My vote is yes. Any business knows you can't cut your way to prosperity. And the level of cuts currently underway in Raleigh will have devastating effects on some of the bedrock institutions that underpin our state.
Submitted by chashumble on Tue, 06/02/2009 - 9:17am.
we're all ... er, progressives. I mentioned this option to Joe Hackney when the state had another slump in revenues back in 2002 and he just hemmed and hawed and muttered something about "growth solving the problem next year." The ball seems to be in his court right now - sigh.
Submitted by usernamehere on Tue, 06/02/2009 - 9:24am.
I understand the meaning of your question and the points of this argument, but it bothers me when people -- and especially MSM reporters (see: NPR report today on the Apple tax bill) -- allow legislators to walk away without asking how taxes reductions or increases in the budget bill differ from other tax increase/decrease bills.
If you're against higher taxes, why rail against the Apple bill?
If you're for higher taxes, why support it?
Even considering the economic stimulus argument, this plain intellectual dishonesty on both sides is what generates cynicism.
Same thing with tolls to pay for bonds, corporate tax rates, etc.
Submitted by PackMan97 on Tue, 06/02/2009 - 11:36am.
I'm not a fan of taxes, and I definitely think spending needs a huge cut before taxes are on the table. Sadly, I don't think enough spending can be cut in order to balance our budget as such, taxes will have to be raised...but please raise them on someone else.
HONOLULU – Describing a "fiscal emergency," Gov. Linda Lingle has ordered three days of unpaid furloughs each month for 14,500 state employees to help erase a $729 million budget shortfall.
The furloughs beginning in July amount to an almost 14 percent pay cut and will be unilateral, applying to the Republican governor herself and her staff.
Submitted by bastilles on Sun, 06/07/2009 - 9:22am.
The biggest problem is that raising taxes doesn't help anyone now. The "budget hole" you're referring to is $5ish billion that the state isn't getting in revenue this fiscal year. Constitutionally, the only thing the governor can do is cut.
Article III, Sec 5 of the NC constitution:
"The total expenditures of the State for the fiscal period covered by the budget shall not exceed the total of receipts during that fiscal period and the surplus remaining in the State Treasury at the beginning of the period. To insure that the State does not incur a deficit for any fiscal period, the Governor shall continually survey the collection of the revenue and shall effect the necessary economies in State expenditures..."
So for any "budget hole" (ie the gap between what NC collected the last fiscal year and what it planned to spend last fiscal year) the only thing that's working are cuts, like the furloughs already in place. But it's almost 20 percent of the entire budget. The only thing North Carolina can reasonably hope for is that they cut it close enough in the next month to get a bailout from the feds.
Now, if you're talking about the next biennium, that's sort of a different thing than a budget hole. It's just a reduced expectation of revenue. That is what what be an appropriate discussion for raising taxes, and it's a discussion the House should welcome as it does its budget. But it doesn't help us now. I just wanted to clear that up.
It's also important to remember that this isn't really the screwup of anyone in state government now. Yes, some of the spending might have gone to misplaced priorities in the past. But no one in Raleigh has wrecked the economy, and no one is to blame for the fixes that have to be taken now.
Put taxes on the table
My vote is yes. Any business knows you can't cut your way to prosperity. And the level of cuts currently underway in Raleigh will have devastating effects on some of the bedrock institutions that underpin our state.
Do good. Be nice. Have fun.
But, of course,
we're all ... er, progressives. I mentioned this option to Joe Hackney when the state had another slump in revenues back in 2002 and he just hemmed and hawed and muttered something about "growth solving the problem next year." The ball seems to be in his court right now - sigh.
Taxes are already on the table
I understand the meaning of your question and the points of this argument, but it bothers me when people -- and especially MSM reporters (see: NPR report today on the Apple tax bill) -- allow legislators to walk away without asking how taxes reductions or increases in the budget bill differ from other tax increase/decrease bills.
If you're against higher taxes, why rail against the Apple bill?
If you're for higher taxes, why support it?
Even considering the economic stimulus argument, this plain intellectual dishonesty on both sides is what generates cynicism.
Same thing with tolls to pay for bonds, corporate tax rates, etc.
We have to balance the budget
I'm not a fan of taxes, and I definitely think spending needs a huge cut before taxes are on the table. Sadly, I don't think enough spending can be cut in order to balance our budget as such, taxes will have to be raised...but please raise them on someone else.
Reagan The Pragmatist
even Ronald Reagan raised taxes when he was governor of Cali in 1967 and was faced with a huge budget hole
Beer tax increase?
I read yesterday that three dozen states are considering beer tax increases.
I'm down with that!
Since I drink like once every 3 months! It want affect me!
Anthony D. Hall,
Fighting for Truth, Justice, Freedom and the American Way!
This struck me as a very fair approach
when I heard about it...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090602/ap_on_re_us/us_hawaii_furloughs
Progressives are the true conservatives.
Whats worse raising taxes or laying off Teachers and Police?
That is a dumb question isn't it. But it is the reality of what is happening in every county in the state.
Anthony D. Hall,
Fighting for Truth, Justice, Freedom and the American Way!
budget hole for this year
The biggest problem is that raising taxes doesn't help anyone now. The "budget hole" you're referring to is $5ish billion that the state isn't getting in revenue this fiscal year. Constitutionally, the only thing the governor can do is cut.
Article III, Sec 5 of the NC constitution:
"The total expenditures of the State for the fiscal period covered by the budget shall not exceed the total of receipts during that fiscal period and the surplus remaining in the State Treasury at the beginning of the period. To insure that the State does not incur a deficit for any fiscal period, the Governor shall continually survey the collection of the revenue and shall effect the necessary economies in State expenditures..."
So for any "budget hole" (ie the gap between what NC collected the last fiscal year and what it planned to spend last fiscal year) the only thing that's working are cuts, like the furloughs already in place. But it's almost 20 percent of the entire budget. The only thing North Carolina can reasonably hope for is that they cut it close enough in the next month to get a bailout from the feds.
Now, if you're talking about the next biennium, that's sort of a different thing than a budget hole. It's just a reduced expectation of revenue. That is what what be an appropriate discussion for raising taxes, and it's a discussion the House should welcome as it does its budget. But it doesn't help us now. I just wanted to clear that up.
It's also important to remember that this isn't really the screwup of anyone in state government now. Yes, some of the spending might have gone to misplaced priorities in the past. But no one in Raleigh has wrecked the economy, and no one is to blame for the fixes that have to be taken now.
Grin and bear it.