  Dougw Member Username: Dougw Post Number: 1766 Registered: 11-2003 |
I thought this was a pretty balanced article that shows where Michigan is relative to other states in terms of taxing & spending: http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs .dll/article?AID=2007706240646 quote: The one area where I agree that spending could be cut a bit more is with state employee salaries/benefits. | ||
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed Post Number: 1080 Registered: 02-2006 |
NO NO NO CUT TAXES!! CUT TAXES!! It's the only way, you know. | ||
Futurecity Member Username: Futurecity Post Number: 599 Registered: 05-2005 |
Michigan is near middle of the pack in state taxes. Yet near the top in compensation for state bureaucrats. Translation: The hard-working people of Michigan are getting LESS fot their tax money. WORSE roads, WORSE schools and LESS OF EVERY STATE SERVICE. All so we can pad the paychecks and benefit packages of lazy-ass bureaucrats. | ||
Futurecity Member Username: Futurecity Post Number: 600 Registered: 05-2005 |
The state pays its bureaucrats $42,000 per year average in BENEFITS (not including salary). A truly outrageous sum. WTF can you even do with $42,000 a year in benefits? These are pigs feeding at the trough and we are paying our hard-earned money to keep it overflowing for them. | ||
Ccbatson Member Username: Ccbatson Post Number: 579 Registered: 11-2006 |
Mediocre is not good enough when the state economy is struggling. We have to attract residents and businesses. The weather isn't going to do it, organized labor isn't going to do,and liberals aren't going to do it. Yes, cut spending and taxes (don't replace the SBT for starters) to become better than mediocre and come out of the tailspin. Breaking down the unions would not hurt either | ||
Paulmcall Member Username: Paulmcall Post Number: 196 Registered: 05-2004 |
When you can't go to the library (because it's closed), get your trash picked up or have no one to put out your fire then you'll realize taxes do pay for something. Not replacing the SBT would bankrupt the state. | ||
Ccbatson Member Username: Ccbatson Post Number: 615 Registered: 11-2006 |
When you can't afford to live here because you have no job because business went where taxes were lower, you will be less worried about the library and trash. Liberals are going to bankrupt the state with, or without the SBT. | ||
Arclight Member Username: Arclight Post Number: 1 Registered: 06-2007 |
Spin it anyway you like, but obviously the cost of doing business is too high in Michigan, or else businesses wouldn't be leaving. | ||
Jhartmich Member Username: Jhartmich Post Number: 66 Registered: 04-2006 |
Seems like the Freep was just looking for something to print. Basically when all said and done, they could not make much of any point from the data. | ||
Dannaroo Member Username: Dannaroo Post Number: 75 Registered: 05-2006 |
Futurecity said: quote: Where does this figure come from? When I worked for the state, I know my benefits didn't work out to anywhere (but I don't doubt that there are likely some who were much higher up than I was who's benefits are really skewing the number). In any case, what's your source? | ||
Udmphikapbob Member Username: Udmphikapbob Post Number: 368 Registered: 07-2004 |
quote: Yep, look at 'em fleeing New York and California! Why, it's getting out of hand, all the businesses relocating to North Dakota and Alabama these days! | ||
Johnlodge Member Username: Johnlodge Post Number: 771 Registered: 10-2003 |
For what it's worth, this 2005 Milken Institute ranking puts Michigan at #10 as far as cost of doing business in the 50 states. Wage Cost and Tax Burden seem to be the areas where we are particularly high. http://www.milkeninstitute.org /pdf/cost_of_doing_business_20 05.pdf | ||
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg Post Number: 969 Registered: 12-2005 |
quote: I agree with you on that assessment. However, the article only looked at the relative positioning of Michigan's taxation and spending levels as of two years ago. The real problem Michigan is facing today is that the revenues being produced at those taxation levels are coming in below projections and are not enough to cover the overall spending plans baked into the annual State budget. So whatever our relative positioning has been with respect to other states, it means nothing because the current situation is out of balance and it is what must be addressed immediately. Whether we are a high or low tax state doesn't mean much because it is a static assessment and we are faced with a dynamic problem of state budget growth that for the past few years continues to be in excess of the growth rate of things like jobs, personal income, business profits, property values, population, etc. Using two-year-old relative positioning statistics to try and justify an approach to solving our current budget problem will get us nowhere, even if they were somewhat more conclusive. When faced with a repeating pattern of shortfalls in revenue, the first thing that needs to be done is to get control of your spending and limit it's growth to less than that of your revenue source's growth. To add new taxes and increase tax rates when you are unable to even reliably predict how much your existing tax mechanisms will generate seems foolish. Better to use the crisis to get spending under control first and then later - if necessary - makes changes to the tax mechanisms. |
