Posted on 03/31/2011 6:44:52 AM PDT by unseen1
Jim Geraghty just can't stop digging, providing even more foolishness regarding media-based tax credits, not subsidies as regards Sarah Palin and Alaska. But this raises a couple of interesting questions.
At some point (I expect and hope) Sarah Palin is going to go out before the American people as a presidential candidate and argue that government can and must do less and spend less. I just grind my teeth knowing that she’s now set up for the easy snickering response: “Yes, that way government can stick to its core duties, which is providing tax incentives to television programs.”
First to NJ, as I imagine Jimbo might hyperventilate over every new Chris Christie You Tube video. While Christie cut $2 million from NJ's tourism budget, it still spends several million dollars of taxpayer dollars a year to attract tourists. Through some tax credits, Alaska now has Ice Road Truckers, Deadliest Catch, Alaska State Troopers, Palin's reality show and other productions, which often tout Alaska as a beautiful tourist destination, while building a cottage film industry that provides jobs and income to Alaskans. They're even building a sound stage up there, so I hear. Certainly in Jim's mind, if Palin's tax credits are an issue, Christie's 5% hotel tax to fund all that government spending in NJ is an even bigger problem for him, right?
So, how would Christie defend all this spending as a conservative were he to run in 2012? I bet Jimbo will get right on providing us the answer to that troubling question. But the question below this is, perhaps, an even better one.
New Jersey funds tourism through a 5 percent hotel-occupancy tax. The state Travel Industry Association said that will generate about $9 million in the next fiscal year.
How is it Geraghty can pontificate so on the evil of tax credits when the very place that employs him relies upon them to bring in the cash to pay him to pontificate? Maybe when he gets done grinding his teeth over that one, he'll let us know what makes him and NRO so special that they have to be subsidized by American taxpayers. I'm not so sure it's as good an investment of our hard earned dollars as it once was, now that I think about it. Are you? ::snicker::
We invite you to partner with us to continue the legacy of William F. Buckley Jr. As a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, we rely on the financial contributions of the general public: individuals, foundations, and corporations. Donations to National Review Institute are tax-deductible. We welcome your support.With your tax-deductible contribution, you are providing crucial support to our many efforts to define and promote principled conservative thought.
I love the pushback the media in thier ivory towers gets when they attack Gov Palin.
But they don't have to because they're not their rules.
Just a game of "gotcha!"
We ain't playing by those rules anymore.
Sarah is leading the way.
seems the beltway cruds never learned the rule about glass houses.
Hey, whatevah.
SP is doing more for America than the clown in the White House has EVER done.
I don’t think this guy knows the difference between a tax credit and a tax deduction.
They both lower your final tax bill. Tax credits are better than tax deductions. but the point is the same. Both are done by government to incentivize a certain function. Be it IRA contributions like the IRA deduction or having two children like the the child tax credit.
And both lower your final tax bill. I don't think that is an argument that will do you much good.
Perhaps if I were in the film industry, I’d find these tax credits to be a terrific idea. But from the outside, they look like government liking television and movies more than other industries and giving it a tax break, not too different from the federal government deciding they like the Chevy Volt more than other cars and offering a generous tax credit to its buyers.
It's hard to argue against that.
Perhaps we should do away with the Churches tax status too
Difference without a distinction.
A tax credit gives you 100% tax reduction for the credit amount.
A tax deduction gives you a percentage of tax reduction, based on your tax bracket.
Net effect, less taxes are paid therefore less tax revenue is generated {and I'm in favor of that}.
And since FL taxes are cheaper than NY it seems FL likes business more than NY. therefore to make it fair for NY to compete with FL we should require FL to raise their taxes...
what Palin signed into law would be an example of the government giving a tax credit to every automobile not simply the Volt.
OMG! so Palin signed a law that reduced taxes!?!? burn her! What does she think she is a conservative. /
I do have to refute one of your points. The fact that she lowerd rates does not mean tax rev is less. In fact the tax rev generated from the reduction of taxes based on the tax credit increased the tax rev. As Reagan said it would
So, today he tries to weasel out of it while still lying.
I'm glad Buckley is gone and can't see what they did to NR.
I never thought I would see RINOs calling for HIGHER taxes to make a point against Gov Palin. If the RINOs were smart they would stop and understand exactly what they are painting themselves into her in their attempt to smear Palin by association. they are infact becoming the GOp wing of the party calling for higher taxes....
I wonder how their case for lower capital gains taxes vs income tax rates falls into this line of thinking.....
I was referring to the individual person and what they paid, not the effect on the gummints overall tax base.
It is true that when tax rates are lowered on individuals, it generates more economic activity, and therefore more individuals pay taxes, albeit, at a lower individual rate, which produce more overall revenue to the tax collector.
No refudiation required, just a misunderestimation about my strategery, and I'm glad you axed.
nice work!
NRO is National Review Online. The 501c3 is the National Review Institute. I didnt have time to scrutinize the website but the Institute appears to be a separate entity from NRO.
I see nothing improper with the Institute qualifying for c3 status. It functions as a think tank.
and taxpayers should pay for people to sit around and think?
It’s difficult to deny an exemption to think tanks when their activities are so similar to that of university professors. Unless you deny tax exempt status to colleges and private schools too, and we know that aint gonna happen.
true but if think tanks had to produce something maybe there would be less of them and that IMO would be a very good thing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.