  Sstashmoo Member Username: Sstashmoo Post Number: 491 Registered: 02-2007 |
SBAM sent out an alert today, Lansing has dealt another blow to Michigan and Detroit area businesses. http://www.fightservicetax.com / | ||
Novine Member Username: Novine Post Number: 164 Registered: 07-2007 |
Someone has to pay. If it's not a tax on services, it's going to be something else. Or are state legislators ready to say no more funding for public schools, closing prisons, and closing secretary of state offices, all of which were proposed as cuts that would take place without the funds from the services tax? | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 4303 Registered: 10-2004 |
Why is the services tax three times as much than that lying Granholm wanted earlier? | ||
Umcs Member Username: Umcs Post Number: 153 Registered: 06-2007 |
Practically, because it is on fewer services. Broader base of taxpayers = lower tax rate (generally). The other legal reason is because they jacked it onto the sales tax act, which is imposed at 6%. | ||
Detroitsuperfly Member Username: Detroitsuperfly Post Number: 347 Registered: 07-2005 |
Conditions change LY. Someone has to pay off all the republican debt that Engler incurred. | ||
Umcs Member Username: Umcs Post Number: 154 Registered: 06-2007 |
I do have one question though. Considering personal dating services are included in the tax, do you think we'll stop seeing those darn advertisements for EHarmony and Match now that their businesses will pull out of Michigan? I could only hope. | ||
Perfectgentleman Member Username: Perfectgentleman Post Number: 3698 Registered: 03-2006 |
Already Andy Dillon wants to go to 7% on the sales tax and the number of services currently taxed will be expanded. And yes, Granholm did lie. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 4304 Registered: 10-2004 |
I got an even better idea. Let's tax SF and his ilk at a 200% income tax rate, and make it retroactive to their DOBs? | ||
Detroitsuperfly Member Username: Detroitsuperfly Post Number: 348 Registered: 07-2005 |
"I got an even better idea. Let's tax SF and his ilk at a 200% income tax rate, and make it retroactive to their DOBs?" Mr Stalin, is that you? | ||
Umcs Member Username: Umcs Post Number: 155 Registered: 06-2007 |
LY, Do you own a business as an aside? | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 4305 Registered: 10-2004 |
I do services, in addition to other things. I can feel how one who is currently unaffected being taxed in short order. That's how the government works. By slowing turning up the temperature. It starts by getting a toe hold, and given enough time, it could be swallowing your feet, ankles, knees, hips, etc. Burp! | ||
Udmphikapbob Member Username: Udmphikapbob Post Number: 480 Registered: 07-2004 |
quote: Because the "we can cut our way to prosperity" crowd freaked out at a broad 2% tax, so you got stuck with a confusing 6% tax on some stuff, but nothing on other services. Also because the Governor doesn't write legislation, she can only sign or veto what the Legislature sends to her. Try looking in a mirror for your answer. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 4307 Registered: 10-2004 |
Just heard the GOP's ad at 5:07 on WJR for the first time. It's a lot funnier than Granholm's. | ||
Perfectgentleman Member Username: Perfectgentleman Post Number: 3699 Registered: 03-2006 |
Yeah, it is funny. "We hate to say we told you so, but we told you so." The Dem's ad blames "Bush's trade policies," I guess they forgot that NAFTA and GATT were signed by Bill Clinton. (Message edited by perfectgentleman on October 11, 2007) | ||
Professorscott Member Username: Professorscott Post Number: 870 Registered: 12-2006 |
The service tax is confusing because, and I wish I could remember who said this first, it is a tax on services that are not represented by lobbyists. The amount of this and that tax is very simple really. We have to decide as a state what services we want and how much we are willing to pay, then the amount of tax we bring in (in whatever forms) has to equal what we plan to spend. Nobody wants to talk about that, though, so what we do instead is exactly what we did last year and the year before that, only maybe a little less of it, and try to tweak the tax code to make it almost kinda match. Our legislature, basically, isn't willing to earn their keep. I lump the Governor in with that as well. We need real, structural changes in what we do as a State and how we do it, but all we get are wimpy little pushing around the edges. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 4309 Registered: 10-2004 |
I thought Granholm's ad was comedy because there was so much lying. I don't watch TV. Was her nose growing on the TV version? | ||
Jrvass Member Username: Jrvass Post Number: 259 Registered: 01-2007 |
Dirty little Demoncrat secret... $1 billion of the 1.75 billion is new spending. Thanks Jenny Grandwhore! | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 4315 Registered: 10-2004 |
quote:Yup! Twenty-one brand new programs, which will be partially unfunded within a year. So, as a result, the annual taxing and spending will be even higher the next legislative session with about 120,000 fewer workers paying taxes by then statewide than this year. And it'll spiral downward year after year. Pilots call that a graveyard spiral. | ||
Lefty2 Member Username: Lefty2 Post Number: 312 Registered: 07-2007 |
Lets increase the tax on politicians salary by 20%, that should help the budget a little, huh | ||
Digitalvision Member Username: Digitalvision Post Number: 414 Registered: 11-2003 |
I love how Granholm talks about "Cool cities" and then slaps a selective tax on graphic designers and creative artists, illustrators, etc (NAICS 5414). REALLY NICE DOUBLE TALK. As to what Professorscott said, he's exactly right. Was talking to a business associate and they were espousing how much money they spent on lobbyists to get their group off the service tax list. This was totally a hack job of a law that, if you look down the list, hurts lots of groups that traditionally don't have large lobbyists (like shoe shiners). I'm not voting for Granholm again - and I usually go democrat. | ||
Thecarl Member Username: Thecarl Post Number: 1079 Registered: 04-2005 |
quote: please, be fair. it wasn't until just after the election that granholm learned of greater-than-expected tax revenue shortfall. do you expect her to have some superhuman ability to see into the future and anticipate business conditions? | ||
Perfectgentleman Member Username: Perfectgentleman Post Number: 3702 Registered: 03-2006 |
quote: Please. | ||
Novine Member Username: Novine Post Number: 166 Registered: 07-2007 |
"Yup! Twenty-one brand new programs, which will be partially unfunded within a year." Really? What are the programs? | ||
Bob Member Username: Bob Post Number: 1575 Registered: 11-2003 |
Correction, it wasn't until after the election that Granholm announced the great than expected shortfall. If she really didn't know about it, then she has extremely dumb people working for her. Not that Dick DeVos would be doing any better right now. | ||
Perfectgentleman Member Username: Perfectgentleman Post Number: 3720 Registered: 03-2006 |
I seriously doubt that Devos would have supported raising taxes in the way they were done. He was also not beholden to unions as Grahnolm is. The sacred cows in the ranks of the government employees are off limits with Granholm. | ||
Bob Member Username: Bob Post Number: 1576 Registered: 11-2003 |
DeVos's inexperience in government would not have made the situation play out much different. The Dems would still have controlled the House and would have probably let government shutdown. DeVos may know how to run a private company, but I think he would have serious issues trying to run public government. He may not have raised taxes, but he would not have known how to compromise with the legislature short of writing them a fat check from his personal fortune to get what he wants. Not to mention his wife was such a nutjob when she was the head of the MI GOP. She did not even get along with John Engler. | ||
The_rock Member Username: The_rock Post Number: 1991 Registered: 11-2003 |
A nickel for every post on a DY thread. That will clear up any budget problem quickly. Supersport and jjaba will lead the way. Of course, Lowell will have to hire a cadre of accountants to settle weekly with Lansing. | ||
The_rock Member Username: The_rock Post Number: 1992 Registered: 11-2003 |
A nickel for every post on a DY thread. That will clear up any budget problem quickly. Supersport and jjaba will show us the way. Of course, Lowell will have to hire a cadre of accountants to settle weekly with Lansing. | ||
Viziondetroit Member Username: Viziondetroit Post Number: 1187 Registered: 11-2003 |
"Considering personal dating services are included in the tax, do you think we'll stop seeing those darn advertisements for EHarmony and Match now that their businesses will pull out of Michigan? I could only hope." ^^^^^^^^ lol lol lol lol | ||
Perfectgentleman Member Username: Perfectgentleman Post Number: 3727 Registered: 03-2006 |
Bob - Not that it benefits anyone to speculate about a Devos victory, but yes he was not as experienced in government although I am not sure that is a negative. However I would rather have a guy who understands business than a tax and spend liberal lawyer who is beholden to the very interest groups that need to be reigned into streamline government in this state. | ||
Bob Member Username: Bob Post Number: 1577 Registered: 11-2003 |
Well, we may get our chance to have him as our governor yet. Although I would hope the GOP would be smarter than that. Although DeVos can scare anyone away with his Scamway money. Although if we have Lt. Gov Cherry on the Dem side, I think we will end up with DeVos as our governor. (Message edited by bob on October 12, 2007) | ||
The_ed Member Username: The_ed Post Number: 38 Registered: 10-2007 |
"The proof is in the put in." | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 4320 Registered: 10-2004 |
Rock: Today's special: You get a 10% discount on your duplicate posts earlier today. | ||
Jdkeepsmiling Member Username: Jdkeepsmiling Post Number: 301 Registered: 01-2006 |
The problem with DeVos was how scary his wife is. She is pretty much every evil thing that anyone can say about politician. Kind of like the reason I did not vote for Clinton the second time was Hillary. Scary spouses are not good things. | ||
Perfectgentleman Member Username: Perfectgentleman Post Number: 3741 Registered: 03-2006 |
Yeah, Dan Mulhern and his taxpayer funded staff is far better. | ||
Novine Member Username: Novine Post Number: 169 Registered: 07-2007 |
DeVos's biggest problem would have been his fellow Republicans. They talked tough about budget cuts but many of them bailed on that and MESSA when it came time to vote. | ||
The_rock Member Username: The_rock Post Number: 1993 Registered: 11-2003 |
LOL, Livernois! Mea culpa too. I guess it boils down to who had the stronger lobby advocating their respective causes. And if that's the case, then Michigan has both more and effective lobbyists representing the golfing industry, than they do representing the skiing industry. Or, perhaps the legislators prefer golf to skiing At least the attorney fee remains sancrosect, and not subject to the wicked tax. And I will only post this once. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 4322 Registered: 10-2004 |
It's interesting see what might come of the recall drive against those RINOs and Dems that started today or yesterday. Detroit and Michigan won't improve until there are fundamental changes made to the state's finances, which the current crop of career politicians won't make. Therefore, it's beneficial to shorten the careers of those least responsive to change. Apparently, receivership (or threats of) for cities or taxpayers' revolts are probably the only forces with teeth. The young won't stay and after a decade, there won't be many middle-aged people with families around either. The politicians surely know this, but they're just concerned about the very short term and their fiefdoms and feeding their cronies. | ||
Mauser765 Member Username: Mauser765 Post Number: 1990 Registered: 01-2004 |
"Was her nose growing on the TV version?" No, but that mole on her face was giving her advertising advice. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 4324 Registered: 10-2004 |
What Granholm needs is a witch's wart on the tip of her nose--a beauty mark. | ||
Bob Member Username: Bob Post Number: 1580 Registered: 11-2003 |
Leon Drolet for Governor | ||
Umcs Member Username: Umcs Post Number: 163 Registered: 06-2007 |
Bob, Do you mean the hypocritical Leon Drolet who continues to milk the taxpayers of the State of Michigan for lifetime medical benefits for his stint in the Legislature while also milking the taxpayers of Macomb County for his salary and benefits as a County Commissioner? You mean that Leon Drolet? Keep drinking the hooch. | ||
Bob Member Username: Bob Post Number: 1581 Registered: 11-2003 |
I was being highly sarcastic. | ||
Umcs Member Username: Umcs Post Number: 166 Registered: 06-2007 |
Thank god Bob. I was thinking I was going to have to hunt you down and shoot you with a hammer-gun. | ||
Mcp001 Member Username: Mcp001 Post Number: 3034 Registered: 11-2003 |
I highly doubt that'll happen. Most of those targeted for recall are republicans. The mi-gop is in a bit of a quandary right about now (no pun intended). They claim to support smaller government and lower taxes (which ironically, wasn't too different from KK telling Detroiters to get off of their porches and get a job). They also blindly support those who sport a "-r" after their names, which places them in a Catch-22. Stay tuned... |
