Granholms tax increase resulting in $434 million short. Time to bend over again.
Posted in the Grand Rapids Forum
Since: Oct 07
#1 May 28, 2008
Fiscal experts say Michigan could have $434 million less than expected to spend on K-12 schools and other government services in the next budget year.
The financial trouble is here despite last year's increases in the state's personal income and business taxes to balance a budget deficit. Reasons include the national economic slowdown's effect on Michigan's economy and fewer people purchasing cigarettes and buying and selling homes.
The revenue forecast comes from the House Fiscal Agency. Another will come Wednesday afternoon when a legislative committee hears from Senate analysts.
Fiscal experts and Governor Jennifer Granholm's administration will meet Friday to agree on how much tax revenue state government can expect to collect.
Should read; Reasons include a moronic socialist governor who raises taxes for our core manufacturing businesses in a declining economy.
So, as I understand the state after enacting her huge business tax increase is actually collecting a full 1/3 less than expected AT THIS POINT.
Taxing an already dying economy even more has had the obvious (to all but her) effect of further stifling our economy and failing to balance our budget as she in her infinite genius would have us believe.
One would think that after this failure she would realize we need to reduce spending and taxes on business to get this state out of the toilet. I'm NOT going to give her the benefit of the doubt.
I am predicting, she will raise our taxes again in an effort to balance our bloating budget once again.
You heard it here first......
“I can't get behind that.”
Since: Mar 08
Saint Charles, IL
#2 Jul 11, 2008
1) The tax increase was written by the legislature (half of which is controlled by the Republican party). Can you explain exactly how this is solely "Granholm's" tax increase?
2) The Michigan Business Tax is more favorable for large industry than the Single Business Tax that it replaced. Exactly what are you basing your claim that it raised taxes for our "core manufacturing businesses," on? Moreover - given that manufacturing as a whole is in the process of relocating overseas - what makes you think it has a future here period?
3) If you actually read the article you posted (which you apparently didn't)- the reason the shortfall is projected is because of declining incomes (which means declining income tax revenues)- not corporate tax receipts.
#3 Jul 20, 2008
Granholm that white bitch cant stand her
Add your comments below
|Old things and places we remember from the Gran... (Feb '09)||9 hr||kookierecluse||941|
|obama chides isis||9 hr||Gville Jim||2|
|College football roundup: Ohio State starts the... (Sep '13)||22 hr||Go Blue Forever||1,368|
|obama must act to protect american interests. . .||Sun||Lilly_Bedwetter||5|
|Obama's new approval rating at 38% (Mar '14)||Sun||Phil||86|
|Back in Iraq. WMD's? oil?||Sun||Oneal||23|
|'We Don't Have a Strategy' to Fight ISIS t||Sun||Oneal||22|
Find what you want!
Search Grand Rapids Forum Now