No Runny Eggs

The repository of one hard-boiled egg from the south suburbs of Milwaukee, Wisconsin (and the occassional guest-blogger). The ramblings within may or may not offend, shock and awe you, but they are what I (or my guest-bloggers) think.

Archive for the 'Taxes' Category

July 8, 2008

A rare victory for business

by @ 15:36. Filed under Politics - Wisconsin, Taxes.

Honestly, the fact that the state Supreme Court was unanimous in handing down said victory (per JSOnline’s DayWatch) is even rarer. They ruled for Walgreen’s against a couple dozen high-tax communities, including Milwaukee, Madison, Cudahy, Hales Corners, Kenosha and Waukesha, that use rent payments instead of market value as the determinant of the value of the property various Walgreen’s stores are on. Walgreen’s has developers buy choice properties and build to Walgreen’s specs, and in exchange, they pay above-market rent to the developer, along with the property taxes. Those communities, up until today, were using the higher rent payments rather than what the developer could sell the property for.

Naturally, the communities are saying that they’ll have to increase taxes on everybody else. How about cutting spending for a change, like those of us in the non-government world have to do every time our disposable income drops?

June 10, 2008

A Not Made Up Inconvenient Truth

by @ 5:10. Filed under Taxes.

Barack Obama came out yesterday hammering John McCain over his support for making President Bush’s tax cuts permanent.   Instead of extending the cuts, Obama wants to remove them and reinstitute higher rates for people he considers “wealthy.”

Along with increasing personal taxes, Obama is now calling for increasing taxes on oil companies.   Obama has the mistaken belief that taxing the oil companies will somehow make Americans feel better about increasing prices  for gasoline.   Of course one item that Obama has overlooked in this effort is that the result of his additional taxes will either be higher costs for gasoline as the oil companies pass those taxes along or higher costs for gasoline and oil companies are disincented to produce gas and lower supply will drive prices higher.

And here is where the inconvenient truth comes in….

Barack Obama believes he can increase revenues to pay for all his social support programs by increasing taxes. That simply won’t work.

Tax increasing on corporations get passed along to consumers in the form of increased prices which causes consumers to buy less of the product which minimizes any tax increase and in some extreme situations, can actually reduce the overall taxes remitted.

Tax increases on individuals don’t increase revenue either. A new and significant economic law states that regardless of what the individual tax rates are, total taxes collected will equal 19.5% of GDP. This law has been dubbed Hauser’s Law after the man who did the research.

According to Mr. Hauser, the reason the rate stays constant is:

What makes Hauser’s Law work? For supply-siders there is no mystery. As Mr. Hauser said: “Raising taxes encourages taxpayers to shift, hide and underreport income. . . . Higher taxes reduce the incentives to work, produce, invest and save, thereby dampening overall economic activity and job creation.”

Putting it a different way, capital migrates away from regimes in which it is treated harshly, and toward regimes in which it is free to be invested profitably and safely. In this regard, the capital controlled by our richest citizens is especially tax-intolerant.

Now here’s where the truth become really inconvenient.

Allowing fuel prices to continue to increase will have one certain impact on the American economy, it will hurt it. Whether for truck traffic, farming, commuting for work or driving for commerce this economy relies on fuel for transportation. If we increase the price of fuel we will either increase costs or decrease transportation. Either one will ultimately have a negative impact on GDP.

Someone ought to take Obama aside, point to Hauser’s law and help him understand that no matter what he does to taxes, he won’t get any additional income without an increase in GDP. Also, to the extent he increases fuel costs or restricts transportation by either by his cap and trade nonsense, windfall profit tax, no drilling anywhere, anytime mentality, betting on “green” solutions that are no where near viability he will hurt GDP and in turn, drive revenues lower.

It must stink to be a socialist when your only real solutions are to turn back to the free market and capitalism and cry “Uncle!”

May 21, 2008

Taxation without representation, MATC edition

(H/T – Owen)

The Milwaukee Area Technical College district wants to jack up budgeted spending by 6.2% over last year’s budget to $333 million, supported by a 4.9% property tax levy increase. Let’s run some numbers:

– Last year, despite budgeting “only” $314 million, they actually spent $331 million because of various unbudgeted construction projects.
– The 4.9% property tax levy increase asked for is, according to the article, mostly for increases in salary and benefits. That would be an additional $1.5 million in wages/salary, $2+ million in health care and $2.5 million in current-year non-health-care fringe benefits (an additional $2 million in increased fringe benefits is related to a new requirement to put future retirement benefits on the books the year they’re accrued instead of the year they’re paid out). Who here outside of government has had a 4.9% increase in wages and benefits?
– Tuition (set by the state) is going up 5.5%.

Jeanette Bell (ex-mayor of West Allis and proven tax-and-spender) had the audacity to claim that MATC cut to the bone. Again, I ask, who outside of government is getting a 4.9% increase in their compensation packages? Say, maybe it’s time to take another look at the $600,000 public safety initiative as well.

May 20, 2008

Serious financial trouble on the horizon

by @ 20:30. Filed under Politics - National, Taxes.

(H/T – Greg Mankiw via Brian Faughnan via Charlie Sykes)

At the request of Rep. Paul Ryan, the ranking member on the House Budget Committee, the Congressional Budget Office prepared an analysis of the long-term economic effects of doing absolutely nothing to either spending or revenues (other than making the Bush tax cuts permanent and indexing the AMT), using a very-long-term plan to slow and ultimately eliminate deficit spending, and using tax increases to attempt to match the increases in spending.

Table 1, which outlines the projected changes in spending as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product (SocSecurity/Medicare/Medicaid operate under current law, “discretionary” spending essentially matches the growth in GDP, interest payments on debt increases to match the increased debt), has some scary numbers. By 2030, Medicare and Medicaid together will account for a larger percentage of GDP than Social Security. By 2050, they’ll account for a larger percentage of GDP than “discretionary” spending, interest payments will be the single largest item on the budget at 13.6% of GDP, and total government spending will account for 41.8% of GDP. By 2082, more than 75 cents of every dollar produced by the economy would go to the federal government, with 40 cents of that going to pay interest, and Medicare/Medicaid spending outstripping the rest of the budget.

Bear in mind, that is with no “universal health care”, no adjustments in the Social Security/Medicare/Medicaid formulae, and no adjustment other than the change in GDP in the remainder of government spending.

As for the debt, by (approximately) 2030, it would be more than 100% of GDP, a situation only experienced in and immediately after World War II. Shortly afterward, it will zoom past the all-time high of 110% of GDP, blowing past 290% of GDP by 2050 and 400% of GDP by 2060.

A textbook analysis of the effect of the exploding deficits on the real Gross National Product per person is similarily ugly. The CBO acknowledges that the textbook analysis is too rosy, but by the late 2040s, the GNP/person will begin to drop due to the effects of the deficits. By 2060, and a drop of 17% from the peak, the debt will be so large, the future effects are incalculable.

Regarding the thought that increased taxes would save us, the focus on the blogs I linked to was on the 88% top tax rate and 25% bottom tax rate required to support a non-interest spending rate of 35% of GDP (and the associated 40% of GDP spent on interest). The CBO notes the following regarding that more-than-doubling of the tax rate: “Such tax rates would significantly reduce economic activity and would create serious problems with tax avoidance and tax evasion. Revenues would probably fall significantly short of the amount needed to finance the growth of spending; therefore, tax rates at such levels would probably not be economically feasible.”

The CBO also ran some numbers on the assumption that non-interest government spending would somehow be held at 28% of GDP (the projections for 2050). Even that would necessitate a higher-than-90% increase in taxes; the lowest rate would go up from 10% to 19%, the current 25% rate would go up to 47%, and the top 35% rate (both individual and corporate) would go up to 66%. That tax increase is estimated to reduce real GNP per person by between 5% and 20% from what it would be if the 2007 levels of spending and taxation would be maintained.

May 13, 2008

Definition of insanity – Germantown edition

Albert Einstein’s definition of insanity – “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”

Germantown school board – Let’s try that $16.5 Taj Mahal elementary school referendum that failed by 10 points again with absolutely, positively no changes again in November

April 22, 2008

Polar opposites on phone taxes

Just when I thought there were no real differences left in the two halves of the bipartisan Party-In-Government, Sen. and certain Republican Presidential nominee John McCain and the tag team of Milwaukee mayor John Norquist, Milwaukee County DA John Chisholm, and governor Jim “Craps” Doyle (WEAC/Potawatomi-For Sale) prove me wrong. First, the local ‘Rats from Sunday’s Journal Sentinel story:

Barrett, Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm and Police Chief Edward Flynn are asking Gov. Jim Doyle and the Legislature to give municipalities control over the 911 telephone surcharge that is supposed to expire Nov. 30. They’re hoping to add that provision to the budget-repair bill now under consideration….

The surcharge on cellular telephone users was created in 2005 to cover the costs of technology to pinpoint the locations of cell phones during calls to the 911 emergency number. Montgomery said that technology has saved at least 15 lives statewide.

The fee started at 83 cents a month, rose to 92 cents in 2006 and then dropped this year to 43 cents.

But before the fee expires, Barrett wants lawmakers to authorize municipal governments to retain the surcharge and expand it to cover all telephones, including land lines provided by both telephone and cable companies. Milwaukee would be able to boost its charge to a maximum of $1 a month in 2009 and $1.50 a month in future years.

Revenue from the surcharge would help fund the emergency services that respond to 911 calls, a technique that city officials say is also used in Chicago, Baltimore, San Francisco and other major cities. At 50 cents a month, the surcharge would generate more than $2 million a year for Milwaukee, rising to $5.2 million for a $1 charge and $7.8 million for a $1.50 charge….

So, rather than find a way to cut $7.8 million from the bloated city budget, Milwaukee’s idiots want to raise taxes by radically expanding both in scope and amount upon something that is supposed to expire. Excuse me while I hurl, and note that these same Gorons want to keep the Miller Park tax past its supposed sunset date in 2014 so they could play with trains.

Revisions/extensions (4:42 pm 4/22/2008) – Fred notes in the comments there already is a 911 surcharge on landlines. That brings me to another reason why I hate these “small” and numerous charges; it’s all too easy to say, “Just a few shekels more for the chilrun/the elderly/the sick/the pooor/insert ‘disadvantaged’ group here.”

Meanwhile, McCain at least doesn’t like new taxes. From this morning’s Wall Street Journal:

Among the better ideas John McCain announced last week is a ban on new cellphone taxes. For America’s 257 million wireless subscribers, the GOP Presidential candidate is advancing a sensible policy with political punch.

A recent analysis by economist Scott Mackey in the journal State Tax Notes shows that the average monthly tax burden on wireless customers is more than 15% – double the average sales tax burden. In some states, such as New York (big surprise), the total tax bite is more than 20%.

If the pols were exercising even modest restraint, wireless consumers would now be enjoying a reduced tax bill. That’s because in 2006 the IRS stopped applying the Federal Excise Tax on Telecommunications to wireless services. The feds weren’t being generous. After the IRS suffered a series of defeats in federal court, then-Treasury Secretary John Snow ordered the bureaucrats to stop gouging consumers. The language of the law, passed in 1898 to fund the Spanish-American War and rewritten in the 1960s, clearly did not apply to today’s digital services.

But even though that 3% IRS levy has been knocked off the monthly bill, the overall cellphone tax burden is the same 15% it was in 2003. Increased Federal Communications Commission fees to underwrite universal service plus higher state taxes have offset the potential relief for consumers.

The WSJ editorial goes on to note there is a bipartisan (not Party-In-Government, surprisingly) propsal to put a moratorium on new cell phone taxes after listing a few other bizzare attempts by the PIGs to dig deeper into the pocketbook.

April 10, 2008

FairTax?

by @ 11:38. Filed under Politics - National, Taxes.

In the wake of Buzz’s comments on The Tax Bomb post (TownHall version), I guess I should explain why I am philosophically-opposed to a national sales tax. It’s been a few years since I did this (I thought I put it here, but it must be my old age showing), and I’m still a bit under the weather (literally; it’s a rainy, ugly Thursday here in the land of cheese and beer), so I may jump around a bit.

First, let me be clear that the current tax code is fouled up beyond all repair. Its tentacles reach into every crevice of life, and at nearly 20% of Gross Domestic Product with promises of ever-increasing taxes, it simply takes too much money. My ideal tax code would be an absolute-flat tax where everybody that works pays the exact same amount. Of course, that would require the death of the welfare state and the reduction of the federal government to its absolute minimum core Constitutional principles, two items that even Republicans are loathe to consider.

That brings me to my first objection to the FairTax; it does not do anything to begin the process of actually reducing the amount of money going to government. Indeed, at 23% of the gross sales, or if you prefer to use the traditional sales-tax percentage, 30%, it is expressly designed to not reduce the amount of money going to government.

Next, the fact that it would tend to be paid in drabs and dribbles mostly-hidden from the view of the consumer is odious. Indeed, the fact that, other than the purchase of vehicles and homes, it would go by all-but-unnoticed makes a national sales tax more-likely to be increased in any given year than the individual income tax. That is borne out by the history of the sales tax here in Wisconsin. 25 years ago, it was 4%. Then came a “temporary” percentage-point increase to 5% that somehow became permanent. The counties whined that they needed more revenue streams, so they were given the authority to lump in a 0.5% sales tax, and most counties, including Milwaukee, promptly tapped in. Milwaukee wanted to replace its convention center, so in went a 0.25% sales tax on prepared food, 2% tax on hotel rooms and 3% tax on car rentals in Milwaukee County (to an unelected board). Then Bud Selig came knocking for cash to “help” build a new ballpark, and in went a 0.1% sales tax in the 5-county area surrounding Milwaukee. In short, a restaurant meal that was taxed at 4% when I was young is now taxed at 5.85%, a 46.25% increase that, once inflation is taken into account, is something north of 300%.

I also take umbrage with is the concept of a “prebate”. Ultimately, the supporters are going to have to make the hard decision of keeping the IRS to verify, either through income or amount of purchases, the amount of the “prebate” to give to a particular individual, accept that the “prebate” is yet another welfare program, or jettison the concept and thus lose whatever left-of-center support might otherwise be gained.

As for the dreams of eliminating the IRS and the “underground” economy, I don’t suppose many of the supporters of the FairTax have had to deal with the BATF. Moonshiners have, and the BATF makes the IRS look like altar boys. Speaking of moonshiners, 221 years of taxation and zealous enforcement didn’t exactly stop their underground economy.

One more thought on the underground economy. If you’ve ever underreported the amount you paid for a used car because you didn’t want to pay the entire amout of the state sales tax, raise your hand. Apparently enough of you did so that many states now base their used-car sales tax on the Kelly Blue Book value instead of the actual sales price. Keep in mind that the state sales tax is anywhere between a quarter and a sixth of what the FairTax would be.

April 8, 2008

The Tax Bomb

by @ 10:41. Filed under Politics - National, Taxes.

Sorry about that; I accidentally hit “Publish” way before I was ready.

(H/T – Flip)

While the old OpinionJournal may be dead, I do appreciate the fact that the entire The Wall Street Journal editorial page is free to all. In today’s edition, John Cogan and Glenn Hubbard peer into the future of the bite of the individual income tax.

First, let me steal what Flip rightfully called “The Ugliest Chart You’ll See All Day”, which estimates the percentage of Gross Domestic Product taken by the federal government over the last 2 years and next 5 years through the individual income tax structure…

ed-ah326a_hubba_20080407201615.gif

…and make some uglier observations. First, note that the divergence between the code as it existed at the end of 2007 and as it did at the end of 2000 actually begins this year. I don’t have the time to research just what parts of the Bush tax-rate cuts of 2001 and 2003 expired already, but some of them already have. Since one can’t expect a Congress controlled by Democrats to give so much as a 1-year extension to tax-rate cuts both of their candidates are committed to eliminating entirely, the divergence should actually begin at 2009. Further, one can’t simply move the “current tax code” line up to meet that; those same Dems as well as select Republicans (including their Presidential nominee) cannot be expected to restore those tax-rate cuts that are already expired, so even if the remainder of the tax-rate cuts were to survive, the individual income tax would likely take something north of 9.3 cents of every dollar produced by the economy, compared to 8 cents in 2006 and an estimated 8.6 cents in 2007.

Even the focus on the indivudal income tax, while historic in its rise under the time bomb the Democrats are intent on setting off, is misleading. While it is the largest single component of the federal government’s drag on the economy, it is far from the only one. The total federal drag on the economy, euphemistically called “federal revenues”, is 18.8% of GDP. While Cogan and Hubbard focused solely on the individual income tax increases in store from the Democrats when they said that either Barack Obama’s or Hillary Clinton’s plans would result in the feds taking 20% of the GDP, the amount that they would have the goverment take will be higher than that as “corporate” income taxes will also be jacked up at astronomical rates. I may not be an economist, but I’ll lay what’s in my wallet against what’s in their wallets in saying that the federal government’s total drag on the economy will be closer to 25% of GDP by 2012 than 20% of GDP.

That reminds me of something my Congressman, Paul Ryan (R) has been saying lately. By the time his children are his age (roughly 2040), if there is no increase beyond inflation in discretionary spending and no changes in the welfare programs (misnamed “mandatory spending”), the federal government would be taking 40% of GDP. For those that didn’t do the math, that’s double the tax burden just to keep the current level of government we have now, and that doubling is on top of historically-high taxes.

I honestly could go on all day with the rest of the opinion piece, but I do want you to read it.

January 28, 2008

That isn’t a stimulus package; THIS is a stimulus package

by @ 12:34. Filed under Business, Politics - National, Taxes.

(H/T – MKH)

Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) reminds us that the last one-time “rebate” scheme didn’t work out so well. Instead, he’s pushing a “get government out of the way” package of tax and spending cuts, pointing out that the tax-cut half of that adopted in 2003 lasted for close to 5 years.

Sen. DeMint didn’t explain very well why the 2001 “rebate” package didn’t work, and why the 2008 “rebate” package will also fail spectacularily, so I’ll have to stick my finger in the dike. Not only is it temporary (one-time, actually), and not only does it represent a return to the welfare state (RepubicRAT version), but that money will not find its way to American manufacturers. Those Americans in debt and caring about it will send that cash to finance companies to reduce (in most cases, not eliminate) their debt. Those not in debt or not caring how much debt they’re carrying will spend it on goods mostly made overseas. Neither item will do jack shit to the American economy; specifically, virtually no new jobs will be created in America.

Revisions/extensions (12:38 pm 1/28/2008) – This will learn me to read the feeds in reverse order. Tom McMahon has the perfect Venn diagram in today’s 4-Block World

taxrebates.gif

January 27, 2008

Mitt(Hill)Care set to rival The Big Dig

by @ 20:32. Filed under Health, Politics - National, Taxes.

(H/T – Dad29)

CNS is running with a report that the cost of Mitt(Hill)Care will go up 85%, or $400 million, in 2009, as a lot more people than expected take the government subsidies for the mandated health insurance. Taxes, both Massachusetts’ and federal, are expected to go up to pay for this.

I’m shocked, SHOCKED that CubaCare Lite is a boondoggle that is being treated as a gateway to CubaCare Heavy. It’s yet another reason why I haven’t joined the FredHeads for Mitt exodus. I still don’t know what I’ll do, either on February 19 or November 4, but I’m beginning to prepare my short list of write-ins.

January 25, 2008

Today’s example of no difference in the two halves of the P-I-G

by @ 15:56. Filed under Politics - National, Taxes.

(H/T – Conservative Belle)

The “economic stimulus package” (otherwise known as the RepubicRAT version of the welfare state) just keeps on getting worse. First, it was a one-time “refund”, with no permanent reduction in the 20%+ of GDP take by the federal government. Now, after the “grand compromise” not only is it a targeted transfer of funds from those that pay most of those taxes to those that pay only a small bit of those taxes (the “refund” cuts out for those earning more than $75,000/$150,000 for couples), but $300 checks are going to go to 35 million families who don’t even pay income taxes. What was that line about the Republic lasting only up to the point where a majority figure out how to get the minority to pay for their lifestyles? It sure feels like we’ve hit that point.

But wait, it’s going to get even worse. The ‘Rats are still agitating for a return to their version of the welfare state, with more unemployment benefits (never mind that, until about 8 years ago, 5% unemployment was considered “full employment”) and more food stamps.

January 17, 2008

Highway Robbery – The Illinois Tollway Chronicles

by @ 19:38. Filed under Politics, Taxes.

Drew Veeneman is just destroying the toll-road pols on the wrong side of the toll booths at the Sam Adams Alliance blog. Once again, since I don’t want to steal his thunder, I’ll point you in the general direction:

Part 1 starts with the corruption of the 1990s, and ties in George Ryan’s “brilliant” idea to flop on a campaign pledge to dump the Tollway Authority.

Part 2 runs with the fallacies of the I-Pass system, especially its enforcement of “violators” (read the post to see why I put that in scare quotes).

I’ll keep this updated with the links to additional parts.

As a cheddarhead who occassionally has to go to (or through) Chicagoland, I hate having to choose between trying to time the lights on the Skokie Highway (and inevitably failing) and ultimately going through the heart of Chicago (if I have to go beyond) or hacking off an arm to pay for the tolls (which Rod Blagojevich doubled for cash users immediately upon getting into office) that pay for stuff like a helipad, custom office chairs for all, and marble floors at Taj Mahal Authority Drive. Worse, the special State Police unit designated for the tollways are starting to actually run speed traps (fortunately, I haven’t been nabbed yet).

January 16, 2008

If at first you don’t succeed,…

by @ 18:45. Filed under Politics - Wisconsin, WTPA.

…try, try again to get a handle on taxes and spending (H/T – Kevin Fischer).

I wish I could believe that this would make it through the Senate, but I have my doubts that it will even make it out of the Assembly.

December 17, 2007

The ghost of E. Michael McCan’t lives

Kevin Fischer has the details of how the Milwaukee County DA’s office declined to pursue any case against the Franklin School District for holding a mandatory indoctrination session for high school students of voting age the Friday before they attempted the 3rd-largest referendum increase in state history. I could’ve swore Paul Bucher filed charges against a Waukesha County school district for similar actions (again, if memory serves, that was settled without a trial).

Pure misuse of TIF district

by @ 18:20. Filed under Business, Politics - Wisconsin, Taxes.

Just because I’ve been focusing a lot on the Presidential race, that doesn’t mean I haven’t been keeping an eye on the local stuff. I only hope I have a Shorewood reader or two so this one can get sunk. According to JSOnline’s DayWatch, the Shorewood Village Board is expected to vote on an $800,000 TIF district to provide the seed money to allow Lakewood Financial Services to put a new facade on a 5-story office-and-apartment building they own on Oakland Ave. Unlike the dead plan to put a House of Blues and an arcade in the former Pabst Brewing complex, I won’t say that this won’t get repaid in short order; it will. However, there’s still a couple things quite fishy here.

First, I’ll take the village’s claim that this will turn a $3,500,000 building into $5,756,000 one, plus provide a boost to surrounding properties of $305,000. Unless I’m missing something important like the owner putting some of its own (or privately-borrowed) money in this, that’s a 383% net return on valuation from nothing more than a new facade. That is simply too good to be true.

Second, let’s run through the developer’s numbers. There are 44 apartments that go for $850/month, and 7,500 square feet of office and commercial space that go for $12/square foot/month. The developer is claiming they’ll be able to up that to $1,050/apartment/month (a $300/month increase per apartment) and $18/square foot of office and commercial space/month (a $6/month increase per square foot) solely from the effects of that facelift. That’s $58,200 per month coming in solely on the basis of the improvement, something I’m sure would cause reputable lenders would literally trip over themselves to offer $800,000 in conventional commercial loans on that promised revenue stream. Again, assuming that the facelift is $800,000 and the developer isn’t kicking in its own or privately-borrowed cash, one has to question why they’re running to Shorewood to be the banker.

Going back to the village’s claims, the increase in revenue (42.3%) doesn’t exactly jive with the expected reassessed value (64.5%). Now, I’m not in the real-estate business, so I do expect a bit of disconnect between increased rent and increased assessed value, but that’s not exactly adding up.

It’s been a while since I’ve been in the area, but the Shorewood portion of Oakland isn’t exactly blighted.

December 6, 2007

Reason #16,329 taxes are out of control in Wisconsin

I missed the budget meeting and the subsequent Common Council meeting here in Oak Creek where they passed a tax-and-spend-to-the-max 3.86% levy increase/4.1% expenditure increase budget the other week. However, thanks to Mark Verhalen, I do have one of the reasons why they did that rather than the original 3.03% levy increase and 3.0% expenditure increase; they wanted to grab $250,000 in additional state shared revenue for the 2009 budget under a program supposedly for communities that practice fiscal restraint available only to those local governments that did tax and spend to the max.

Yes, you heard that right – the state is passing out state tax money to communities that screw the taxpayers the maximum amount allowed so that they can continue to spend out of control when the one-year semi-freeze limit hits.

Words, at least those not involving BS-bombs, H-bombs and F-bombs, fail me.

November 20, 2007

The ever-growing gubmint monster – counties edition

by @ 20:37. Filed under Politics - Wisconsin, Taxes.

(H/T – Owen)

The Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance looked at county government taxation and spending between 2000 and 2005. The very quick Cliff’s Notes summary:

– Wisconsin’s 72 counties spent a total of $6.70 billion between operations ($4.42 billion), debt service ($250 million) and golf courses/hospitals/civic centers/nursing homes ($2.03 billion) in 2005. If memory serves, Milwaukee County was responsible for just under $1.2 billion of that.

– The operations portion represented a 4.3% annual increase from 2000, and a 3.3% per capita annual increase (funny; I don’t recall getting a 3.3% annual increase in pay).

– Over that time frame, state aid went up 2.04% an an annual basis, while county taxes went up 5.73% on an annual basis and revenues from fees, fines and permits went up 9.58% on an annual basis.

– Overall, health and human services spending took up 46.1% of county expenditures, easily outpacing public safety (19.9%), general government (13.9%) and highways (9.5%).

– Exactly one of the 72 counties reduced taxes on a per-capita basis; La Fayette (0.28% decrease annual rate). The lowest per-capita increase was in Dane, which raised taxes 2.1% per year).

– Five counties had per-capita public charges (i.e. fees) more than double in those 6 years; Jefferson (152.6%), Milwaukee (146.6% – ‘thank’ you very much, Thug Holloway), Dodge (137.0%), Washburn (119.2%) and Door (101.3%).

November 13, 2007

It’s a veto party

by @ 17:54. Filed under Politics - Milwaukee County, Taxes.

Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker’s veto message is below the fold. Among the 22 are the County Board pay increase, continued funding the infamous House of Corrections Farm and Fish Hatchery, and the separate $9,127,378 tax levy increase.

Since the County Board will be voting on overriding these vetoes tomorrow, hammer them first thing tomorrow to get them to uphold all 22.

(more…)

October 31, 2007

Is NOTHING safe from the tax man?

by @ 9:39. Filed under Taxes.

(H/T – Allahpundit/HotAir Headlines)

Iowa is taxing pumpkin purchases on the basis of their use as jack-o-lanterns. Those who are planning on making pumpkin pies can fill out a sales tax exemption certificate at the place of purchase stipulating to that.

Do notice that there is no checkbox for either “private citizen/end user” or “pumpkin for human consumption”. Indeed, the back of said form does not have that allowance on it. The Iowa Department of Revenue also “helpfully” points out that failure of the purchaser provide his/her telephone number or fill out any other portion of the form is grounds for prosecution for “fraudulent intent”.

Oh, and don’t plan on using the “dual-use” defense when the DOR agents start patrolling the neighborhood looking for Jack-O-Lanterns. This phrase on the back of that form has that covered – “If property or services purchased for resale or processing are used or disposed of by the purchaser in a nonexempt manner, the purchaser is then responsible for the tax.” So, when the DOR agents come a-knocking to take your pumpkins and cash away, don’t think that offering them a piece of pumpkin pie made from the innards of said pumpkins will save you; you’ll just lose the pie as well.

I’m only surprised that Doyle hasn’t thought of this first. Michelle put my thoughts into pictures

1vomit.jpg

Revisions/extensions (6:53 pm 11/1/2007) – After Iowa squeezed all the juice they could out of the jack-o-lanterns, they reversed course (H/T – Heather Radish)

October 26, 2007

Let the local spending smash the ceiling, and other veto errata

by @ 12:49. Filed under Politics - Wisconsin, Taxes.

Let’s take a quick run through Gov. Doyle’s veto message (H/T – WisPolitics Budget Blog, which, though it lacks the words that were “Vannah White”ed, has a red-colored summary of each veto’s effects, shall we? For reference’s sake, here’s the Munich Acco…er, Grand Compromise. Late word from WisPolitics is Mike Huebsch won’t even try to override any of this. (“thanks” a lot, Neville) On your marks, get set,….

  • The Wisconsin Covenant – This is one of those times I wish we had the specific words that were whacked. While Doyle merely says he doesn’t want to set the financial eligibility requirements at this time (which the Grand Compromise set at Pell Grant/reduced-price school lunch), I find it extraordinarily odd that he mentioned “Wisconsin residents”, especially since he considers illegal aliens that have successfully invaded Wisconsin “Wisconsin residents”.

    Also, let the spending commence; we’re now on the hook for operating the “private” office that will run it.

  • Independent Purchase of Telecommunications Services – Message from Doyle to the UW system and the Legislature – How dare you let the UW system spend money they would spend anyway without going through me, Lord Craps. After all, I have a public union to keep happy, I don’t want them to turn on me like they have those that ultimately pay their salaries and benefits.
  • Information on Instructors – Nope, can’t let the students know who is going to run the class until they actually show up.</channel_Craps>
  • Levy Limits on Technical College Districts – A very modest 4% annual limit on the increase of taxpayer cash to overspenders like MATC just can’t be allowed to fly; after all, their teachers have to continue to earn more than UW professors.</channel_Craps>
  • Stewardship Review – Demandment XIII – I am Lord Craps. No one shall question how much land I remove from the property tax rolls in the name of envirowhackoism, or how much taxpayer money I use to do so.
  • Muskellunge Fishing Season and Catch and Release Bass Fishing – This is another time I wish I knew which words were axed. While the red-colored glasses review says he’s partially vetoing the provisions to not ensare those wishing to use barbed hooks or live bait to fish for other species during catch-and-release bass and musky seasons, I don’t see what words could be whacked to that end without whacking the entire relevant provisions.
  • Quarterly and Annual Reports from the State Fair Park Board – Demandment XIV – I am Lord Craps. No one shall question how much money is spent by the State Fair Park Board.
  • Technical Modification to Kenosha County Circuit Court Branch 8 – My mention of this one is my olive branch to Doyle. As the affected position was written, the election to the new-for-2009 branch would have happened in the spring of 2008. This was the fastest way to fix that.
  • Demonstration Waiver for Health Opportunity Accounts Under BadgerCare – Demandment XV – I am Lord Craps. No one shall question how much money is spent on BadgerCare Plus.
  • Reducing Fetal and Infant Mortality and Morbidity – When it comes to sunsets, Doyle believes in the British Empire concept of none.
  • Municipality property tax limit – Hang onto your wallets, folks. While Doyle and company believe the munciipalities cannot be expected to find pork to defund this late in the budget process for this year, I fully expect them to find additional pork to fund this year just so the base for next year’s one-year 2%-or-growth “freeze” will be that much higher.
  • Reports and Approvals in the transportation budget – Demandment XVI – I am Lord Craps. No one shall question how much money I spend from the transportation fund, or whether I give it all to WEAC.
  • Department of Transportation Permits for Activities Along State Trunk
    Highways Within Municipal Limits
    – Those highways are mine, MINE!</channel_Craps_Daffy_edition>
  • Vehicle Immobilization and Impoundment for Repeated Parking Violations – Huzzah part deux. No Denver Boots for the foreseeable future.
  • Kenosha-Racine-Milwaukee Commuter Rail Extension Project – Night of the Living Dead lives! DAMMIT!

October 24, 2007

Petulant Senate ‘Rats

by @ 19:23. Filed under Taxes.

I first saw the rumblings on a putsch in the Senate ‘Rat leadership over at Kevin Fischer’s place late last night, but it was a bit late to expound on it. I’ve been out all day, and it’s come to fruition. Russ Decker is now your State Senate Majority Leader.

Considering that they got over 75% of the additional taxes they wanted going into negotiations and better than 57% of the additional spending they voted for (less H&DW), despite being cut out of the negotiations, I was right when I said they wanted it all. Guess they forgot that the governor makes all the rules when it comes to the budget. I wonder whether they’ll try to knife him in 2010.

“Brilliant” negotiating Huebsch, part deux

by @ 1:12. Filed under Politics - Wisconsin, Taxes.

It might just be the time of the night, but the more I think about the “Grand Compromise”, the more I realize those of us who don’t want to be #1 in taxation got rolled. First, let’s go back to the spending numbers, and assume that Healthy and Depopulated Wisconsin was never a serious proposal. Throwing that up against what was passed last night, Robson got 76.3% of her her $1,000,000,000 tax increase and 68.5% of difference in the increase in state-funds spending (the amount that comes directly from our pockets versus what comes from that plus what comes from the federal trough) between her plan and the sop thrown to us in southeast Wisconsin.

What’s worse is something that GOP 1st District vice-chair Bob Geason dug up (H/T – Recess Supervisor). Remember that total spending “reduction” from Doyle’s original budget? When all the bonding gets put into the spending equation, all but $345,091,300 of difference between the original and the Grand Compromise disappears. It’s way too late to come up with the bonding numbers from the three intermediate proposals, but the total bond-and-spend number in the original budget was $60,346,104,400. However, if memory serves, it’s safe to say say that the final bond-and-spend number of $59,998,013,100 is closer to Doyle’s original proposal and probably the H&DW-less Senate proposal than the Assembly “sop”.

Revisions/extensions (7:06 am 10/24/2007) – I took the time to make a quick run-through of both the Senate and Assembly plans for bonding. Adding the Senate-approved bonding to the Senate H&DW-less plan made that plan’s bond-and-spend number $61,292,741,000 (with H&DW, it would have been $68,892,741,000), and adding the Assembly-approved bonding to the Assembly’s “sop” plan made that plan’s bond-and-spend number $59,036,762,500. In short, Doyle got 73.4% of the difference in the total spending-and-bonding between his original plan and the Assembly plan, and Robson got 57.4% of the total spending-and-bonding between her plan and the Assembly plan, at least if you take out H&DW. Disgusting.

As Wile E. Coyote would say, “Brilliance! Sheer, unadulterated brillance!”

Revisions/extensions part 2 (7:07 pm 10/24/2007) – The tax increases were recalculated after I left for Madison early this morning.

October 23, 2007

Higher taxes, more spending, bigger gubmint now a fait accompli

by @ 19:42. Filed under Politics - Wisconsin, Taxes.

Mike Huebsch, RINO member of the Party-In-Government and speaker of the Assembly, got 60 votes for the Munich Acco…er, Grand Compromise. Since the original tax-and-spend party runs the Senate and occupies the governor’s mansion, it’s all over but the packing.

For those of you interested in finding out the remainder of the RINO members of P-I-G sold us taxpayers out, they are – Joan Ballweg (41st Assembly District), Brett “Soybean” Davis (80th), Jeff Fitzgerald (39th; the Fitzgerald family Turkey Day dinner ought to be interesting), Donald Friske (35th), Eugene Hahn (47th), Jake Hines (42nd), Dan Meyer (34th), Terry Moulton (68th), Jeffrey Mursau (36th), John Murtha (29th), Terry Musser (92nd), Lee Nerison (96th), Alvin Ott (3rd), Kevin Petersen (40th), Jerry Petrowski (86th), Kitty Rhoades (30th), Scott Suder (69th), Gary Tauchen (6th), John Townsend (52nd), Karl Van Roy (90th), Mary Williams (87th) and Jeffrey Wood (67th). For those counting at home, that, including Huebsch, is less than half the Pubbie caucus and pretty much the entire outstate caucus. I could’ve swore there was a caucus rule that said more than half the caucus had to agree to bring it up for a vote; I would like to know who simply put on a good show, or alternatively, whether Huebsch decided to screw over most of the Pubbies.

I invite each and every one of those listed above, including and starting with Mike Huebsch, to renounce their Republican affiliation and just join the ‘Rats since they’re already 90.9% there.

Revisions/extensions (7:58 pm 10/23/2007) – While the Senate also passed this 18-15, the “Pubbies” know their politics a little bit better, as every one of them rejected it. As expected, East Side Plale voted for this to try to avoid a repeat of Double Vote Riley in 2010.

Now, on to Craps and the veto pen. Any takers on him excising the few good things while not taking out the pork?

Revisions/extensions part 2 (9:38 am 10/27/2007) – Had Mary Williams from the wrong district.

Since I need the extra cash to pay for the extra taxes,…

I figure I ought to package up the assorted Paul-nuts that have shown up here and the TownHall version of this place and sell them. I’ve even ginned up a label (with all due apologies to Rebellion Brewing’s Roasted Nuts beer):

Maybe if the head Paul-nut would fight a tenth as hard for smaller government as he does for Dhimmitude,….

Make that budget 95% bad

by @ 10:00. Filed under Politics - Wisconsin, Taxes.

Revisions/extensions (5:36 pm 10/23/2007) – Upon reflection, and a bit of a “nudge” from Jib, I’ve taken out a cheap shot on those of you north of Hwy. 10. I apologize for that.

I knew about the fees that shocked, SHOCKED the folks at 4th and State, which never really disappeared from any of the budgets. I am not even really surprised that outstate Wisconsin is getting yet another 4-lane bypass that is not needed in the form of Highway 23 in Fond du Lac County (I do believe I said, “Gotta keep on building those 4-lane bypasses of every Podunk last north-Wisconsin town.” However, Christian Schneider delved in and found all sorts of “small-time” pork. Some of my “favorites”:

Short Course to Introduce Chinese Students to the Wisconsin Idea (p. 85) – What, the ChiComs don’t already know all about taxing and spending to death?

The Film Production Tax Credit for $1,000,000 (p. 113) – Ever since they took the stubs off the ends of the Hoan Bridge, Wisconsin hasn’t been on Hollywood’s radar screen. I mean, Scott Walker couldn’t even get them in to blow up the whaling wall.

$250,000 grant to the Painters and Allied Trades District Council 7 of the AFL-CIO for “training” (p. 447) – So that’s how Craps refunds his campaign contributors. Paging Mr. Biskupic. Paging US Attorney Steve Biskupic. Since that particular local is in New Berlin, and AG Kathleen Fal…er, JB Van Hollen won’t dig into anything related to Craps, you may as well go out with a bang.

Again, everybody who votes for this abomination of a budget need to be replaced forthwith.

[No Runny Eggs is proudly powered by WordPress.]