Governor Rick Perry likes to say Texas is experiencing an economic miracle because of small government and low taxes. Another take:
[S]mall government still doesn't mean scant government in Texas. It means lots and lots of small government and accompanying taxes. Sure, a new Texan might relish the paycheck bump owed to the state's lack of income tax. But a typical Dallas property-owner pays property taxes to the county, city, local schools, county hospital district, a county educational services district and a community college district, along with sales tax to the state, sales tax to the regional transportation agency and a plethora of local, county, regional and state fees and excise taxes.
In addition, a host of new tax-related entities, mainly invisible to the public, has been created in the last 25 years, including municipal utility districts, tax increment financing districts, redevelopment zones, municipal management districts and more, most of which have the power to borrow money, all of which must be repaid by taxes.
Leave a Comment:
This tends to always be the case with taxes. If you truly look up all the things that the government pays for and provides as a service, whether its a City, County, State or Federal, money is needed to pay for those things. So if you don't pay a big state tax of some kind that burden just falls to the counties or cities. So yes people shout in joy you have no state income tax, but now you will pay more some how through the county or city. You're still going to pay money if you want those public services!
Texas?...you can expand that to the whole United States.
President Obama has just slammed the banks for charging a $5 per month transaction fee on debit cards because recent legislation limited the fee banks could charge retailers. It was not hard to figure out this fee would have to be passed on to consumers.
President Obama has no problem increasing the $2.50 security fee on flights to $5 with more increases to come. He's also proposed increased fees on airlines that will also be passed on to consumers.
And on taxes...last night Ms. Maddow did another of her artful bait and switch moves. She played a new ad that criticizes President Obama for raising taxes despite his words that taxes should not be raised on anyone during a recession.
Ms. Maddow said there were pictures of "middle class" citizens in the ad and then she adopted those words. Going so far as to say, "that damning 'he wants to raise middle class taxes' ad."
Here are the facts asserted in the ad: President Obama said taxes should not be raised on anyone in a recession. He has and proposes more. No word of middle class.
Ms. Maddow continued the session making the case, in part, that "we are in danger of slipping back into another recession."
Now, if Ms. Maddow was really reporting she would analyze President Obama's words used in the clip that "you don't raise taxes during a recession" and then challenge why he is proposing raising taxes as we head towards another recession.
LOL
1st its only ONE bank and that`s Bank of America or anti-america.
and he as We The People know is only talking about the top 1% you know the ones who can help out! if they still american enough that is.
If you read the reasoning behind the elimination of swipe fees (what the banks charged the vendors before), they clearly stated that the banks were charging $0.27+ for something that cost them $0.07-$0.10 - the main point being that it was an invisible fee. If BofA wants to charge their customers $5 a month for something that other banks don't charge for, that is their prerogative. Any customer of BofA can simply switch banks to one that doesn't charge that fee - capitalist free market competition at it's purest form. My bank actually pays me for using my debit card (and not getting bills mailed to me every month) - so to say that the banks had no choice is disingenuous. BofA just took a "gouge the customer" route.
Blaming Obama for a decision that a private bank made solely to keep the profit margin high is a joke. They could have decided to cut compensation to their executive board and CEO to offset the loss in income, but they chose to punish the consumers and blame the government - which you bought hook line and sinker.
made solely to keep the profit margin high
greed as well, cause they just layed off 10K, guess that didnt save enough.
Pilotshark, you are incorrect.
Here's a sourced quote:
My local regional bank has already started the fee.
Bolbis, care to offer a source. You are correct that the fee was invisible and that is because it was "hidden" in the cost of the retail goods purchased. Retailers use to have to pay this fee to the banks so they charged us in the price of the product.
Do you now think the retailers are going to reduce the price of their goods accordingly? So, now we pay the fee in the price and the fee to the bank, stupid legislation that designed from the heart and not the head.
@RobDon - the source is the Federal Reserve's review of the banking industry and the numbers come directly from the banks themselves. Link as follows:http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/testimony/raskin20110217a.htm
Here is the paragraph that explains it (as it is buried in the report):
" Eighty percent of issuers that responded to the survey and provided the necessary information reported average variable costs of authorizing, clearing, and settling a debit card transaction that were below the proposed 12 cent cap. This alternative would also permit an issuer to comply with the standard by receiving an interchange fee that does not exceed the level of a safe harbor. If the interchange fee is at or below the safe harbor, the issuer would not need to determine its maximum interchange fee based on allowable costs. The proposed rule initially sets the safe harbor at 7 cents per transaction, which represents the median average variable cost of authorizing, clearing, and settling a debit card transaction reported by issuers that responded to our survey and provided that information. Under the second alternative, an issuer would comply with the interchange fee standard as long as it does not receive an interchange fee above the cap. The proposed rule provides the same initial cap of 12 cents per transaction."
So my memory recall wasn't perfect, it was actually a median average of $0.07, and the cap was set at $0.12. The banks were charging $0.44 per swipe prior to the Dodd/Frank legislation. That is a 366%-628% markup (using the $0.07-$0.12 actual cost range from the report).
The report also mentions that debit cards are used in 35% of non-cash transactions, so as far as retailers lowering their prices - that seems unlikely (I don't know what percentage of sales are cash vs credit/debit vs check). What is more likely is that they will not have to raise the prices as quickly as soon as they see more profit coming in due to $0.30 less being taken from their pockets and handed to the banks for providing their customers with the option of using a debit card.
Applaud, applaud, applaud....I like it when someone is willing to back up what they say and even admit error (although very slight in your case). Thank you, thank you, thank you...(and please do not interpret this as sarcasm, someone willing to provide sources, in my experience, has been very rare.)
I concede most of your points with the following observations:
1. The .07 to .12 cost were variable costs only, it does not include (nor did the law provide) fixed costs such as computer networks, communication medium, etc. needed for the transaction. But would think that was negligible and the reason it was not included.
2. I just glanced at the testimony link and I assume the survey was of banking institutions and the information accurate. No reason to think otherwise.
3. Lastly, it is not uncommon for a business to have very high margins in one area so they can offer free (or low or negative) services elsewhere. I can not make the case for this in this situation.
Thanks again Bolbis!
I don't have the facts to back this up, but I believe . . . that is the way it works. Less Federal Guvmint means less Federal Guvmint $$$$$ in the local economy. So wherejathinkitwouldcomefrom?
When you live in a state that has no income tax, you do not have the revenue to collect trash & recyles or repair roads so you have to belong to a local Home Owners' Association. Your dues are TAXES for which you receive services. If you don't have an HOA, then I guess you have bring your trash to the dump and pay per bag - hmmmm, which by the way is a TAX! Get it?
I pay state and city taxes and my trash & recycles are collected every week right out my back driveway; all the record rain fall of the last two months pretty much went right down our sewers with flooding only in low lying areas and rural areas where they have less sewers, the roads in my neighborhood were just repaved this summer, etc. This is what I get for my taxes. We also have schools and colleges and universities and university hospitals; we have free libraries (lots of them), arts, theatre, music scene to die for and other cultural events. We have sports teams galore (Go Phillies!) and so it goes. We have the best member owned radio station you never heard! www.xpn.org - check it out!
But, you know, you can't know what you don't know and when Celebrities tell you what you want to hear, I guess you just can't learn that you don't know what you don't know. And round and round we go. Personally, I don't care if that's how some folks want to live. But I do very much care that they want to drag me into the pit of despair and ignorance with them. Hell NO! I won't GO!!!
The same thing has happened in nearly every state that went on an income tax-cutting spree. As income taxes were cut, costs for essential services were downloaded to county and municipal governments. Besides property taxes soaring, countless "special districts" were created to fund things such as water treatment, schools, public transit and so on. Rick Perry didn't cut taxes; he simply made other levels of government tax more.
As for his boast of being a job creator, I suppose Perry plus his wealthy friends and contributors think that what the country needs to get out of its economic problems (what Paul Krugman calls "The Lesser Depression") is a whole lot more minimum wage jobs with no benefits as fry cooks in fast food chains. Perry is a greasball, a charlatan and a total mulyuk.
@Charley James - You're so right! Repugnicants didn't "cut" taxes; they merely "shifted" taxes and or renamed them to be a "fee" and like such!
Some homeless shelters in Texas are actually working in shifts. Those who work all those newly-created jobs still can't afford a place to live. So while the night shift works; the day shift sleeps and vice versa. The new Hooverville = PerryVille x 2.
But, hey, it's their own fault they can't buy a house while working a minimum wage job. Just like it's my friends fault that after working non-stop for over 40 years, the company she was working for laid off half the staff because folks tend to not take Australian vacations they can't afford. AND it's her fault that employers won't hire you if you are unemployed and it's her fault that employers won't hire you when you are over 50 - let alone 60. So, it's all her fault that she is 60 and unemployed and can't even get an interview for a minimum wage job! Guess she didn't work hard enough the last 40 years!
So much for "low/no tax" states! Hey sheeple are you paying attention.
LOL
if you live in Texas it seem you do not make enough to pay attention.
GOP plan to dominate the world.
We have all the same type of taxing districts with Illinois property taxes and we still have an income tax, although not substantial. The state has cut education funds to all school districts which leaves it up to the property tax owners to pay more in taxes or cut services. There are other cuts in the state budget with similar consequences. Tax referendums will be put on local ballots, but it is highly doubtful they will be approved. When one government agency cuts services, the downstream government units must pick up the costs or cut services. S--t rolls downhill.
The longer Perry stays on the national stage the more we are going to hear about his crazy actions in TX.
Washington state is similar--no income tax so very high property taxes.
It's an economic miracle alright. It's amazing there is anyone eating there anymore.
Here's an idea....Single and family pay at same rate. No federal tax for anyone under $40k. 10% tax rate up to $100,000. 28% up to $250,000. 40% for all above $250,000. Redo the AMT for anyone with income above $1MM at 34% with the only exclusion for mortgage deduction, municipal debt, and US debt interest. Capital gains taxed at 1/2 of your marginal tax rate to encourage investment in the USA. Eliminate all deductions except mortgage interest and US/municipal interest, charitable deductions, and health expenses above 7.5% of income like presently done on Schedule A. Corporate taxes make it 10% for all profits up to $1MM. Then tax rate jumps to 25% for profits above $1MM.
Like
The lower rate would fully benefit smaller businesses that are adding and growing jobs. Oh, and for companies that make no money, they still owe a 1% of business revenue (not profit) so all pay for basic services that federal gov't provides like armed forces, roads, etc.
I would add the caveat that the mortgage interest deduction only applies to your resident home - not investment properties. Other than that, you idea makes sense. We still would need to see the numbers crunched to ensure that it was a positive gain for revenue stream, but it seems like a step in the right direction to me.