Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

kalm wrote:Another trickle down fail.

'What you mean slashing taxes on the rich didn't increase revenues and now we need to cut education to plug the hole?"
GTFO!

Wanna bet the blame Obammer?

(Dear Baldy, yes it's thinkprogress, but the figures are all linked so simmer down )

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/0 ... ojections/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Baldy wrote:

kalm wrote:Another trickle down fail.

'What you mean slashing taxes on the rich didn't increase revenues and now we need to cut education to plug the hole?"
GTFO!

Wanna bet the blame Obammer?

(Dear Baldy, yes it's thinkprogress, but the figures are all linked so simmer down )

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/0 ... ojections/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Promoting an argument by highlighting the exception to the rule is a lost argument.

Besides, when you consider that your own state, Texas, South Dakota, Wyoming, etc. don't even collect taxes on corporations, it's a non sequitur.

I don't care enough to look, but Kansas might be like other states who are slowly trying to ween itself off of income taxes and shifting to a state consumption tax as it's source of primary revenue.

And as others have stated already...it's fucking Kansas.

CID1990 wrote:what a fail

SO Klam are you finished with the "thoughtful moderate" act?

It was getting old anyway

kalm wrote:

CID1990 wrote:what a fail

SO Klam are you finished with the "thoughtful moderate" act?

It was getting old anyway

This tax policy and the resulting revenue shortage and need to cut education is not moderate... But nice try at a dig.

CitadelGrad wrote:

kalm wrote:
This tax policy and the resulting revenue shortage and need to cut education is not moderate... But nice try at a dig.

Who is to say that the revenue reduction wouldn't be worse if higher tax rates were retained? I'm not a expert on the Kansas economy. Neither are you and Think Progress. The article was weak and provided no real analysis. It simply pointed out a correlation (perhaps even a weak correlation) and drew some pretty broad conclusion.

dbackjon wrote:LOL at the lame spin from the right.

The left predicted this exact outcome - just as supply-side failed nationally, it failed miserably in Kansas.

dbackjon wrote:LOL at the lame spin from the right.

The left predicted this exact outcome - just as supply-side failed nationally, it failed miserably in Kansas.

GannonFan wrote:Have you been to Kansas? I think the problem with Kansas is, well, it's Kansas. Why would large income earners suddenly flock to Kansas just because the tax rate goes down? And how many large income earners can be there anyway?

GrizFanStuckInUtah wrote:

GannonFan wrote:Have you been to Kansas? I think the problem with Kansas is, well, it's Kansas. Why would large income earners suddenly flock to Kansas just because the tax rate goes down? And how many large income earners can be there anyway?

Amen brother. I was stationed at Ft Riley and the problem with Kansas is Kansas. There is a reason tornadoes go through there, it is gods way of trying to erase a mistake.

GrizFanStuckInUtah wrote:

GannonFan wrote:Have you been to Kansas? I think the problem with Kansas is, well, it's Kansas. Why would large income earners suddenly flock to Kansas just because the tax rate goes down? And how many large income earners can be there anyway?

Amen brother. I was stationed at Ft Riley and the problem with Kansas is Kansas. There is a reason tornadoes go through there, it is gods way of trying to erase a mistake.

dbackjon wrote:LOL at the lame spin from the right.

The left predicted this exact outcome - just as supply-side failed nationally, it failed miserably in Kansas.

UNI88 wrote:

dbackjon wrote:LOL at the lame spin from the right.

The left predicted this exact outcome - just as supply-side failed nationally, it failed miserably in Kansas.

You're talking about 1 state out of 50 and arguing that it's problems show that failure of right wing policies. How are the other states doing in comparison? How is Wisconsin doing? Has it gone down the toilet after Walker made his corrections? How is Illinois doing? Illinois has a Democratic governor and General Assembly that have failed to make any meaningful reforms and the state economy is completely in the toilet. Does that prove that all left wing policies are abject failures?

When I'm in Wisconsin and I see a car with a Recall Walker bumper sticker I want to offer to trade Quinn & Madigan for Walker.

AZGrizFan wrote:What's wrong with Kansas?

Is that a trick question? A rhetorical question?

At a recent Urban Institute forum, two policy analysts who follow state and local finances were asked a simple question: What's the worst and best tax bill a state passed this past year? Without hesitation, both Nick Johnson, an economist with the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, and Joseph Henchman, a lawyer with the right-leaning Tax Foundation, gave the same answer. Kansas, they said, was the worst.

The tax reform measure, passed by the Kansas legislature last year and signed by Gov. Sam Brownback, slashes the top two individual income tax rates, as well as rates for corporations. It also exempts all pass-through business income -- the first state tax law to do so.

But other states have cut tax rates too, so why is Kansas' so bad? I put this question and others to Johnson and Henchman. Here's an edited version of their comments.

Joe Henchman (JH): Good tax reform broadens the tax base and lowers rates. That's what Gov. Brownback wanted to do. But the legislature took out the "broaden-the-base" part. They just passed a tax cut, which can be justifiable if you want to reduce the size of government or expect other revenue sources to go up. But they didn't cut spending and they don't expect revenue to grow, so it's just a hole. With the exemption for pass-through entities, if you're a wage earner, you're taxed at the top rate, which is currently 4.9 percent in Kansas. If you're a partnership, an LLC or any form of recognized business entity with limited liability that's not a corporation, you're income is taxed at zero percent. That's an incentive to game the tax system without doing anything productive for the economy. They think things like the pass-through exemption will encourage small business, and to be fair, it might. But they are doing it in a way that violates the tax principle of neutrality.

Nick Johnson (NJ): The law fails almost every test of good tax policy, starting with adequacy, affordability and sustainability. It fails both vertical and horizontal equity tests. Vertically, it's beneficial to high-income taxpayers and harmful to low. It doesn't do much for the middle either. Horizontally, its exemption of pass-through entities creates inequities and tax avoidance, which of course then goes back to sustainability because it balloons cost.

The point of [economist Arthur] Laffer, [who was a consultant for the tax plan], is that the whole idea of the tax bill is to jump-start the economy. But evidence suggests that there's no goose to the economy from this or, if there is one, it will be small. The real big problem here is that because it costs so much money, it will make it harder for Kansas to make other kinds of investments that are important to a strong economy like education and infrastructure. People don't understand the scale of what's been enacted -- it's jaw dropping. I'm hard-pressed to identify another state that has ever passed a larger tax cut package overall to its budget.

CID1990 wrote:

dbackjon wrote:LOL at the lame spin from the right.

The left predicted this exact outcome - just as supply-side failed nationally, it failed miserably in Kansas.

Klam is hemmorhaging all over the place and of course Know Nothing Jon tries to come to the rescue

(Dear Baldy, yes it's thinkprogress, but the figures are all linked so simmer down