News:

Long overdue maintenance happening. See post in the top forum.

Main Menu

Oklahoma House Votes to REDUCE Tax Rate

Started by guido911, April 21, 2009, 06:41:21 PM

Previous topic - Next topic


guido911

Quote from: FOTD on April 21, 2009, 07:16:23 PM
Shameful political shenanigans....

So Guido, what gets cut out of the budget. Take the lead.....

Oklahoma historical society, Oklahoma Scenic Rivers Commission, all the BS licensing commisisons (barber, cosmotoligists, hearing aid fitters)...Go ahead, defend these programs to the taxpayers. I would also amend Oklahoma Governmental Tort Claims Act to include more exemptions from liability and improve the language in the statute as such applies to medical, road construction, and DMHSAS-related activities.
Someone get Hoss a pacifier.

Chicken Little

Quote from: guido911 on April 21, 2009, 06:41:21 PM
Every little bit helps
Helps what?  Helps compound our problems?

According the the article you posted:
QuoteThe state is facing a revenue shortfall estimated at more than $600 million, but the overall budget shortfall is closer to $900 million after accounting for funding commitments and one-time funds used a year ago that are no longer available.

Hickman claims that some (but not all) of this shortfall would be made up by federal stimulus next year.  So what's he saying?  That we should use one-time money to PRETEND we can afford tax cuts?  You don't have to be a math whiz to figure out that when the stimulus money runs out, you're left with an even BIGGER shortfall.  It's a variant of Grover Norquist's famous comment; Hickman is trying to drown government in his own stupidity.   

And Guido, millions of people visit these museums, historic sites, and natural areas.  Shutting down tourism in Oklahoma may not be the brightest move in the long run or the short run, but whatever.  We'll set that aside and give you credit for finding a grand total of about $4 million.  Apply that to the shortfall in the "Land of the Hick-man", and you only need to find $1 billion more.  Good for you!

We know that these tired old ideas are intellectually bankrupt, so driving the state into actual bankruptcy seems like showing off.  On a positive note, this growing collection of dim bulbs might make a dent in our energy consumption.

nathanm

Quote from: Chicken Little on April 22, 2009, 12:12:48 AM
We know that these tired old ideas are intellectually bankrupt, so driving the state into actual bankruptcy seems like showing off.  On a positive note, this growing collection of dim bulbs might make a dent in our energy consumption.
Dim bulbs use more energy per lumen, so no dent. :(

I think Guido and his ilk must be the same sort who think that Oklahoma roads and bridges aren't really bad at all, the whole crumbling infrastructure thing is just manufactured by the media to try and take more tax dollars.
"Labor is prior to and independent of capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration" --Abraham Lincoln

TUalum0982

I think it is a big mistake.  We are already in shortfall, and this reduction will only make it worse.  For me personally, they can keep the 1.1%.  I not rich by any stretch of the imagination, but 1.1% wouldn't really do much for my soon to be wife and I.
"You cant solve Stupid." 
"I don't do sorry, sorry is for criminals and screw ups."

guido911

Quote from: Chicken Little on April 22, 2009, 12:12:48 AM
Helps what?  Helps compound our problems?


No, helps those of us paying mega taxes already. I know you have no problem with the evil "rich" paying more, but I do. We are supposedly in tough economic times here, everyone should belt tighten including our government. If that means that museums don't get their money, so be it. Sorry, that's how I feel.
Someone get Hoss a pacifier.

Hoss

Quote from: guido911 on April 22, 2009, 09:32:43 AM
No, helps those of us paying mega taxes already. I know you have no problem with the evil "rich" paying more, but I do. We are supposedly in tough economic times here, everyone should belt tighten including our government. If that means that museums don't get their money, so be it. Sorry, that's how I feel.

Wow, that whopping 3.5 percent tax increase to pre-bush tax levels.

Although I guess if you make a gazillion dollars it would be more than us mere mortals make in a year.

::)

Conan71

Poor timing on another tax cut.  I'm usually all about cutting taxes and waste, but I really don't see how the state can afford a cut in revenue right now.  The story says $600mm loss as a result of cutting to 4%?  I also don't like the idea of cutting budgets of agencies which help promote tourism (Historical, Scenic Rivers), and therefore an import, of dollars flowing into the state from visitors.

If they really wanted to cut taxes that bad and do it as a measure to help out those who might be struggling, cut state sales tax on groceries.

This isn't a liberal v. conservative issue here.  It's about common sense, and there is none in this tax cut.
"It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first" -Ronald Reagan

swake

I'm with Conan,

This is not the time. And when oil prices recover and the state is flush with cash again and is ready to cut taxes, the state needs to work to get out of the Sales Tax business. Oklahoma can start by ending sales taxes on groceries and by giving at least a penny back to local governments for infrastructure.

carltonplace

swake, agreed on the state sales tax. It isn't fair for the state to limit municipalities to sales tax revenue only and then go grab the first four cents.

Chicken Little

Quote from: guido911 on April 22, 2009, 09:32:43 AM
No, helps those of us paying mega taxes already.
No, get with the program.  Oklahoma's state and local tax burden is 19th this year, according to the Tax Foundation.  Oklahomans aren't paying "mega" anything...and it shows.

guido911

Quote from: Chicken Little on April 22, 2009, 12:46:12 PM
No, get with the program.  Oklahoma's state and local tax burden is 19th this year, according to the Tax Foundation.  Oklahomans aren't paying "mega" anything...and it shows.

Bullcrap. I paid more in federal income tax this year than I did in the previous four years combined. If I get to keep a little more of MY money (get it, not YOUR money), I'm pleased.
Someone get Hoss a pacifier.

TheArtist

 So if this decreases our over all tax burden, wouldnt that mean for instance, Tulsa could take some of that money which would have gone to the Oklahoma history museum and use it for the Tulsa History Museum or another attraction here? We are always complaining about how much of our money goes to the state and OKC gets more than its fair share. Well, less that goes to OKC means more we can use to decide what gets done with it locally in Tulsa. Though I do agree that, if they are going to cut programs/infrastructure/education,etc. they should give the cities the ability to choose to finance those things with income taxes not just sales taxes.

There are things we would like to have here in Tulsa. On the one hand the state has a tendancy to gyp Tulsa and give to OKC. But then when they cut state funding, they dont make it easy or fair for us to fund things our selves. We get screwed either way it seems.
"When you only have two pennies left in the world, buy a loaf of bread with one, and a lily with the other."-Chinese proverb. "Arts a staple. Like bread or wine or a warm coat in winter. Those who think it is a luxury have only a fragment of a mind. Mans spirit grows hungry for art in the same way h

rwarn17588

Quote from: guido911 on April 22, 2009, 12:54:19 PM
Bullcrap. I paid more in federal income tax this year than I did in the previous four years combined. If I get to keep a little more of MY money (get it, not YOUR money), I'm pleased.

OK, let me get this straight.

Guido, the Obama stimulus package gives you a tax break and runs up bigger deficits. You oppose it.

The state wants to give you a tax break and run up a bigger deficit. You support it.

Huh? This does not compute.