Further Asshole Sighting Wrote:
> Grow up, Brian. You wrote an unsourced
> unsupportable right-wing hit piece full of
> schlock, squish, and smarmy innuendo because a
> "conservative" website would publish it for you.
> Hardly the first time you've done that. Like many
> of the others, this one was worthless
> vanity-journal level tripe.
I'm a co-owner of the site, but thanks for playing.
> Your string-pullers don't allow as how there IS
> any such time. Your claim does not distinguish
> "now" from any other point in history.
I supported McDonnell's transportation plan, because we needed the money for transportation and every other trick in the book had been tried. We needed the tax increases, and there was no other way to raise the levels of revenue we needed that was politically feasible.
If we hadn't seen property tax increases, we hadn't seen sales tax increases, and we coupled the Meals Tax with reductions in BPOL or other tax reductions, you could make a case for a Meal Tax. But because the first two happened and the third hasn't, now isn't the time.
> No, there have not. The payroll tax holiday (you
> go back to work after a holiday, you know) was a
> temporary emergency measure enacted to replace the
> prior temporary emergency measure that Republicans
> refused to support because it didn't help rich
> people enough. Like THEY needed the help. And
> every dime of that uncollected payroll tax was
> made up to SS et al. simply by cutting checks
> directly from the Treasury General Fund.
Ignoring the ignorant partisan nonsense, the bottom line here is that for two years, people were taking home more per paycheck. That ended last year. Thus, they had less take home pay. That's a hit to their pocketbooks.
> The tanning tax? Cadillac plans? Try again,
> goober.
Here's a link to the list of taxes in Obamacare that went up on individuals or small businesses.
http://www.atr.org/full-list-obamacare-tax-hikes-listed-a7010#ixzz1zTXuZUYl
That's not "nothing."
> So avoid it by visiting an exchange and purchasing
> coverage. The days of free-loading are over.
> Everybody pays something. Even if it's just the
> entirely TRIVIAL penalty.
1% of your income isn't trivial. And when it goes up to 2% next year or $395 dollars, or 2.5% and $695 in 2016, it's not going to be trivial. But regardless, this is yet another situation where people's take home pay is reduced because of government action.
> Go ahead, Brian. Document the extent of your
> naked smarminess here by posting the actual income
> levels you have to have in order to lose as much
> as one cent to those taxes. Be sure along the way
> to distinguish between gross income, adjusted
> gross income, and taxable income.
The top tax rate went back up 39.6% for families making $450,000 or more. 39.8% of Fairfax families (the largest percentage) make over $150,000 or more. I don't have data in front of me on the number making more than $450,000 but those folks got a tax increase.
As for distinguishing between tax terms, you can google that yourself.
> Crushing! No wait, it's peanuts. This is just
> more smarm and squish. The current impact of a
> conditional tax that may or may not go into effect
> at some point in the future is not significant.
> It is ZERO!
None of these tax increases alone are crushing. That's the point. They're incremental, but they're all hitting around the same time while wages continue to stagnate. You're asking Fairfax taxpayers to pay more while the money they're making hasn't gone up.
My point about the sales tax increase to 6% isn't that it has an impact now, it's that it's an automatic tax increase because there is no way the Federal government implements the internet sales tax before the deadline, so we're going to see an automatic sales tax hike again, and that needs to be factored into the decisionmaking process.
> Wrong numbers, Brian, and you know that full well.
> The county falls behind if nominal revenues
> remain flat. They HAVE to increase simply to
> tread water, and they have to increase by more
> than that to make up ground lost in the stupid
> Great Recession that your senseless right-wing
> buddies brought about. Tax burden on the typical
> County household is at a low level. Gaps in
> County funding are at a high level. Both of these
> will need to change or we will turn ourselves into
> Arkansas.
No, those are the right numbers, and you can pull them off the County website if you want to check my math. The county doesn't fall behind if nominal revenues remain flat because our budget is balanced and we can't spend more than we take in. It requires prioritization and cost savings where possible to keep growth to a minimum.
How about instead of demanding data from me, you actually provide some - justify your claim that the tax burden on the typical Fairfax household is at a low level. And where are the gaps, besides the school system's constant gap, in county funding?
> No, goober. They were cuts reluctantly imposed
> because there was no funding that could be used to
> prevent them. Stupid claims like the one above
> simply convince more and more people that you are
> a total sham and phony.
That's nonsense. It's about priorities. If you've got a shortfall, you prioritize what is most important. Apparently the schools didn't feel that class size was more important than step increases and other non-academic functions. That's why we elect a school board, to set those priorities. If they did a bad job, well, go run for School Board.
> Yes, others have sad stories to tell as well, but
> that does not excuse or cover up the fact that
> because of funding shortfalls, class sizes were
> indeed increased again this year and promised
> token catch-up pay raises for teachers were
> delayed by a further six months. All these other
> issues do is lengthen the list of reasons why
> revenue increases (such as would occur with a
> meals tax) are needed.
No, it lengthens the list of reasons why the School Board needs independent data in order to help them prioritize better.
> The meals tax would raise revenues. Revenues are
> what pay for all the important things that Ed
> mentioned. Were you not aware of that connection?
Taxes don't pay for an environmentally conscience community, nor do they pay for a workforce that attracts businesses. As for the rest, all of those things are covered. We are getting revenue increases, because the Supervisors just raised property taxes.
The Meals Tax is a regressive tax that hits every resident directly in their pocketbook, hits those who can afford it least the hardest, and doesn't raise a spectacular amount of revenue. It's just another tax on top of all of the other taxes folks pay and that are all inching higher because of the "it's not a big increase, and the rich can afford it" mentality that too many folks like you have around here.
If the Meals Tax referendum does end up on the ballot, we can see if your name calling will be successful in getting it passed.
Don't hold your breath.