Income Tax Increase - Was 3.9%; Now will be 4.35%
State Senate:

    * Patricia Birkholz - Saugatuck
    * Tom George - Portage
    * Ron Jelinek - Three Oaks
    * Gerald VanWoerkom - Norton Shores

State House:

    * Chris Ward - Brighton
    * Ed Gafney - Grosse Pointe

Sales Tax Extension to Several Services
State Senate:

    * Wayne Kuipers - Holland
    * Ron Jelinek - Three Oaks
    * Valde Garcia - Howell

State House:

http://www.rightmichigan.com/comments/2007/9/16/23026/9965/2#2

I'll be reducing the price now, not just to help with the 6% increase in the title document prepartion I have to pay but in hopes of escaping a state controlled by liberal Democrats and spineless turn coat Republicans!

Save your bleeding heart liberal diatribe for a blog that lends itself to your anti-Semitic and homophobic allegations.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Classy
by NoviDemocrat on Tue Sep 11, 2007 at 02:28:13 AM EST

Guess I can see where the Larry Craig's and the Bob Packwood's of the world get started."

Reference: http://www.rightmichigan.com/story/2007/9/10/161713/749

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Everyone is off Saturday
by NoviDemocrat on Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 10:46:25 AM EST

So the Republicans can hob-nob at Mackinac Island and Jewish members can observe Yom Kippur.

"There are only two ways for Michigan to fix its budget deficit. Either government reforms and tightens its belt, or families will be forced to tighten theirs. Michigan families are already struggling with a tough employment and housing market, and the last thing we should do is ask them to pay more to fund a bloated state bureaucracy."

DO WE HAVE A PROBLEM WITH PEOPLE SAVING TOO MUCH MONEY ON THEIR OWN?

The second example is managed money. If I am the manager a 10 million dollar portfolio, the charge is a 1% wrap fee per year. My client sees that charge come out in 4 quarterly installments of $25000. My pay will be about $10,000 off of that. The difference here is that the sales tax of $1500 will be deducted from the account of my client.

I am willing to guarantee that EVERY large 401k plan and Pension Fund will move out of the state of Michigan within a year. If the fund can be run cheaper just by naming a manager in another state it will be done this way. The people who lose are the financial advisors.

So what now?  

That is the question begging to be asked.  We are mad, we are frustrated, but....

What are we going to do about it?

It has to be more than blogs and it has to be sooner than November '08.  We have a state to defend, we have families that need better government now, not later.

So this will require action.  I, for one, refuse to stand still and allow special interests and tax-n-spenders to destroy our home.

As Nick puts it, stay tuned.....its gonna be a wild and bumpy ride....but I've read my Bible, and I know who wins....

You know what the Democrats over on the Free Press forums told me when I said this: "get a better paying job." How's that for irony, eh? Demand it of me, but not the welfare slime that they pander to.

I'm sick; had Republicans reigned in spending under Engler, we wouldn't be in this mess. Engler's tax cuts increased revenue, and these guys just spent it rather than looking to return it to the taxpayers by either cutting taxes further, or eliminating income tax altogether.

"The volume of email, phone calls and letters I received on the income tax and service tax proposals was unprecedented and overwhelmingly opposed the increases."

Take a look at from 1968 through 1983, when Unionism was the strongest in our state. All we see there are tax increases, except for one decrease - an increase in an exemption. We went from $0 (no income tax) to $3.6428M. The growth of the auto industry, as well as the ridiculous rise in wage rates brought in plenty of money. Problem was, it also brought in the poorest quality automobiles ever seen on the road. Just compare any care from 1968 - Chevelle, Mustang, GTO, etc. to the cars being produced in Michigan in the early 80s.

Starting in 1983, our income tax was cut something like 14 times. Initially, as all tax cuts do, the revenue dropped. However, within a couple of years, it started to soar - rising to as high as $7.2465M in 2000, and dropping off thanks to a downturn in Michigan's economy, thanks to a new loss of union thug employment. By your own chart, income tax is now at $5.912M, up from $3.6428M when the cuts began.

As I said, tax cuts increase revenue.

Now, regarding the SBT. Notice that the only years revenue dropped was when the tax was reworked. This is usually because accountants and revenuers, as well as the businesspeople, need time to figure out what they are doing. In the last few years, yes of course, SBT revenues decreased. That's the point. Tax on business is supposed to decrease when you get rid of the tax - DUH! Oh sorry, I forgot you're a Democrat; you can't be expected to know that....

By looking at this stuff so narrowly, you are missing the big picture. Let's look at the state revenue that was fueled by cutting the taxes.

Years   Revenue  Expenditures
1983-84 13,023.6 12,078.4
1984-85 13,733.8 13,039.7
1985-86 14,901.9 14,115.7
1986-87 16,601.5 15,892.3
1987-88 17,582.3 16,948.1
1988-89 18,377.3 17,576.4
1989-90 19,105.6 19,038.0
1990-91 20,667.4 21,486.9
1991-92 23,408.9 22,286.3
1992-93 24,026.8 23,394.2
1993-94 26,209.9 24,205.1
1994-95 28,989.4 27,784.9
1995-96 30,536.3 29,919.4
1996-97 31,710.3 30,456.5
1997-98 33,291.8 31,543.2
1998-99 34,373.7 32,890.5
1999-2000 36,643.3 34,698.9
2000-01 38,910.9 39,369.7
2001-02 39,608.1 41,696.8
2002-03 39,965.1 41,599.9
2003-04 41,456.5 42,024.1
2004-05 42,256.2 42,445.6
2005-06 43,928.9 43,922.4

First of all, I am the libertarian here - I will not defend over-spending drunken Republicans any more than I will defend Commie Democrats.

Secondly, "Cutting" taxes increases revenue. You cannot expect a tax that no longer exists to increase revenue - unless you are a stupid Democrat.

Thirdly, you Dems spend endless hours blaming Engler for "cutting taxes," mock when folks like me explain that cutting taxes leads to increased revenues, and then when I show the truth of it, complain that Engler raised taxes in order to get the increased revenue. Which is it buddy?

Did Engler CUT or INCREASE taxes? Did he merely re-direct them? Then it's not a tax cut, now is it. Regardless of what you claim about anything, tax cuts in the context of smaller government, leaves more money in the hands of the taxpayer so that they can stimulate economic growth through investment and personal spending. Anyone with a high school diploma should be able to figure that out - but of course since Democrats love public education, there's no guarantees that they understand anything after 13 years of indoctrination; er, I mean, education.