tom wants to abdicate it.
Second, Tom's doing everything to talk about the unfairness of every tax out there - inferring that the one he's not mentioning must be the answer to our problems. (psst... it's the income tax). Except Tom knows the second he tries to openly advocate it, he's toast. Hence, point number one where he tries to have anyone but himself make the decision...
And third, and most illustrative why he's out of touch with most everyone in South Dakota - check out his statement: "Sales tax is known to be the most regressive of taxes; i.e. the poorest of the poor and the middle class pay the same 6 percent of state/city sales tax as do the wealthy."
I can hear the masses calling... "No! No!.... Save us from the tax that everyone pays equally, Tom....." A tax that everyone, regardless of class or income, pays equally is regressive? Rubbish. Hogwash. And B.S.
I'd say it was the opposite. Not just a little, but the utter and complete opposite. In fact, I'd say it was actually quite progressive. Even a grade school child can understand that if you're spending less, you pay less in taxes. If you spend more money, you're going to pay more in taxes.
It cuts across all social strata and income levels. Your taxation is directly proportional to your income and consumption. No loopholes. No shelters. Just a flat tax charged at the point of sale.
Even those who receive services funded by these taxes are going to pay at least something. It's going to be a pittance as compared to the middle or upper class, but it makes them a stakeholder in the process as well, as opposed to simply being someone who draws off of the system - they contribute too.
But according to Tom, true equality isn't fair.
Says a lot, doesn't it?
Comments
during the Robber Baron era, when the uber-rich had multi millions and the average joe mad less than a grand a year, the most anyone, rich or poor could possible pay for even the most expensive pair of shoes was $15 or so. That's why all the excess capital accumulated and why all those mansions (read "castles") that are now in ruins got built. There was nothing else for the rich to do with their dough. Is that your idea of "progressive", ace? I gotta tell ya, it ain't mine, bro.
I am so tired of the argument that the poor pay an unfair amount of sales tax. The poor pay no federal income tax, get tax rebates and earned income credits and extra credits for kids and food stamps and Medicaid and heating assistance and rent assistance etc. Give me a break! Everyone needs to pay something into the system, even those who get the most benefits from it. And a sales tax is one of the only taxes they really pay.
Just like that goofy Iraq Surrender Group!
What a joke!
God forbid that excess capital (i.e. the fruits of their labors) accumulate.
Just another flaming liberal who wants to tax success down into mediocrity.
Hint, they tried that in the Soviet Union and it didn't work there, either.
The sales tax is regressive because it discourages spending. The sales tax is regressive because as a percentage of their income, lower income individuals DO pay more.
The same can be said about the property tax in that it discourages spending, especially among lower income folks.
See Abe Lincoln's speeches for more on this.
Labor preceeds and is more important than capital.
If you qualify, you can get credit for the money you spend on sales tax on food.
So those lower income folks don't have the tax burden on necessities.
I get so tried of liberals always saying make the rich pay. Well guess what, it’s the middle and upper class that pays all the tax burden. The poor pay almost nothing in taxes. No income taxes, they get free health care and help with the cost of food.
So quit claiming the poor are so abused, what other nation in the world so the poor have cars, cable TV, and free health care. If they don’t want to be poor, they should go out and work two jobs to get ahead like the rest of us.
I think you defeat your own argument. You can still find $15 shoes, but you can also find $150 shoes. I'm sure if you're rich enough, you could pay someone to custom-make you some $1500 shoes. There are THOUSANDS of ways rich people can (and do) spend more money than middle or lower income people. There are luxury items at the high end of most product lines - electronics, cars, clothes... The more the rich spend on those, the more tax they pay.
So maybe rich people should think of taxes as an investment in the country and the people who have made it possible for them to continue to prosper.
No man is an island, remember?
Besides, rich people like making good investments, don't they?
Personally, I wouldn't know, but that's what I hear.
Soak the rich and you take away their power to employ more people and the incentive to earn more.
"what other nation in the world so the poor have cars, cable TV, and free health care. If they don’t want to be poor, they should go out and work two jobs to get ahead like the rest of us."
I would like to add...what other nation has a very high obesity rate amongst its poorest of poor?
very well said, 10:20, as you're right on...I recvd an email from a letter to the editor yesterday stating that he requests that those recving public funding get randomly drug/alcohol tested as he does at work. Said if they fail, they dont get assistance. Said it is his right to demand this testing, as he has to be tested, and it is his money that goes to fund those people on public assistance. Only demanding what is fair!
Anyone who thinks the economy is more fair by comparing percentage of income to sales taxes paid is nuts. Those same "rich" people are the ones creating jobs, and stimulating our economy with purchases. If you disagree, look at expensive housing developments, and tell me how much they help stimulate the economy, in comparison to a trailer court...Its not even arguable...I cant believe this thread has gone back and forth...ignorance is defined as a "sense of not knowing". Sorry, but those in favor of stiffer taxes for the rich are uninformed and ignorant.
Nick