Posted on 04/29/2002 6:56:08 AM PDT by Stand Watch Listen
The Connecticut legislature has passed a measure that would make the state the first in the nation to create a unique tax bracket for millionaires.
Luckily, Governor John Rowland has promised to veto this 1% additional tax. It's a rather transparent attempt by state Democrats to portray Rowland as "favoring the rich" in a re-election year when the state budget is running a near billion-dollar deficit.
Unfortunately for these same Democrats, Rowland has proven himself as a supremely confident and able governor, and this cheap tactic should do little to keep him from a third term.
But the fact that such legislation could even reach the governor's desk is proof that the "soak the rich" Democratic approach to big government didn't die with Al Gore's beard and will, in all likelihood, continue.
The budget shortfall in Connecticut is indicative of the situation facing many states across the nation. During the economic boom of the late 1990s, state spending rose in tandem with an historic surge in capital gains and other tax revenues.
However, neither Republicans nor Democrat state lawmakers had the common sense to curb spending programs when the economy began to slow. So now, the state has a considerable deficit and the response is the millionaire's tax.
State Rep. Ernest Newton II (D-Bridgeport) hailed the millionaire's tax saying, "It's going to save our cities." But why weren't Connecticut's cities saved by a decade of spending increases in the 90s? Why is a millionaire's tax that won't even get the state back into the black suddenly a panacea?
The answer is simple. Like their counterparts on Capitol Hill, Connecticut Democrats refuse to accept responsibility for making lousy budget decisions.
Republicans are no less guilty of irresponsible spending than their Democratic colleagues, but some in the GOP comprehend just enough economics to know that in order to stimulate a weak economy, government must reduce taxes rather than continue demanding more of the people's money.
Simple logic dictates that if tax revenues during a historic economic boom were not enough to pay for state programs, there can't possibly be enough to pay for such programs now.
But rather than recognize this painfully simple truth, Democrats suggest that any necessary cuts would be "outrageous" or "inhumane" or whatever overly dramatic description might lead you to believe that the cuts weren't necessitated by their own irresponsible spending in the first place.
Inventing a millionaire's tax costs the Connecticut Democrats little in political capital, and is a cheap way for them to show how they relate to "the little people" whom they speciously claim to be fighting for.
What is less understood is that, in the face of this crushing budget deficit, the state is still looking at approving a budget that increases state spending by 4%.
Thus, while the successful are singled out and penalized to "save our cities," state legislators can't even stop spending money they literally don't have.
To conceal this stunning irresponsibility on their part, they invent new taxes rather than finally take responsibility for allowing spending to spiral out of control in the first place.
Mind you, I have no great affinity for millionaires per se, but since they have been targeted because of their income, why aren't Connecticut residents also informed of how much tax these millionaires already pay?
Democrats like to portray the wealthy as never doing their fair share, but the fact is many of us will pay fewer taxes in our lifetime than what the wealthy might pay in a single year.
Further, the millionaire's tax, if implemented, couldn't close the budget gap, leaving one to wonder who will pay for the 4% increase in state spending. Will Connecticut Democrats next year invent the College Graduate Tax or the Home Equity Tax or the You Got A Raise This Year tax?
The outrageously arrogant claim by Connecticut Democrats like Rep. Jim Amann (D-Milford) that the tax is "fair and just," might be good spin, but really assumes that wealthy citizens are required to bail out incompetent legislators who can't balance a budget.
Democrats who believe in "soaking the rich" continually blame the financially successful in our society because they think envy and resentment between the classes is a good way to get votes and deflect responsibility. In practice, this has been a fairly effective tactic.
But when it comes to racking up massive public debt, ask yourself who is really to blame; those who make money for themselves and others, or those who simply spend everyone else's?
Sterling Rome,
Another previous post on the subject: Connecticut Senate Approves Budget With Special Tax of Millionaires
CT Bump!
If any one would like to be removed from my CT Bump list, please let me know and it will be done ASAP. Conversely, if you would like to be added the same holds true.
Gov. Rowland is a solid RINO but he's not a fool and he's not going to let the Democrats off the hook with this short-sighted, grandstanding political ploy aimed at the uninformed and stoking class envy.
It stinks and it makes CT look as foolish as the politicians we choose to send to Hartford. Unfortunately, this kind of nonsense is what happens when one party rules in a state.
AMEN!
AMEN!
There aren't many ;^)
I am one of those who would be 'soaked' by the new tax. Should it pass (and my pals in Hartford assure me it won't), I will buy a house in Florida or Nevada, and that's where my legal residence will be.
Johnny RINO knows this, and even said it today. The only difference is that he said people like me would take jobs with them.
I wouldn't blame you, or anyone for that matter, for taking that course. As if the tax man doesn't confiscate enough of your money already to pi$$ away. If I were in your boat, I'd find anyway possible to hide and move money around to keep it well hidden.
When they pass I'm outta here. I've travelled to a lot of places, and I can't name another state with so many ignorant, mean-spirited brainwashed liberal dolts than my home state of Connecticut (though I did spend some time in New York yesterday.)
Here's an example -- one of the yuppie soccer moms that moved into the unbelievably overpriced houses up the street comes flying down the hill in her Suburban, just about brushes me walking my dog, then tosses litter out the window. As I turn to stare at the back of the land yacht, mouth agape, I see the SIERRA CLUB bumper sticker on the back. Perfect. Probably a Hillary supporter too.
Johnny Rino was kinda right, though. The company that I sold two years ago now employs more than 50 people. I won't lift a finger on another venture either. My silent partner, the US Government, will take close to 50% of my successes and leave me to pay 100% of any failures. That's before the state comes in with its cut.
I'll give my tax money to my next home state, most likely Texas or Florida.
:^)
Did you see Johnny RINO's backtrack on the "Millionaires Tax"? He says he is willing to put everything back on the table for negotiation. No surprise, really.
Re: CT
I'm pretty well stuck here for quite awhile. Our family business and both sets of my kids grandparents are here and I couldn't take them away from them (baby sitting aside). My family has been here since the mid 1600's so I guess you could say my roots are set pretty deep. Besides, Mrs.Lone doesn't want to be far from the rest of the family either.
My biggest problem is that I like having all four seasons and love the snow. My choices are somewhat limited on the climatalogical vs. political scale. Maybe when my wife and I get into our 40's and the kids start college, I'll pack everything up and move to the Maine woods, liberals be damned. If all goes as planned, I'll have a good accountant and attorney in line!
In Connecticut (like with the federal income tax) your reward for that success is an extra tax.
Where did you read that the head RINO put the millionaire tax back on the table? Did he actually veto the budget (I won't read any papers but the Waterbury Republican, and I haven't had a chance to take a look)?
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.