Wednesday, February 16, 2011

Snyder's Tax on Grandma Shows How Moderate He Is

After winning the Republican nomination for governor and then the Michigan governorship without having to utter a peep about what he stands for, Rick Snyder finally has had to show his true colors with his state budget.

In a nutshell, Snyder thinks Michigan should raise taxes on senior citizens in order to give tax breaks to businesses. Snyder wants to tax Grandma.

The Detroit Free Press says Snyder will propose ending the state income tax break on retiree pensions and IRA withdrawals.

Snyder's administration says the $1 billion tax increase on senior citizens would offset the $1.5 billion hole in the budget left by eliminating the Michigan Business Tax. So Grandma and Grandpa will be paying the taxes that used to be paid by Walmart.

Apparently, Snyder thinks the way to attract business is to drive away people. Some of those senior citizens also have residences in Florida, which has no state income tax. Michigan's tax break for senior citizens leveled the playing field and encouraged many to keep a residence in Michigan. This could put some of them over the edge, encouraging them to give up their Michigan residency.

The news media has consistently referred to Snyder as a "moderate." Wonder if they'll keep it up now that "moderate" means taxing Grandma.


kevins said...

You put this crap up and never respond, so I feel I'm wasting my time.

you don't want a tax on grandma? Then who should be taxed--grandma's kids, many without a job or underemployed?

There is a $1.8 billion deficit that your hero failed to fix. What's your solution, other than hating everything Republican?

We have the most generous pension tax in the nation. Many states that already tax pensions are run by Democrats, or to be more accurate, were implemented when Democrats were in power.

So is it a bad thing when Democrats do it, or only when Republicans do it? Are you againt the pension tax, or are you just against anything suggested by a Republican?

Will you answer this?

Rosalyn said...

I think you are missing the point Kevin.

There are many other ways to generate tax dollars. This is just a bad idea.

Many of the new Goveners ideas attack the working poor and the retired.

Makes no sense...does it?

Anonymous said...

Hmm, for starters Kevins, how about making the wealthy pay their fair share?

kevins said...

so there are no wealthy older people living on pensions?

I'm not missing the point. Many states tax pensions. Are they all wrong as well?

What are the many other ways to generate tax revenue? You want to tax the wealthy? Be my guest.

But the deal with Judy is her irrational hatred of anything proposed by a Republican. It's so bad that she basically says the majority of Livingston County residents are stupid, selfish, terrible people. Do you all believe that as well?

Now if you want a legitimate discussion, I don't believe the business tax should be lowered while the EITC is scrapped. Makes no sense to me. I think Snyder is wrong on this one, but I don't think he is an evil person.

Nor did I think Granholm was evil, just not very good at being governor.

You want to talk about attacking the poor? Granholm sided with the Detroit teachers union and turned her back on Detroit school kids. Don't see Judy criticizing that one.

kevins said...

Here's another point about how unfair judy's comments were.

The biggest beneficiaries of the pension tax exemption are those who fall between the ages of 55 and 64, hardly the picture of frail, poverty-stricken grandma that Judy wants to paint.

While some may have been forced to retire early, the fact that to be effected by Snyder's proposal, most would have been able to retire early (as young as 55) with a defined benefit of more than $45,000 a year. That's a little different story than Judy wants you to believe.

I still want to see the full details of his plan. But Judy's comments are easy to predict. If a Republican says it, it's bad. No reason to study it. In fact, if something bad happens, it's a Republican's fault.

Here's a fact, and I can prove it. If a Republican suggests something, Judy tears it down and says it's the devil's work. But she gushes about it when a Democrat offers suggests exactly the same thing.

That, in my opinion, makes her irrelevant.

kevins said...

One final point. When Granholm was governor, she wanted to extend the sales tax to services. According to Judy, that means Granholm wanted to tax Grandma every time she got a haircut or got her taxes done.

Now, personally, I think Granholm's idea had merit. But I just wanted to point out how absurd Judy is being. I can use her style of argument to bash Granholm unfairly. Judy thinks republicans drool and democrats rule. That's her opinion, but she shouldn't be taken seriously.

(For instance, she says republicans are stupid for criticizing the auto bailout plan, including bankruptcy, endorsed by President Obama. But when Mitt Romeny, correctly, said that bankruptcy was the best way to save GM, Judy had a fit. The positions were exactly the same, but she only supported it when it was Obama's idea. Sound familiar?)