Uncivil Rights
A BLOG rife with wit, sarcasm, and the endless joy which comes from taunting the socialistic and unpatriotic liberal left. Logical thoughts and musings ONLY need reply...unless you're really, really funny. You have the Uncivil Right to be an IDIOT.
"Give me LIBERTY, or give me DEATH!"
Saturday, October 02, 2004
The Problem with Unions Part I
The American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) have posted their legislative agenda on their website www.afscme.org. This agenda is posted in the form of several “fact sheets” which I would like to address one by one.
“Restore Fairness to the Income Tax” – Fact Sheet
Most of the taxes cut in the 1990’s were income taxes to the benefit of the wealthiest citizens.
“…when the true cost of those tax cuts become clear…states have been reluctant to ask for the wealthy to contribute to the solution.”
“When balancing their budgets, states should look to those who received the most from the 1990’s tax cuts, and not to those who depend on public services to get by.”
Rebuttal: The concept of a taxpayer receiving a benefit when taxes are cut is socialistic. It is saying the government is giving them something when in actuality; it is the wage earner that is paying the government in the form of taxes. Utilizing socialism, the “wealthiest” received the most from the tax cuts because they “EARNED” the most wages, therefore they paid the most in taxes. Those who depend on public services to get by usually pay NO taxes. The solution should start by reducing costs and expenditures, and staying within a budget dictated by the fees and taxes collected.
America has created a welfare state. Welfare has become a way of life and income rather than the short-term help it was supposed to be. This in turn has fostered and enforced the greatest socialistic philosophy of income redistribution.
Income taxes can be an important part of the solution to state budget shortfalls.
“A one percentage point increase on incomes above $100,000 would generate…”
“A 10 percent across-the-board surcharge…would generate…”
“An income tax surcharge is a straightforward, progressive and easy to administer way of increasing state revenue.”
Rebuttal: AFSCME seems to be more interested in raising taxes and government spending than finding ways of governmental cost reduction. This is the biggest mistake unions make. Their leaders are stuck in the past rather than evolve as the business and economic climate of this country evolves. However, for the laymen today, unions are a business. For a business to prosper, it must make a profit. The profit for a union is found in its dues structure. The more union employees, the more union dues collected. Therefore, it is logical a union would argue against outsourcing and argue for increased taxes and services. Increased services will increase union members; increased taxes will pay for those workers.
Instead, unions should be looking to the future. By reducing taxes, consumer spending on goods and services increases. This in turn will increase manufacturing and eventually expand businesses which will then increase jobs (potentially union jobs).
Rather than looking for sources of revenues in the form of taxes and surcharges, unions should look for ways to expand businesses and create jobs.
Just the FAQs (Frequently Asked Questions)
“Raising income taxes, particularly on high-income taxpayers, will likely have less impact on economic growth than any other policy choices, like cutting funds for schools or infrastructure. A dollar cut in government spending immediately removes one dollar from the economy. When a dollar is raised in income taxes from high-income individuals some of that dollar may come from savings, thereby putting a dollar into the economy that otherwise may not have been there.”
“Most high-income individuals itemize their federal tax returns and deduct state and local taxes from their federal taxes. Therefore, the federal government will, in effect, provide high-income taxpayers a partial rebate on any additional state income taxes they may pay. People choose to live in a state because of its climate, jobs and social opportunities, not because of its tax structure.”
Rebuttal: School reform should be on the top of the list for unions. School vouchers would bring competition to the public school systems and increase effectiveness and efficiency of the public schools. School funding is at an all time high with little to show. Schools do not need more funding; the system needs to be fixed.
Any concept for removing someone’s savings is abhorrent and should not be tolerated. Social Security will not be around much longer, and people should be planning their future with that in mind. The concept presented above by the union is self-serving and does not have the best interest of the people in mind. Eventually, all money will enter the economy.
If the unions are so interested in keeping money in the economy, then the fair tax plan should have their full support. With more money in the pockets of the consumers, consumers will spend more, thereby putting more money in the economy.
There are many professional athletes that live in Texas due to the tax structure. If the above premise (this premise was true in the 1920’s and 30’s, once again showing unions still live in the, past )of living in a state for the climate, jobs, etc…, then Americans would be migrating to California for the seasonal work and eliminating any reason to hire illegal immigrants. However, due to the welfare state, people will go where they can get the most for the least. This is why we see concentrations of families on welfare in the urban areas.
“Restore Fairness to the Income Tax” – Fact Sheet
Most of the taxes cut in the 1990’s were income taxes to the benefit of the wealthiest citizens.
“…when the true cost of those tax cuts become clear…states have been reluctant to ask for the wealthy to contribute to the solution.”
“When balancing their budgets, states should look to those who received the most from the 1990’s tax cuts, and not to those who depend on public services to get by.”
Rebuttal: The concept of a taxpayer receiving a benefit when taxes are cut is socialistic. It is saying the government is giving them something when in actuality; it is the wage earner that is paying the government in the form of taxes. Utilizing socialism, the “wealthiest” received the most from the tax cuts because they “EARNED” the most wages, therefore they paid the most in taxes. Those who depend on public services to get by usually pay NO taxes. The solution should start by reducing costs and expenditures, and staying within a budget dictated by the fees and taxes collected.
America has created a welfare state. Welfare has become a way of life and income rather than the short-term help it was supposed to be. This in turn has fostered and enforced the greatest socialistic philosophy of income redistribution.
Income taxes can be an important part of the solution to state budget shortfalls.
“A one percentage point increase on incomes above $100,000 would generate…”
“A 10 percent across-the-board surcharge…would generate…”
“An income tax surcharge is a straightforward, progressive and easy to administer way of increasing state revenue.”
Rebuttal: AFSCME seems to be more interested in raising taxes and government spending than finding ways of governmental cost reduction. This is the biggest mistake unions make. Their leaders are stuck in the past rather than evolve as the business and economic climate of this country evolves. However, for the laymen today, unions are a business. For a business to prosper, it must make a profit. The profit for a union is found in its dues structure. The more union employees, the more union dues collected. Therefore, it is logical a union would argue against outsourcing and argue for increased taxes and services. Increased services will increase union members; increased taxes will pay for those workers.
Instead, unions should be looking to the future. By reducing taxes, consumer spending on goods and services increases. This in turn will increase manufacturing and eventually expand businesses which will then increase jobs (potentially union jobs).
Rather than looking for sources of revenues in the form of taxes and surcharges, unions should look for ways to expand businesses and create jobs.
Just the FAQs (Frequently Asked Questions)
“Raising income taxes, particularly on high-income taxpayers, will likely have less impact on economic growth than any other policy choices, like cutting funds for schools or infrastructure. A dollar cut in government spending immediately removes one dollar from the economy. When a dollar is raised in income taxes from high-income individuals some of that dollar may come from savings, thereby putting a dollar into the economy that otherwise may not have been there.”
“Most high-income individuals itemize their federal tax returns and deduct state and local taxes from their federal taxes. Therefore, the federal government will, in effect, provide high-income taxpayers a partial rebate on any additional state income taxes they may pay. People choose to live in a state because of its climate, jobs and social opportunities, not because of its tax structure.”
Rebuttal: School reform should be on the top of the list for unions. School vouchers would bring competition to the public school systems and increase effectiveness and efficiency of the public schools. School funding is at an all time high with little to show. Schools do not need more funding; the system needs to be fixed.
Any concept for removing someone’s savings is abhorrent and should not be tolerated. Social Security will not be around much longer, and people should be planning their future with that in mind. The concept presented above by the union is self-serving and does not have the best interest of the people in mind. Eventually, all money will enter the economy.
If the unions are so interested in keeping money in the economy, then the fair tax plan should have their full support. With more money in the pockets of the consumers, consumers will spend more, thereby putting more money in the economy.
There are many professional athletes that live in Texas due to the tax structure. If the above premise (this premise was true in the 1920’s and 30’s, once again showing unions still live in the, past )of living in a state for the climate, jobs, etc…, then Americans would be migrating to California for the seasonal work and eliminating any reason to hire illegal immigrants. However, due to the welfare state, people will go where they can get the most for the least. This is why we see concentrations of families on welfare in the urban areas.
totalkaosdave, 7:49 PM
|
