A Novel solution to the Stalemate in Minnesota

Discussion in 'Politics' started by martybegan, Jul 12, 2011.

  1. martybegan
    Offline

    martybegan Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2010
    Messages:
    29,281
    Thanks Received:
    4,000
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Ratings:
    +10,913
    Currently the stalemate involves republican legistators refusing to pass any tax increases, and a democratic Governor who wants to pass a tax increase on people making $1,000,000 or more.

    The small size of this pool (around 3,000 people) leads to a new idea on the concept of taxing people more based on how much they make.

    ASK THEM.

    I'm sure you can identify them quick enough to have a special election, limited to the millionaires only.

    Have them vote on if they are willing to pay more to close out the budget impasse. Make it a secret ballot, and have both sides in the government pledge to abide by the results.
     
  2. Jarhead
    Offline

    Jarhead Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    20,554
    Thanks Received:
    2,348
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +3,286
    I think you miss the point.

    It is not an issue of whether or not they want to do it...

    It is an issue of changing the basis of America and start employing legislation that is designed to be for only some of the people.

    Once you start that......it opens up the floodgates.

    The government is to treat all of the people equally....
     
  3. hboats
    Offline

    hboats Silver Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2010
    Messages:
    1,297
    Thanks Received:
    199
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +199
    Governor Dayton just wants to raise taxes, if he can't raise taxes on the rich in Minnesota he has another solution. What is it? Raise taxes on the middle class and lower class. That's right, he wants to add a $1 per pack tax to cigarettes and an alcohol tax.

    Here's an even more novel solution. Get spending under control and then live within your budgeted income.

    I don't need my taxes raised. I need a government that budgets based on what they currently have, not based on how much more they can take from the people they are supposed to represent.

    Rick
     
  4. boedicca
    Offline

    boedicca Uppity Water Nymph Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2007
    Messages:
    41,772
    Thanks Received:
    12,766
    Trophy Points:
    2,250
    Location:
    The Land of Funk
    Ratings:
    +22,719
    This solution sounds a lot like a protection racket. When the government takes a small group and asks them how they feel about some policy or legislation, it smacks of Guido showing up at a shop saying "Nice place youse have here. Too bad something shoulds happen to it".
     
  5. martybegan
    Offline

    martybegan Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2010
    Messages:
    29,281
    Thanks Received:
    4,000
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Ratings:
    +10,913
    I do see the drawback to doing this, but it would be curious to see what the response is.

    This would be true "taxation with representation" unlike what we have now, with the masses dictating to a minority what they have to pay to the government.

    Aruging the need for progressive taxation can be in another thread, I was just wondering what would happen if they tried this. To me the sample size is small enough to get it put together in a few weeks.

    My reason for posting this is I remember political adds from the NYC unions the last time a millionaires tax was proposed. The line the commercial used was "and ASK the wealthy to pay just a little bit more". Of course they werent going to ask, they wanted the legislature to pass a tax increase on rich people.

    This would be a case of actually asking the top 1% to pay "just a little bit more" instead of forcing them by legislative fiat.
     
    Last edited: Jul 12, 2011

Share This Page