Dayton takes message around Minnesota; GOP attacks

Gov. Mark Dayton is taking his push for a top-tier tax hike around the state today as a budget standoff with Republicans continues. Full Story
tiger

Scottsville, NY

#41 May 26, 2011
Someone please explain to me why anyone would think they have a 'right' to someone else's money? I saw one of the commericals on tv this AM and just about blew coffee out my ears. Sure I'll go to work and pay more tax so you whiney entitled snots can sit home and cry about Oprah. ugh
MKidd

Rosemount, MN

#42 May 26, 2011
Ben10 wrote:
I smell a one term governor. At least his political tactics are fresh and different...oh, wait a minute...didnt take old manic Mark long to show what a useless boob he is.....again.
He will have 2 terms and the House back ASAP. You should pack up and move now to save yourself the frustration of hating it here so much.
Concerned Citizen

Saint Paul, MN

#43 May 26, 2011
Does anyone really believe that the cost of gov't should remain the same every year? Does your fuel costs remain the same? How about your grocery bills, or the cost of a new car, or any goods and services. Even in this difficult economy, stuff costs more. Gov't is no different. You are buying roads, schools, police, clean water, parks, and about a zillion other things with your taxes, and those things cost more each year. If you want to maintain the same level of service, you have to increase spending. If you want to maintain spending levels, you have to cut services. I realize that the conservatives have proposed some cuts. That's great, but the cuts don't cover the spending proposed, which leaves a 1.8 billion dollar shortage. The repub's think that this money will automatically appear if they take it from LGA. That just means property taxes will go up for everyone. It's time for the uber-wealthy to pay a little more. Year after year the top 5% get tax breaks. Time to turn the clock back a bit, so we can afford decent roads, schools, parks, etc. Taxes are not the devil. Our state is falling apart, bridges are falling down, schools crumbling. Who is responsible for it? We all are, not just the middle class. You can blame some waste on the gov't, but no more than any other entity. There's not a bunch of secretly rich gov't folks around. They don't exist. Everyone is not evil. Dayton is not evil. The repubs are not evil. Everyone wants what's best for our state, but sometime I think the conservatives forget that our state is more than just the top 5% of the income bracket.

“I am always right.”

Since: Oct 09

Former MN Taxpayer

#44 May 26, 2011
Roger wrote:
Typical Republican budget. Cut everything for the Middle class and the poor and give the rich
and oil companies billions in tax cuts.
Roger, you seem like a bright young man. Let's go back to elementary school math. You did pass your 5th grade math class, didnít you?

You have a job and made $32 per hour. You get a $2 per hour raise so that you now make $34 per hour. Did your wages just get cut?

Now, take that example and explain to all of the rest of the children in your classroom how a $32 billion budget in the last biennium, and a $34 billion budget in the current biennium equals a cut in the budget.
JAMES

Burnsville, MN

#45 May 26, 2011
tiger wrote:
Someone please explain to me why anyone would think they have a 'right' to someone else's money? I saw one of the commericals on tv this AM and just about blew coffee out my ears. Sure I'll go to work and pay more tax so you whiney entitled snots can sit home and cry about Oprah. ugh
so basically you don`t think you should have to pay any taxes?? so nobody should have to pay any taxes?? i believe this was already decided by the courts several times
one word future

Saint Paul, MN

#46 May 26, 2011
MKidd wrote:
<quoted text>He will have 2 terms and the House back ASAP. You should pack up and move now to save yourself the frustration of hating it here so much.
Bankruptcy
HeyMoron

Minneapolis, MN

#47 May 26, 2011
gdpcon wrote:
<quoted text>OMG!!! are you clueless. Find the Jason Lewis podcast and listen to the study he cited - it was an IRS study, not the Conservative, Jason, Hannity or Rush study. The numbers were in the magnitude of $600 billion increase in IRS revenues. While Bush started with a surplus, he ALSO "inherited" an economy headed towards a recession, then there was 9/11, the housing bubble burst, his admininstrations wreckless spending. Prior to the Democrat majority Congress passing TARP and stimulas, the Bush deficit was $456 billion (a fact you will likely dispute), but that is no comparison to Obummer. He's has INCREASED the deficit 4 FOLD, true unemployment is 15% and he's tanked the economy. How about you dispute this one too - thousands of companies have quietly lined up and submitted variances to implement Obummercare. Why you ask? For precisely the same reason the health insurance carriers said; because costs will go UP NOT DOWN. Whose Congressional District has filed and been granted the most variances - NANCY PELOSI'S DISTRICT. I'm shocked!!
Still don't see a link to this IRS report you speak of. When are you going to post that instead of your meaningless rantings of misinformation. Still waiting.
Vikings Fan

Rochester, MN

#48 May 26, 2011
Doug from White Bear Lake wrote:
<quoted text>
The budget that Dayton vetoed was based on "estimated" tax revenus for the upcoming bi-enniem. The additional $2 billion is to replace the one time stimulus money MN received from the Feds. The previous budget was for $32 billion. Plus we recieved and spent $2 billion from the Feds. Thus, we actually spent $34 billion. That is how the legislature came to that number.
Dayton's proposed budget was to spend $37 billion. He planned to pay for it by creating a higher income tax bracket for the top 2% of the MN highest earners. In other words, it would only affect wealthy "workers", not those living on trust funds or other assets.(i.e small business owners who have to report business revenue and income together on their MN tax returns.) When asked by a reporter what he would spend the additonal $2 billion in tax revenue,(the actual figure mentioned wss $1.8 billion), Dayton replied he did not know. I guess he will figure out how to spend it after he gets it.
The real problem is that none of the figures being bandied about does anything to reduce the existing deficit.
Doug, you still miss the point, even by your own admission estimated tax revenues are $34 billion. Bottom line is that all Gov. Dayton had to do is compromise with the legislators and tell them how he wanted to spend the $34 billion. The legislators were compromising by upping the spending from $32 billion to $34 billion. Taxpayers, and the legislators agree on one thing, you can't spend more then you are taking in. I could care less about the $2 billion in federal stimulus money, that's a one time budget gift by the us taxpayers in federal taxes. I understand your view and Gov. Daytons view of raising taxes on the top 2% of Minnesota Taxpayers, but I don't currently agree with it when what it's really about is only spending what we take in. Kind of like most families in Minnesota, they can only spend as much as what's left of their paycheck after taxes.
Water Board Him

Minneapolis, MN

#49 May 26, 2011
HeyMoron wrote:
<quoted text>
RIGHT, and tax breaks for the top 5% are going to create jobs....NOT. If that were true we would not be in a jobless recovery because the tax cuts under Bush are still in place 10 years later. Get a clue.
Those are now the Obumbler Tax Curs he extended them you moron. Why extend them if he thought letting them expire wouldn't hurt the economy. You sure are a dope, liberal, same thing, whatever!
zebra

Saint Paul, MN

#50 May 26, 2011
Why doesn't Dayton propose a 95% trust-fund tax on all Minnesotans? I would have more respect for him then.

Since: Mar 11

Minneapolis, MN

#51 May 26, 2011
zebra wrote:
Why doesn't Dayton propose a 95% trust-fund tax on all Minnesotans? I would have more respect for him then.
He would probably exempt any trust funds housed in South Dakota banks.
joe

Saint Paul, MN

#52 May 26, 2011
IrishMN- Fact: You are a pathetic loser. Also you know nothing about state budgets. Nothing.
Mr Nice

United States

#53 May 26, 2011
The GOP must attack, they have no plan to protect. The budget they submitted was the same warmed over Pawlenty Budget that put five billion in debt. Did not work then and won't work now.

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results but getting the same. Republicans are insane.

65% of Minnesotans agree with Dayton that a mix of cuts and increasd revenue is the way to go.
Proud Republican

Minneapolis, MN

#54 May 26, 2011
Doesn't this silly man know that money is for the rich?
the troll

Minneapolis, MN

#55 May 26, 2011
PBMcWatt wrote:
It's interesting that Dayton wants taxpayers to decide/intervene on the Budget issue by contacting their lawmakers yet he doesn't want the taxpayers to decide on a gay marriage amendment by having it appear on a ballot.
that's because the rich pay less of a percentage of their income than the working class and the Constitution cites all men are created equal. He wants the rich to pay their fair share and he wants to protect other human beings civil rights. Thats why he got elected over "Tom - waitresses make too much money - Emmer.
the troll

Minneapolis, MN

#56 May 26, 2011
IrishMN wrote:
<quoted text>
Roger, you seem like a bright young man. Let's go back to elementary school math. You did pass your 5th grade math class, didnít you?
You have a job and made $32 per hour. You get a $2 per hour raise so that you now make $34 per hour. Did your wages just get cut?
Now, take that example and explain to all of the rest of the children in your classroom how a $32 billion budget in the last biennium, and a $34 billion budget in the current biennium equals a cut in the budget.
Rodger, tell this racist jerk that the wealthy in MN pay less percentage of their income than the working class does for their tax contribution. 12% vs 10%. And if Dayton doesn't get his way, property taxes go up for property owners, especially in the poorer counties.
Doug from White Bear Lake

Fort Collins, CO

#57 May 26, 2011
Vikings Fan wrote:
<quoted text>
Doug, you still miss the point, even by your own admission estimated tax revenues are $34 billion. Bottom line is that all Gov. Dayton had to do is compromise with the legislators and tell them how he wanted to spend the $34 billion. The legislators were compromising by upping the spending from $32 billion to $34 billion. Taxpayers, and the legislators agree on one thing, you can't spend more then you are taking in. I could care less about the $2 billion in federal stimulus money, that's a one time budget gift by the us taxpayers in federal taxes. I understand your view and Gov. Daytons view of raising taxes on the top 2% of Minnesota Taxpayers, but I don't currently agree with it when what it's really about is only spending what we take in. Kind of like most families in Minnesota, they can only spend as much as what's left of their paycheck after taxes.
The main reason for my initial post was to clarify how the numbers were reached. Dayton proposed a $37.5 (approximate) budget. The legislature came forward with their first, best, and only offer of $34 billion. Since MN has a law requiring a balanced budget, the $34 billion the legislature came up with had to be based on projected (i.e. estimated) revenue. All government budgets are based on projected or estimated revenue.

I also wanted to point out to other posters just who Dayton is targeting for the tax increase. Small business owners, who are required by law to report business revenue as income, make up the majority of top 2% of wage earners. As we all know, small business owners are the primary job creators in our economy. Increasing taxes on small business owners will neither balance the budget nor create more jobs. It is actually likely to force some small businesses to lay off employees or close up altogether. The result will then be more unemployed and less overall tax revenue. It does not make sense.

Finally, I also wanted to point out that either budget figure does abosolutely nothing to reduce the current deficit. That is the real concern here.
Econ 101

Saint Paul, MN

#58 May 26, 2011
the troll wrote:
<quoted text>Rodger, tell this racist jerk that the wealthy in MN pay less percentage of their income than the working class does for their tax contribution. 12% vs 10%. And if Dayton doesn't get his way, property taxes go up for property owners, especially in the poorer counties.
The classical argument against progressive taxation runs as follows:

The diminishing returns argument applies to the fraction of income used for present consumption. As income rises, diminishing returns implies that a smaller and smaller fraction of income will be spent on consumption goods. The remaining income will (of necessity) be used to purchase capital goods. This acts as a form of positive feedback that in turn yields more income for capital spending. Meanwhile (and because) these capital goods induce a decline in the costs of production which has the effect of raising real wages generally and implicitly raising the general standard of living. The income paid back on the capital helps create the disincentive to consume that creates capital spending. Thus, those capitalists who effectively manage their property are rewarded and given control of more (newly created) property, of which they are increasingly less inclined to consume and increasingly more inclined to purchase capital goods and thus further elevate the general standard of living by driving down the costs of production. As they acquire more capital goods, eventually their ownership outstrips their ability to manage and oversee what they own; however, they control only as many capital goods as can be attributed to the income of their prior capital---which previously did not exist. Therefore, their ownership does not negatively contribute to the general standard-of-living relative to counterfactual state of them not purchasing those goods. It would thus be misleading to argue that redistributing their capital may yield further increases in the standard-of-living. Doing so may well cause that effect, but doing so neglects that it was the assumption that redistribution would not happen that induced the accumulation of capital.

Eugen von BŲhm-Bawerk, "Karl Marx and the Close of his System", 1896
LeDumbo

Burnsville, MN

#59 May 26, 2011
Mr Nice wrote:
The GOP must attack, they have no plan to protect. The budget they submitted was the same warmed over Pawlenty Budget that put five billion in debt. Did not work then and won't work now.
Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results but getting the same. Republicans are insane.
65% of Minnesotans agree with Dayton that a mix of cuts and increasd revenue is the way to go.
Minnesota's state constitution doesn't allow debt. You must mean the projected deficit, which in no way is a debt. Therefore, Pawlenty didn't leave the state with a $5 billion debt, he left it with a $663 million surplus. Insanity is pointing out math flaws to a liberal.

Liberalism, for people bad at math.
LeDumbo

Burnsville, MN

#60 May 26, 2011
Doug from White Bear Lake wrote:
<quoted text>
The main reason for my initial post was to clarify how the numbers were reached. Dayton proposed a $37.5 (approximate) budget. The legislature came forward with their first, best, and only offer of $34 billion. Since MN has a law requiring a balanced budget, the $34 billion the legislature came up with had to be based on projected (i.e. estimated) revenue. All government budgets are based on projected or estimated revenue.
I also wanted to point out to other posters just who Dayton is targeting for the tax increase. Small business owners, who are required by law to report business revenue as income, make up the majority of top 2% of wage earners. As we all know, small business owners are the primary job creators in our economy. Increasing taxes on small business owners will neither balance the budget nor create more jobs. It is actually likely to force some small businesses to lay off employees or close up altogether. The result will then be more unemployed and less overall tax revenue. It does not make sense.
Finally, I also wanted to point out that either budget figure does abosolutely nothing to reduce the current deficit. That is the real concern here.
The legislature started at $32 billion. Therefore, they already moved $2 billion towards Dayton's $37.5 billion proposed budget. Dayton hasn't moved.

What were you were saying about small business owners taking the tax hike in the shorts was correct.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Mankato Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Minnesota man charged with 15 sex abuse counts Sep 26 no name 1
I go charged double at Dickeys barbecue. Don't go! Jul '14 Joyce 8
Mankato's historic post office seeks new life a... Jul '14 Jeanie Cooke Fred... 2
charity craft show Jul '14 Tracy 1
karl gregor "zeke" ziemer (Aug '11) Jun '14 abcdeftg 5
Trail Blazer Bar & Grill (Apr '14) Apr '14 New2town 1
GOP Candidate Wants To Get Elected To Keep His ... (Apr '14) Apr '14 Leland mccormick 1
Mankato Dating
Find my Match

Mankato Jobs

Mankato People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Mankato News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Mankato

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]