 |
| |
|
|
Sava
|
 |
GO GO GO!
Mar 2001
time: 23:30
|
|
quote:
Published on Monday, August 25, 2003 by the Seattle Post-Intelligencer
Alabama Tax Plan Causes Unholy Outrage
by Neal Peirce
Who would Jesus tax? How much of a burden would he lay on the poor? How about the rich and big corporations?
Alabama voters will face that kind of issue on Sept. 9 — an explosive proposal to reform America's most regressive tax system, long skewed to protect affluent individuals and the state's "Big Mules" — powerful timber and farm interests.
There's no other state where a family of three or four pays tax on income of as little as $4,600 a year. Last year the lowest-earning one-fifth of Alabama taxpayers paid 10.3 percent of their incomes in state and local levies. But the richest 1 percent paid just 3.7 percent.
Enter Alabama's Republican Gov. Bob Riley, a staunchly conservative former congressman of the Newt Gingrich school who hosts Bible classes at the state Capitol in Montgomery. Confronted with a $675 million budget deficit, Riley revolted. Cutting that deeply, he feared, would trigger a "catastrophic failure of government" in a state already in the national cellar of per-capita spending for education and other basic services.
But Riley went a lot further than suggesting tax hikes to cover the deficit. He recommended a massive "tax and accountability" plan increasing taxes by $1.2 billion over five years, eight times the largest increase ever before enacted in Alabama. Many of the new funds would be targeted to habitually underfunded and underperforming public schools, accompanied by measures to thin out incompetent teachers and better prepare Alabama residents for a competitive 21st-century economy.
But in the process Riley proposed giving the poor a huge break — no income taxes at all below $20,000 in income.
"I've spent a lot of time reading the New Testament," said Riley, "and it has three philosophies: Love God, love each other, and take care of the least among you. It is immoral to charge somebody making $5,000 a year an income tax."
Under Riley's proposal, just the top third of income earners, plus corporations and large farm and timber operations, would pay more taxes. The state's lowest-in-the-nation property taxes would rise moderately. Alabama would rise from 50th to 44th in total state and local per-capita taxes.
Alabama's mainstream religious denominations are backing Riley. Eight former presidents of the Alabama Baptist State Convention recently declared his plan will end unfair taxation, "bringing relief and justice to the poor who are our neighbors." Many mainstream business groups, including insurance, utility, banking and consumer-product firms, back the measure as a way to boost education and sharpen work-force skills.
But a number of independent Christian congregations — not to mention the Alabama chapter of the American Christian Coalition — are against the measure. Anti-tax groups are bitterly opposed. In a topsy-turvy political landscape, the state's Republican Party is opposed, while the Democratic Party is in favor.
Polls show the revenue measure, which the state constitution mandates must go to popular vote, trailing by about 20 points. That's partly because low-income and black voters, who'd benefit the most, remain largely opposed — reflecting their suspicion of the Montgomery political establishment they believe has invariably scorned and disserved them. Timber and other corporate interests opposing the measure are financing television ads aimed at exploiting less-educated people's fears.
Meanwhile, such groups as the National Taxpayers Union and Eagle Forum are mobilizing in opposition, fearing their nationwide anti-tax message will be muddied. Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform, wants "to make Riley the poster child for Republicans who go bad. I want every conservative Republican elected official in the United States to watch Bob Riley lose and learn from it."
What is certain is that gross unfairness in state tax systems, the affluent and powerful benefiting at the expense of the poor, is hardly restricted to Alabama. In fact, 46 of the 50 states take a much larger share of income from lower- and middle-income families than they do from wealthy citizens.
Last year, the lowest-earning 20 percent of Americans had an average state and local tax rate of 9.6 percent — almost twice the 5.2 percent paid by the richest 1 percent of Americans. The figures, which count in the benefit from deducting state and local taxes from individuals' federal tax returns, were calculated by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy. They actually show the state and local systems have become even more regressive in the last decade.
So next month's referendum outcome in 90 percent Christian Alabama may have far-reaching national implications. A Riley win could lead to spirited re-examination of state and local tax systems, on moral and religious grounds.
If Riley loses, on the other hand, we'll have pretty convincing proof that for all the moral high ground Christians claim, in a showdown they open themselves to criticism that they hate taxes more than they love Jesus.
Copyright © 2003 The Seattle Times Company
|
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0825-06.htm
Seeing as I bash the South and Republicans a lot, I'd like to give a shot out to Mr. Riley, who appears to be doing a lot of good in his state. I was appalled to hear about the state tax situation in that state. Incomes as low as $4,600 are taxed higher than the top 1% of income!!! I'm glad to see the mainstream Christian groups supporting the measure. And I'm not surprised that the corrupt, corporate Christian Coalition is against the measure.
Go Riley! 
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970
time: 05:30
|
|
If taxing poor people's income is immoral, taxing anyone's income is also immoral.
The point of a tax should not be a carrot-and-stick system, the point of which is to enact punitive tax programs against the middle class and wealthy and use that money to reward the poor for being poor.
The only quasi-legitimate purpose of an income tax (and this still doesn't make it moral) is to fund the GOVERNMENT, not government PROGRAMS. The minimum amount of money necessary for the government to operate is all the government needs.
In any case, if faced with a budget deficit, the government should have to do what *I* have to do - CUT SPENDING! That's the only responsible way to pay your bills - NOT make someone else do it for you.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Berzerker
|
 |
topeka, kansas,USA
May 1999
time: 23:30
|
|
Sava - From the article:
quote:
Who would Jesus tax? |
No one, he never told his followers to "tax" anyone. People asking this question obviously cannot quote him and must ignore what he did say. 
quote:
Last year the lowest-earning one-fifth of Alabama taxpayers paid 10.3 percent of their incomes in state and local levies. But the richest 1 percent paid just 3.7 percent. |
I just love it when the left becomes disgusted with tax rates. Btw, is that a questionable stat like the one below? What is the state income tax without local levies?
quote:
Last year, the lowest-earning 20 percent of Americans had an average state and local tax rate of 9.6 percent — almost twice the 5.2 percent paid by the richest 1 percent of Americans. The figures, which count in the benefit from deducting state and local taxes from individuals' federal tax returns, were calculated by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy. |
How horrible, those nasty rich people who are paying God only knows what in federal taxes get to deduct some state and local taxes? Shameful! But can I ask someone to translate that because it doesn't seem to make sense if it's relevant. How does this qualify as a benefit wrt state and local rates? It's a "benefit" in regard to the federal tax, not state taxes.
quote:
In fact, 46 of the 50 states take a much larger share of income from lower- and middle-income families than they do from wealthy citizens. |
Hmm...I must be in one of the 4...which is strange considering this "conservative" Republican state I live in has some damn high taxes. But how can that be? Some states don't even have income taxes. Hell, many people here (you know, those nasty rich people) pay far more in property taxes than the poor pay in income taxes. In fact, we pay more in property taxes alone than the poor pay in income taxes - by far. There is something seriously wrong with these stats, Sava.
quote:
Polls show the revenue measure, which the state constitution mandates must go to popular vote, trailing by about 20 points. That's partly because low-income and black voters, who'd benefit the most, remain largely opposed — reflecting their suspicion of the Montgomery political establishment they believe has invariably scorned and disserved them. |
Now there's some of that left wing bias for ya, how do we explain their opposition in nice terms while indicting the motives of everyone else?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
chegitz guevara
|
 |
Ft. Lauderdale, FL Communist Party of Apolyton
Jun 2000
time: 00:30
|
|
Well, let me shock some here by saying that I think everyone should pay taxes, regardless of their income level. The amount should be progressive and a bearable burden on everyone, but if you pay no taxes, you have no real stake in the system. Oh sure, you might be a lazy, greedy person who collects a check "Where's "my" money," but beyond that, you won't have much interest in civic matters. But when you have your money involved, you have a reason to pay attention and take part.
Does that make any sense?
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:30.
Apolyton Time is 00:30. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
28-08-2003 18:29
I'll just leave it at that.
But yes, Jesus would ask, not force.
|