Dumbasses really didn't see this coming?

Look if you raise taxes on poor people, they're screwed. They can't afford to move. But you won't get much extra money because well...they're poor in the first place. So it isn't worth it to do this.

If you raise taxes on rich people, such as those who make millions, they can just GO, and move somewhere cheaper.

How fucking stupid do you have to be to fail to realize this?

They should have just started making cuts.

This is the same thing Kerry did with his boat. But the guy who has a 25 foot 5 schooner is screwed. The rich will find a way to protect their money.

It's just another reminder that the best and brightest minds are not working in government.

NJ raised a tax on big trucks. Why, hello, Philly is right over there!

The "luxury tax" put a 10% hike on boats and cars over $75K. Feadship and Rudy Choi, overseas yachtbuilders, rejoiced, as thousands of Americans were put out of work in Florida alone.

And once again I urge you to remember to be consistent: if you call for "the government" to do something, this is the level of expertise you think is just dandy.

New York already tried it, and a bunch of the rich bailed for Florida. It didn't bring in more money. Maryland, and Illinois, have got to be slow learners. There is a reason New York has trailed the nation economically for most of the past three decades. Don't imitate us.

Unless the plan is more failure. Because there isn't as far to fall when you're already down.

"Do this for 7 years and you add another million to your portfolio."

Umm, no, this is a gross conceptual error. What has happened is that the million was not otherwise lost due to the taxation. That's fundamental.

A public having trouble understanding what a "rebate" is will have trouble getting this.

While riding the limo, the executives will decide of relocating their entire operation is worth the trouble. If the state continues to screw up, then away they will go.

See "California".

"Fancy what a game of chess would be if all the chessman had passions and intellects, more or less small and cunning; if you were not only uncertain about your adversary's men, but a little uncertain also about your own . . . You would be especially likely to be beaten if you depended arrogantly on your mathematical imagination, and regarded your passionate pieces with contempt. Yet this imaginary chess is easy compared with a game man has to play against his fellow-men with other fellow-men for instruments."

--George Eliot, in Felix Holt, the Radical (1866)

There is a name for these type of people. They are called freeloaders. They don't want to pay their fair share. People like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett don't have a problem with paying their share, why do these jokers.

> There is a name for these type of people. They
> are called freeloaders.

A lot of these people pay more in taxes in a year than you do in a lifetime - so exactly how are they freeloaders?

I'm not a freeloader, but I can assure you if Texas ever does something stupid like start a state income tax (you know the sales tax won't go anywhere) we'll be leaving. Because there is just so much of my (or anyone's) money the government should be able to take. Period.

Ryan, if you could live somewhere equivalent for less, you'd be stupid not too. That's not freeloading, that's budget 101.

I don't think they are freeloaders. They pay in a lot of money in taxes. It isn't right to keep taking more and more from them, especially if you don't do it to everyone at all income levels.

The real freeloaders are the ones who don't pay in any taxes and receive refunds and credits far exceeding anything they have paid in for the year, like those that reap the benefit of the EIC. Someone I know, a mother with two kids, makes right about $20K. She filled put the online tax estimator from TurboTax as well as the one at H&R Block. Each one said she was entitled to roughly a $12K refund. Do you really think she paid in even a fraction of that money in taxes for the year? She's planning to go to Hawaii with that refund this year. She takes a really nice vacation every year with her refund and leaves her kids with relatives. Meanwhile, I make just over $50K, don't qualify for any of those credits, paid in a little over $8K in federal taxes, ans my refund is estimated to be $500. Really sounds like a "fair" system!

I'm with BunnyGirl.

The system kind of sucks.

Worst part of her example of the teacher is that the woman is probably putting almost nothing away for her future. She's counting on a tax payer funded pension, which means you'll be paying for her long after she's stopped working and you'd like to.

I always laugh, then feel a little bit pissed, when morons who pay $0.00 in taxes complain that rich people who pay increasingly huge sums in taxes as their income goes up, are "freeloaders" for not being eager to pay more.

lol, at least one person read the link i posted!

"There is a name for these type of people. They are called freeloaders."

Well I'm a freeloader then. I adjust my deferred comp to keep my AGI below certain thresholds. One thing I like about turbo tax is the ability to run scenarios. Of course with changing tax tables and other laws it's a moving target but the point is gaming doesn't just happen at the extreme upper end of the economy, and it doesn't even require particular sophistication.

There is a name for these type of people. They are called freeloaders.

An example: I drive from Philly to D.C. four times a week -- am I a freeloader?

Glenn Beck made a comment about how he now has rented two floors of a skyscraper in NYC. They have stopped remodeling pendig moving to lower tax climes.

You are making the assumption that because I make more yuo have more rights, through taxation, to my property.

This would be the same thing as the government saying you have a three bedroom house --you are couple living alone. We're moving in these two homeless people into your spare bedrooms. You have more than them so you need to give up more.

Radwaste, I should have written that one will have one million more in one's portfolio in the low tax state as compared to the predator state. Obviously one does not earn one million more, although I have ignored the money that one could have earned on that extra 150,000 a year the investor is able to keep.

Amy, as always, thanks for linking, it is very much appreciated.