Fair shares

There are 18 comments on the TwinCities.com story from Feb 13, 2011, titled Fair shares. In it, TwinCities.com reports that:

A major theme of Gov. Dayton's State of the State speech was his desire to create a more progressive tax system in which all pay a fair share .

Join the discussion below, or Read more at TwinCities.com.

Rolf Westgard

Saint Paul, MN

#1 Feb 13, 2011
The point of higher volume energy pricing is to encourage all of us to use less energy by insulating our homes, buying more efficient lighting, etc. This will actually save us money and help the environment regardless of our income bracket.
The notion that business and government want us to be poor makes little sense.

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#2 Feb 14, 2011
"Studies by the Minnesota Budget Project and others show that it's middle-income taxpayers, those in the $40,000 to $60,000 income bracket, who pay the highest percentage of income when property taxes are included." Dayton isn't talking about any tax but State Income Tax. When you look at that tax, the higher earners pay a higher tax. Typically, Democrats are unable to define "fair"!

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#3 Feb 14, 2011
"Bottom line: government and corporate America want to make you poor and keep you poor. Consider yourself warned.
Matt Rothchild, Robbinsdale "
Matt, better check under your bed for the boogieman!
Suzi

Minneapolis, MN

#4 Feb 14, 2011
Why would corporate America want to keep people poor? This doesn't make any sense at all. Corporations don't make profit from poor people, they make profit from people who have money. If you're poor, you can't pay your bills or buy anything. But you are correct, energy companies do charge more to people who use more, but it's because they want people to conserve. This actually goes against the ideals of most large corporations which prefer that you use/buy more so that they make more money.

Since: Feb 08

Sandstone MN

#5 Feb 14, 2011
Using a state tax to make up for the appearance of a disparity in a local tax is obscene. People have control of the local tax -- elect people to the city council/county board/school board who have some fiscal responsibility. Elect people who will cut local spending. No one should expect the state income tax payers to subsidize their quality of life.
What's next, a progressive gas tax?
TaxTaxTax

Minneapolis, MN

#6 Feb 14, 2011
"Progressive" tax system?

One of Webster's definitions is: "INCREASING IN EXTENT OR SEVERITY"

Please introduce a tax system that is RE gressive Mark.

And, oh by the way, please wipe that googly-eyed look off your face!
Gndydncr

Rochester, MN

#7 Feb 14, 2011
Rolf Westgard wrote:
The point of higher volume energy pricing is to encourage all of us to use less energy by insulating our homes, buying more efficient lighting, etc. This will actually save us money and help the environment regardless of our income bracket.
The notion that business and government want us to be poor makes little sense.
Energy companies are merely an extension of the government in that there are no competitors for the product you need and therefore you have no choice -- they can do whatever they want.

Take a good hard look at what Rolf and others are saying and be mindful of the logic and business plan demonstrated under government control in the energy arena and then KNOW that the same mindset and logic WILL exist when the same people start ramping up government controlled health care to its full measure in 2014, especially if it turns into a single payer system, which I am sure is on the minds of our liberal friends.

Those citizens who use a greater amount of health care will pay higher rates. Why? To encourage them to use less of it. Repeal Obamacare now!
Gndydncr

Rochester, MN

#8 Feb 14, 2011
Rolf Westgard wrote:
The notion that business and government want us to be poor makes little sense.
Your half right. Liberal government wants the population to be poor because it makes them more dependent on government and thereby easier to control.

Since: Feb 08

Sandstone MN

#9 Feb 14, 2011
Gndydncr wrote:
<quoted text>Energy companies are merely an extension of the government in that there are no competitors for the product you need and therefore you have no choice -- they can do whatever they want.
The local water/sewer utility here is run by the city. They too want to have "progressive" rates. Note, there is no difference in the "normal" base usage between a single family home and a business or industry. More social engineering by the government.
Billy Blanks

Saint Paul, MN

#10 Feb 14, 2011
Gndydncr wrote:
<quoted text>Your half right. Liberal government wants the population to be poor because it makes them more dependent on government and thereby easier to control.
now THAT'S a dumb comment! thanks for the monday laugh
Gndydncr

Rochester, MN

#11 Feb 14, 2011
Billy Blanks wrote:
<quoted text>
now THAT'S a dumb comment! thanks for the monday laugh
Oh really. Lets make some lists.
One list will be all the government programs that simply hand money over to people, they don't have to pay it back, and the entitlement can go on forever.
Make another list where the government helps people out temporarily, no pay back required, but the assistance is limited.
Next list will be government assistance for a limited time and payback is expected.
Next list will be no financial handouts but teaches people how to be self sufficient.
Next list will be government tax codes that don't punish people for being wealthy.

Don't be surprised if the first list is the longest and the last list is the shortest. You don't have to do anything to get on the first list but you have to carry the government on your shoulders to get on the last list.

Change the rules to where EVERYBODY has to have payback and EVERYBODY has to endure a little tax pain. That won't get you very many votes but it might get people moving in a positive direction.
Wonderoos

Buffalo, MN

#12 Feb 14, 2011
Billy Blanks wrote:
<quoted text>
now THAT'S a dumb comment! thanks for the monday laugh
Says Billy, from a free computer at the public library.
gzaiger

Minneapolis, MN

#13 Feb 14, 2011
Gndydncr wrote:
<quoted text>Your half right. Liberal government wants the population to be poor because it makes them more dependent on government and thereby easier to control.
I read your explaination and it still simply doesn't make sense. People vote for those who help them have a better life. For whatever you may think about welfare, it's not a good life, and the huge majority want to get off of it and make better money by working. They will in fact vote for those who help build up communities and businesses and make things better. Beleive it or not, not everyone thinks the Republicans are those people. No one will keep getting elected into office if the population in that district gets poorer and poorer.

In fact, history shows time and time again that Presidents usually lose their second term if the economy is bad - don't you think Obama can read the polls? DO you really think his campaign is going to be "look, I made you poorer, vote for me"? Your whole argument has no base.
MCullen NE

Minneapolis, MN

#14 Feb 14, 2011
Rolf Westgard wrote:
The point of higher volume energy pricing is to encourage all of us to use less energy by insulating our homes, buying more efficient lighting, etc. This will actually save us money and help the environment regardless of our income bracket.
The notion that business and government want us to be poor makes little sense.
It makes perfect sense poor people are easier to divide and control.
Gndydncr

Rochester, MN

#15 Feb 14, 2011
gzaiger wrote:
<quoted text>
DO you really think his campaign is going to be "look, I made you poorer, vote for me"? Your whole argument has no base.
No, I don't think he will say that. He's not that honest. He's going to tell the poor people that their poverty is caused by CEO's with high bonuses, which isn't true either. And then he's going to tell them to vote for him because he is the one that can confiscate the most money from "those people" and give it to the poor, no charge. He will not offer them a way out of their poverty, either. He will only offer to sustain their poverty.

By the way, I saw some headlines the other day that said the executives of GM (Government Motors) were going to get some nice bonuses. What's up with that?
Berry G

Saint Paul, MN

#16 Feb 14, 2011
Gndydncr wrote:
<quoted text>Your half right. Liberal government wants ... to ... makes them more dependent on government and thereby easier to control.
Poor many not be the correct word, but I do agree with the rest of the statement.
wjh

Saint Paul, MN

#17 Feb 14, 2011
Rolf Westgard wrote:
The point of higher volume energy pricing is to encourage all of us to use less energy by insulating our homes, buying more efficient lighting, etc. This will actually save us money and help the environment regardless of our income bracket.
The notion that business and government want us to be poor makes little sense.
Wait a minute, who do you think pays the utility bill at the White House?
Do you think THEY pay a progressive rate?

"He's from Hawaii, O.K.?" said Mr. Obama's senior adviser, David Axelrod, who occupies the small but strategically located office next door to his boss. "He likes it warm. You could grow orchids in there."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/29/obam...

It's sheer hypocrisy on the left. They want everyone to pay more but then the inner city poor who live in older inefficient homes will most likely be exempted or get another energy credit so they can pay their utility bills.

And who will pick that tab up? The rest of us of course.

So lets us the same logic as with other Government services, those who demand more from the Government should pay higher taxes, after all don't we want them to use less?

PS Rolf, the rich pay as percentage of their income less then the rest of us for EVERYTHING, that's the advantage of being rich.
wjh

Saint Paul, MN

#18 Feb 14, 2011
Gndydncr wrote:
<quoted text>Your half right. Liberal government wants the population to be poor because it makes them more dependent on government and thereby easier to control.
Gndydncr, I don't think the politicians intentionally make people poor but many of their own policies have unintended consequences that make it a reality.

The stimulus is probably a good example; sure it created some jobs in the short run but nothing near of what they promised. You know you have bogus numbers when they start counting "saved jobs." Completely unsustainable and now the rest of us will have to pay the bill with money we don't even have.

Government continues to tell people it can solve problems it really can't. Too many people put way too much faith in the Government because it's so much easier then taking that low paying crappy job and working your way up.

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.

Robbinsdale Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
BLM urge rioting over OSU SHOOTING 2 min Mammie 24
Obama & BLM mourn monstor Fidel Castro 10 hr GrowUp 62
California Dems Block Gang Member Database 14 hr TAAM 1
Drop one word....add one word game (Apr '14) Dec 4 texas pete 628
Get Over It! Dec 3 Evil Roy Slade 10
News 1 person injured in 2 a.m. shooting at St. Loui... Dec 3 Protesters CAN WORK 1
News Hennepin County Medical Center is a leader in '... Nov '16 WildLifeLover 5

Robbinsdale Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Robbinsdale Mortgages