Thursday, January 20, 2011

State Taxes Rising and State Services disappearing, Thank You GOP!

State Taxes Rising and State Services disappearing, Thank You GOP!

Sean Lewis
January 20, 2011

Republicans ended the Federal Stimulus package to the States,
now we are seeing the effects of such actions.

Higher State Taxes
and
Fewer State Services
and crumbling infrastructure.

But many Americans are paying higher taxes anyway because states can't
borrow the way Washington can or put off the day of reckoning. The
listless economy has shredded state budgets, forcing tough decisions
nationwide about whether to slash services, raise taxes, or both. Last
year's big federal stimulus package helped, sending about $250 billion
to states. But that emergency funding is starting to peter out and tax
increases passed during the recession are finally starting to hit
people's wallets.

Over the last two years, 36 out of 50 states have raised taxes or
fees, according to data from the National Association of State Budget
Officers. The combined tab comes to more than $25 billion. The worst
seems to be over, with proposals for the upcoming year amounting to
just $3.1 billion in new state taxes. But those figures are premised
on a steadily improving economy, which means new taxes could end up a
lot higher if there's a dreaded double-dip recession. And many local
municipalities are just getting around to raising their own taxes,
since state and federal aid to many local governments is falling. In
Congress, for instance, new aid packages that would prevent teacher
layoffs and help pay for Medicaid have stalled, as opponents argue
that the federal government can no longer afford such generosity.

To figure out where the pain is greatest, I used NASBO data to compile
the total tax hikes in each state since 2009, including proposed tax
increases for 2011. Then I divided each aggregate figure by the
state's population, based on Census Bureau data, and ranked the states
according to the amount of new taxes per person. The per-capita
numbers don't mean every resident is forking over the same higher
amount, since taxes are often skewed toward wealthy people and
businesses. But they do reveal which states are in the most pain, and
the types of new taxes passed in those states could find their way to
others. Here are the states with the highest per capital tax hikes
since 2009, along with some of the notable new taxes they've imposed:

New York. Total enacted and proposed new taxes, 2009–2011: $8.2
billion; $419 per person.

Enacted: Higher taxes on the wealthy and on tobacco, beer and wine,
car rentals, and taxi rides; increased fees on motor vehicles,
hospital stays, car insurance, tax preparation, utilities, and several
other things; reduced tax credits for a variety of businesses.

Proposed: Additional taxes on cigarettes; new taxes on certain small
businesses, soft drinks, and some medical services.

California. Total: $11.5 billion; $312 per person.

Enacted: 1 percentage point increase in the sales tax and a quarter-
point increase in personal income taxes. Lower business tax credits;
new fees on motor vehicles, vessels, and aircraft.

Proposed: A net decrease in gas and diesel taxes.

Delaware. Total: $253 million; $286 per person.

Enacted: 1 percentage point increase in taxes on incomes above
$60,000; higher taxes on cigarettes, video lottery, utilities, and
some businesses. New estate tax.

Connecticut. Total: $777 million; $221 per person.

Enacted: Higher income taxes on the wealthy and on medium-sized and
large corporations; higher taxes on tobacco; accelerated estate- and
gift-tax payments; various new fees.

Wisconsin. Total: $900 million; $159 per person.

Enacted: Higher taxes on the wealthy, lower capital-gains-tax
exclusions, higher taxes on tobacco.

Arizona. Total: $1 billion; $154 per person.

Enacted: A 1 percentage point increase in the sales tax on most goods
and services.

Kansas. Total: $425 million; $151 per person.

Almost all of the new taxes in Kansas are proposed for 2011, including
an increase in the sales tax and the tax on tobacco.

Washington state. Total: $982 million; $147 per person.

Enacted: Higher tuition at public universities and a variety of fee
increases.

Proposed: Higher taxes on cigarettes, carbonated beverages, hazardous
substances, and some businesses.

Oregon. Total: $541 million; $141 per person.

Enacted: Higher personal and corporate income taxes, higher taxes on
tobacco, higher motor vehicle fees.

Massachusetts. Total: $890 million; $135 per person.

Enacted: A 1.25 percentage point increase in the sales tax,
elimination of the tax exemption for alcohol, new taxes on direct-
broadcast satellite service.

New Hampshire. Total: $161 million; $121 per person.

Enacted: Higher taxes on tobacco, some motor vehicle records, hotel
rooms, gambling winnings; higher fees on boat and motor vehicle
registrations and some government activities.

http://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/flowchart/2010/6/30/10-states-where-taxes-are-rising-the-most.html

Tuesday, January 18, 2011

The LYING GOP, People no longer need to work to afford healthcare = GOP lie 650,000 American jobs lost!

People no longer need to work to afford healthcare
= GOP lie: 650,000 American jobs lost!

Sean Lewis
January 18, 2011

The CBO states that because of Healthcare reform people no longer
must remain at jobs so they can have affordable healthcare.

Americans may now downsize or out right leave jobs they continued
to work because healthcare insurance was to expensive to afford.

The GOP spins the half truth of 650,000 American jobs will be 'lost'
as a result of healthcare reform.

This is actually 650,000 jobs now available for entry level positions
for the unemployed being exited by Americans who are retiring now
because they can afford to!

FACT CHECK: Shaky health care job loss estimate

By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR, Associated Press
Tue Jan 18, 7:11 am ET

WASHINGTON – Republicans pushing to repeal President Barack Obama's
health care overhaul warn that 650,000 jobs will be lost if the law is
allowed to stand.

But the widely cited estimate by House GOP leaders is shaky. It's the
latest creative use of statistics in the health care debate, which has
seen plenty of examples from both sides.

Republicans are calling their thumbs-down legislation the "Repealing
the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act." Postponed after the mass
shootings in Tucson, a House vote on the divisive issue is now
expected Wednesday, although Democrats promise they'll block repeal in
the Senate.

A recent report by House GOP leaders says "independent analyses have
determined that the health care law will cause significant job losses
for the U.S. economy."

It cites the 650,000 lost jobs as Exhibit A, and the nonpartisan
Congressional Budget Office as the source of the original analysis
behind that estimate.

But the budget office, which referees the costs and consequences of
legislation, never produced the number.

What follows is a story of how statistics get used and abused in
Washington.

What CBO actually said is that the impact of the health care law on
supply and demand for labor would be small. Most of it would come from
people who no longer have to work, or can downshift to less demanding
employment, because insurance will be available outside the job.

"The legislation, on net, will reduce the amount of labor used in the
economy by a small amount _roughly half a percent_ primarily by
reducing the amount of labor that workers choose to supply," budget
office number crunchers said in a report from last year.

That's not how it got translated in the new report from Speaker John
Boehner, R-Ohio, and other top Republicans.

CBO "has determined that the law will reduce the 'amount of labor used
in the economy by.roughly half a percent.,' an estimate that adds up
to roughly 650,000 jobs lost," the GOP version said.

Gone was the caveat that the impact would be small, mainly due to
people working less. Added was the estimate of 650,000 jobs lost.

The Republican translation doesn't track, said economist Paul Fronstin
of the nonpartisan Employee Benefit Research Institute. "People
voluntarily working less isn't the same as employers cutting jobs," he
explained.

For example, CBO said some people might decide to retire earlier
because it would be easier to get health care, instead of waiting
until they become eligible for Medicare at age 65.

The law "reduces the amount of labor supplied, but it's not reducing
the ability of people to find jobs, which is what the job-killing
slogan is intended to convey," said economist Paul Van de Water of the
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. The center advocates for low-
income people, and supports the health care law.

In theory, any legislation that increases costs for employers can lead
to job loss. But with the health care law, companies can also decide
to pass on added costs to their workers, as some have already done
this year.

To put things in perspective, there are currently about 131 million
jobs in the economy. CBO projects that unemployment will be
significantly lower in 2014, when the law's major coverage expansion
starts.

A spokeswoman for House Ways and Means Committee Republicans pointed
out that CBO's report did flag that some employers would cut hiring.
"The CBO analysis does not claim that the entire response is people
exiting the labor market," said Michelle Dimarob.

The law's penalties on employers who don't provide health insurance
might cause some companies to hire fewer low-wage workers, or to hire
more part-timers instead of full-time employees, the budget office
said. But the main consequence would still be from more people
choosing not to work.

That still doesn't answer the question of how Republicans came up with
the estimate of 650,000 lost jobs.

Dimarob said staffers took the 131 million jobs and multiplied that by
half a percent, the number from the CBO analysis. The result: 650,000
jobs feared to be in jeopardy.

"For ordinary Americans who could fall into that half a percent, that
is a vitally important stat, and it is reasonable to suggest they
would not characterize the effect as small," she said.

But Fronstin said that approach is also questionable, since the budget
office and the GOP staffers used different yardsticks to measure
overall jobs and hours worked. The differences would have to be
adjusted first in order to produce an accurate estimate.

Said Van de Water, "The number doesn't mean what they say it means."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110118/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_care_repeal_fact_check

Monday, January 10, 2011

2nd Amendment Solutions, By Ballot or Bullet, and the Tea Bagger Fringe is shocked they are targeted as the source of the match that lite the flame of violence!

I am posting this Video, Photo and comments over and over, the thing
that is real scary is
how the crowd cheered to the violence of a 2nd amendment solution!

We May Have To Resort To The Bullet Box
http://opendebateforum2.blogspot.com/2011/01/catherine-crabill-va-gop-candidate-we.html

'By Ballot or Bullet Restoration is coming' a sign at a 9/12 rally
http://plixi.com/p/44747249

If a Detroit Muslim put a map on the web with crosshairs on 20 pols,
then 1 of them got shot, where would he be sitting right now? Just
asking. - Michael Moore

A physician cannot treat an illness s/he willfully refuses to
diagnose. Violent political rhetoric is not fault of "both sides." -
Tom Tomorrow

Inspiring that our media pundits are so quick to reach for
"everyone's
to blame" when no conservative events have been terrorized by gunmen.
- Jeffrey Feldman

Weird: rightwingers say movies, video games affect behavior -- but
real world violent rhetoric from leaders & radio talkers have NO
impact! - Tom Tomorrow

Jared Lougnner: drug arrests, too crazy for Army or for college or
anything else, but getting a legal gun? No problem. - Tom Tomorrow

I find it abhorrent that Sarah Palin would stoke the coals of
extremism with dangerous messaging, then delete it when something bad
happens. - Jason Pollock

Sure, Sarah Palin didn't pull the trigger. But then, neither did
Charles Manson. - auntbeast

Sarah Palin rummages online frantically erasing her rabble-rousing
Tweets like a Stalinist trimming non-persons out of photos. - Roger
Ebert

I'll say this, if your first instinct after hearing about a tragedy
is
to scrub yr websites, you have a problem as a political movement. -
digby56

CNN's Dana Bash says "this could be a wake-up call." THIS ... ? The
whole Tea Party, carrying guns to rallies WASN'T?? - hololio2

Teaparty asses have been asking for this to happen, and how they're
pissed off that we're calling them out on it. - TLW3

STOP SAYING"BOTH PARTIES"!! The Left has not been advocating
Violence.
@CNN assholes. - YatPundit

Friday, January 07, 2011

Simple Fact, The Health Care Law is exempt from the GOP CUT/GO law because is actually SAVES 100,000 Billions of Dollars!

So to eliminate the Health Care law will actually RAISE the DEBT.

One more time, to repeal the Health Care Law it will RAISE
the DEBT.

So the GOP is LYING about the Health Care Bill costing money.

So Now they have changed the reason for repealing the Bill
to it cost jobs?

Sounds like the ever changing reasons to invade Iraq.

They Lie, They Lie and They LIE!