Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: C’mon, Greg
Next Post: That’s pretty darned bad
Posted in:
* Click here for background if you need it. From Julie Sampson at Citizen Action Illinois…
Illinois needs to replace its current income-tax system, which has long allowed rich people and big corporations to get away with not paying their share. We should amend the constitution to permit a fair tax that requires wealthy people with higher incomes to pay more, while allowing working people with lower incomes to pay less.
A recent “fact check” by the Better Government Association overly complicates Gov. JB Pritzker’s position on this important issue. The governor is taking the lead to pass a fair tax because he understands that for our state to thrive, we need to fund our schools and universities, rebuild our infrastructure and pay our bills—and that wealthy people like himself can and should pay a little more to make that possible.
The BGA suggests there are alternatives to a fair tax amendment that would also raise needed revenue while cutting taxes for low- and middle-income taxpayers. That in itself is only half true: The devil is in the details.
One BGA alternative is expanding the state sales tax to services. Yes, a tax on brokers, lawyers and chartered jets would fall mostly on the rich, but applying sales tax to haircuts and dry-cleaning, not so much. Plus this approach wouldn’t raise significant revenue if, as the BGA suggests, the rate was lowered at the same time.
The BGA also looks at taxing retirement income, something the governor opposes. If such a proposal were limited only to rich retirees, it would likely run afoul of the very constitutional provision the fair tax seeks to amend.
Finally, the BGA raises the prospect of a significant rate increase in the current flat tax, accompanied by increased exemptions and credits to reduce the impact on lower-income taxpayers. That’s just a complicated, backdoor way to achieve the basic goals of adequate revenue, fairly raised. Better to pursue those goals in the most clear and straightforward way possible: By asking voters to change the constitution and permit a fair tax.
That’s not only the best public policy, but good, transparent government, too: It allows voters to democratically decide for themselves whether the state will move to a fair tax system. That may be why more than 7 of 10 Illinoisans backed the fair tax amendment in a Paul Simon Institute poll last year.
* On the other end of the spectrum, here’s Kristen McQueary in the Tribune…
It was the Stamp Act of 1765 that seeded the colonists’ revolution against British government overreach when taxation transitioned from a tool to regulate commerce into a mechanism to raise revenue. Attitudes toward taxation are distinct in the U.S. and particularly in the Midwest. Taxpayers deserve respect.
Conservatives accept and participate in taxation. We understand that taxes are fundamental to paying for education, public safety, infrastructure and services for the most vulnerable.
What we rebel against is the inefficient expenditure of the bounty, the refusal to enforce spending discipline, the corruption woven throughout state and local government that feeds the beast.
There’s no way to argue with a straight face that the Illinois politicians in power now have thoughtfully approached the sacred nature of taxation. Instead, they’ll impose a graduated tax rate without allowing commensurate relief on the constitution’s pension clause. And they’ll present their graduated tax rate schedule as proof of their moral compass.
But the question is: Where was that moral compass all along?
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 9:46 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: C’mon, Greg
Next Post: That’s pretty darned bad
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
“the sacred nature of taxation” LOL
Comment by NoGifts Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 9:51 am
Hurricane, where was ma Tribune’s moral compass when Rauner unleashed hell on Illinois’ service providers? You picked the few over the many and you lost.
Tax the rich. Build nice things. Take care of people who can’t take care of themselves. Also fix bridges etc so no one dies. You know be a government for the people and all that.
Comment by Sonny Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 9:55 am
I came to teach in Illinois after choosing between several job offers. I came to Illinois because the wages and pension package promised to me were the best. When I signed my hiring contract, I assumed that the pension was a promise to me in exchange for my hard work over several decades. Now, Kristen McQueary wants to break that promise. The willingness to break a promise shows that Ms. McQueary lacks her own moral compass. Apparently, while conservatives rebel against inefficient expenditures of tax dollars, they are comfortable breaking promises when it suits their needs.
Comment by Scamp640 Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 9:56 am
==…when taxation transitioned from a tool to regulate commerce into a mechanism to raise revenue.”
Is she really arguing the Stamp Act was the first time taxes were used to raise revenue instead of regulate commerce? Yikes.
Comment by Anon324 Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 9:58 am
McQueary’s column is just weird. She basically says “yes, Iowa and Wisconsin have progressive income tax, as do the majority of states, and yes they are more financially stable than Illinois, but Illinois isn’t worthy of a progressive income tax.”
Comment by Montrose Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 9:59 am
Where was that moral compass all along?
When Rauner slashed autism funds on autism day
Where was that moral compass all along?
When Rauner committed wage theft against thousands of public servants.
Where was that moral compass all along?
When Rauner gutted state agencies.
Where was that moral compass all along?
When Rauner eviscerated funding for education.
Where was that moral compass all along?
When Rauner failed to protect the lives of veterans in our state home.
Where was that moral compass all along?
When Rauner gave hundreds of millions to large corporations in EDGE grant. Corporate welfare
Where was that moral compass all along?
When Rauner deprived over a million Illinoisans the services that they depended on (United Way)
Where was that moral compass all along?
When Rauner bought off Dunkin, Drury, and Franks to subvert union peace and stymie the budget
Where was that moral compass all along?
When Rauner threw his own party’s leader under the bus for working on compromise (Rodogno)
Where was that moral compass all along?
When Rauners chosen budget impasse nearly destroyed this state.
Do I need to continue?
Sit down
and evaluate your own moral compass
Comment by Honeybear Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 9:59 am
== … without allowing commensurate relief on the constitution’s pension clause. ==
Back to the underfunded pensions as a scapegoat. Despite the clear ruling by the IL SC on the SB-1 pension bill, they still seem to think they can change the pensions for existing employees.
What do they want to do, remove the pension clause and then try, after the fact, to negate the Federal Contracts Clause?
Guess they must not believe in contracts. Why should they? These days businesses just negate contracts through an orchestrated bankruptcy.
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 10:01 am
“Instead, they’ll impose a graduated tax rate without allowing commensurate relief on the constitution’s pension clause.”
Even relief of the pension clause would not do anything for many years to come. There is no QUICK fix to the pension liability, the courts have already said that. The SC even stated that they can raise taxes, basically saying to raise taxes to pay back what you squandered away years ago. But when taking about reform, how about Public Aid reform such as requiring a link card to have a picture of the person using it so they can’t be sold for $$ ? I have seen this done time and again. Social services are about half of the state budget; just cutting waste by 10% would fund the pension problem. I’m not saying cut services for the poor, just help eliminate the abuse.
Comment by TaxedEnough Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 10:05 am
” wealthy people with higher incomes”
What about actually rich people who can show zero income?
Do these folks realize that they are pitting working people against other working people, and leaving the billionaires out of the equation entirely?
As to the Trib:
They DO realize that every dollar of deficit spending is a dollar + interest of future tax increases, right? I mean, RIGHT?!?! How can anyone comment seriously on tax policy and ignore that deficit spending is merely a time-shifted tax. Where’s the drumbeat about that aspect?
Comment by Chris Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 10:06 am
==These days businesses just negate contracts through an orchestrated bankruptcy.==
The ability for some taxing district, whether it be a local body like CPS, the city, or the state, to declare bankruptcy really seems to be the end goal with this strategy.
Comment by Anon324 Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 10:07 am
Where is the moral compass of legislators who have been in office for decades passing on hundreds of billions of debt to the next generation?
They have refused to make the necessary tough choices because it would be politically difficult and blame others for their failures.
Comment by Lucky Pierre Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 10:08 am
“but applying sales tax to haircuts and dry-cleaning, not so much”
Anything but raising the state income tax on the rich. Let’s do more regressive taxation.
Sales taxes can be avoided or reduced, but collecting taxes from income is a straightforward approach to getting revenue.
“Instead, they’ll impose a graduated tax rate without allowing commensurate relief on the constitution’s pension clause.”
As it should be done, instead of accommodating the Trib editorial board’s sadism, wanting to ensure cutting the pensions of those who are not rich. Plus, pension reform was already done. Enough is enough.
Comment by Grandson of Man Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 10:12 am
Kinda hard to be understanding of an opposing viewpoint when you have purveyors of that viewpoint like Kristin on the other side Rich, just sayin…
Comment by PublicServant Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 10:14 am
But in the spirit of moderation, I’ll just say Kristin…”Gum” me.
Comment by PublicServant Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 10:18 am
Thank you, Julie. We finally know where the AFL-CIO and SEIU stand on this important issue. I look forward to more tax clarifications from (fill in union-funded group here).
Comment by City Zen Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 10:18 am
RNUG -
Please remember that as wrong as Hurricane Chick / Troncsters are, Sam Zell destroyed their pensions to buy the Trib, Rebecca Pallmeyer ruled Sam Zell couldn’t be made to pay, and their reaction is to gut existing public employee pensions.
Comment by Smitty Irving Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 10:20 am
RNUG, talking about how likely a CA is for pensions, I read this article the other day, suggesting specific language to amend the constitution. It seems like it is “clarifying” what was included in the pension contract all along, opening a door to the argument that employees aren’t entitled to future benefits, in fact were never so entitled. What do you think?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/ebauer/2019/02/26/three-steps-to-fixing-illinois-pension-crisis/#3eb674895276
Comment by Perrid Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 10:21 am
It takes an incredible lack of self-awareness to invoke a “moral compass” after backing Rauner all those years when he was willfully reneging on billions in signed contracts to vendors and social service providers.
Where was the “moral compass” then?
That was “conservative?” Somebody should loan the troncs a dictionary.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 10:21 am
You can only tax to regulate? The colonists resisted it in part because they had no say in the Stamp Act. The British argued the tax was ok, because 90 percent of Britain’s population also could not vote since they owned no land. Stamp Act tax only applied to the Colonies not to Britain.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stamp_Act_1765
Comment by lost in the weeds Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 10:22 am
==We understand that taxes are fundamental==
But skimp on what we owe and revere those who game the system to their advantage (e.g. Jeff Bezos).
Comment by Jocko Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 10:23 am
I recognize and believe that Illinois needs more tax revenue and the 2 logical sources for this revenue are a service tax and/or a graduated income tax.
What I think is ridiculous is referring to a graduated income tax as a “fair tax”. In my humble opinion a tax is a tax. Those who call it a fair tax are most likely the ones least likely to pay the increase.
I am one who will end up paying more if the State goes to a graduated income tax and I accept that, but the label “fair tax” is mis- leading and absurd.
Comment by MOON Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 10:30 am
The Tribune was wrong about isolationism and they’re wrong now.
Comment by A 400lb. Guy on a bed Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 10:30 am
Re the BGA suggestions …
Here are some FY13 - FY16 IDOR numbers to ponder. Note: some of this was during the lower income tax period which is why I give the range:
individual income tax brings in $15.3B - $18.3B.
corporate income tax brings in $2.3B - $3.7B
sales and use tax brings in $10.1B - $11.2B
excise taxes bring in $2.7B - $2.8B
gaming brings in $11M - $13M
(not even a rounding error on the other numbers)
And here are some of our unmet needs:
structural annual budget deficit about $2B
last year the schools were appropriated $8.3B and against a BOE request for $15.6B, so figure a shortage of $7.3B. Hopefully that would provide a small amount of property tax relief.
switching to actuarial based payments to the 5 state pension systems, about $2B
So in just a quick overview, the States could use another $11B or so of revenue.
Meeting that need using the existing tax structure, that would mean doubling the sales tax OR raising the income tax by 2/3’s.
Add in all the new spending that is being called for. Cities want to claw back the revenue sharing that was taken away. A capitol construction bill needs to be paid for. Probably even more State funding of schools, coupled with mandated reduction in school district levies, would most likely be required to get a really noticeable property tax reduction. Add in additional state spending to rebuild the social services network devastated by the previous few years lack of a budget / revenues. The list goes on …
The sad fact is that the State will need a graduated income tax that generates more revenue than the current system, expanded taxes on services, renegotiating the State’s share of gaming to be bigger, and some kind of retirement income tax just to pay the existing debts, fulfill all the new spending promises, and provide property tax relief.
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 10:31 am
== Please remember that as wrong as Hurricane Chick / Troncsters are, Sam Zell destroyed their pensions to buy the Trib, Rebecca Pallmeyer ruled Sam Zell couldn’t be made to pay, and their reaction is to gut existing public employee pensions. ==
Exactly what I was alluding to …
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 10:33 am
You know, it really takes some skill to string along so many ideas in that few sentences.
Comment by Barrington Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 10:39 am
https://www.history.org/history/teaching/tchcrsta.cfm
Comment by lost in the weeds Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 10:40 am
The Stamp Act was the first direct tax on colonists by Parliament. The colonists beef was taxation without representation.
Odd analogy to employ when complaining about the actions of elected representatives.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 10:42 am
When they first took on the mission, I was excited, but I have been very disappointed in the BGA’s fact checking. They seem to misunderstand the distinction between facts and opinion and frequently miss the forest for the trees. And it doesn’t matter who they’re checking so I don’t think it’s an ideological bias. It’s just not being done well and that’s a shame because it’s really needed.
Comment by Chicago Cynic Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 10:50 am
“corporate income tax brings in $2.3B - $3.7B”
That’s pathetic
In an era when corporate profits
are so incredibly high.
Like Amazon
paying Nothing…..nothing
in corporate income tax
There’s where we can immediately improve
Stop Corporate Welfare
Get Rid of Corporate exemptions and loopholes
Make them pay
Comment by Honeybear Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 10:56 am
== talking about how likely a CA is for pensions, I read this article the other day, ==
Initial take is it is just revisiting the previously discredited Sidley-Austin arguments.
Moving everyone to SS and a defined contribution match will most likely cost taxpayers more today than the existing system. In fact, since the employer would have to pay the SS contribution, for teachers it would be a cost shift from the State to the local school district.
I believe everything proposed in step 2 of the Forbes article has already been ruled against by the IL SC.
The actual bill for a CA is an attempt to insert the Sidley-Austin interpretation in the IL Constitution and do an end run around both previous IL SC rulings and contract law. Setting things up as a one-sided contract. Kinda of like slavery … take my terms and I can change the terms at any time.
Relevant language in HJRCA0021 (HC0021). The proposed changes are starred and retyped in caps since I couldn’t get the underlining to work:
(ILCON Art. XIII, Sec. 5)
SECTION 5. PENSION AND RETIREMENT RIGHTS
Membership in any pension or retirement system of the State, any unit of local government or school district, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, shall be an enforceable contractual relationship, the **ACCRUED AND PAYABLE** benefits of which shall not be diminished or impaired. **NOTHING IN THIS SECTION SHALL BE CONSTRUED TO LIMIT THE POWER OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO MAKE CHANGES TO FUTURE BENEFIT ACCRUALS OR BENEFITS NOT YET PAYABLE, INCLUDING FOR EXISTING MEMBERS OF ANY PUBLIC PENSION OR PUBLIC RETIREMENT SYSTEM.**
..
I suspect there would be some interesting litigation over this. While a contract can be anything both parties agree to, it is also generally accepted that a contract has defined and fixed terms that can not be changed unilaterally. This ‘contract’ allows for unilateral changes.
Now to the relevant question: if it passes the House and Senate (remember, the governor has no official role on CA’s), would the public approve it?
I would have to revisit the 1970 Con-Con, but only a couple of provisions like the income tax were voted on as individual proposals. I know the current pension clause was part of a bundle of CA changes; it was not voted on separately.
I don’t know what would happen. In this age of pension stealing through bankruptcy and pension envy stirred up by the 1.4%, it may stand a good chance. On the other hand, when you add up all the government workers, there is a fair sized block of voters there. If they organize their relatives and friends, they may be able to stop the change. I wouldn’t want to venture a guess on how it would turn out.
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 11:15 am
LP says: They have refused to make the necessary tough choices because it would be politically difficult and blame others for their failures.
Now when some want to make the “tough choices” you scream and holler No Way.
Comment by don the legend Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 11:19 am
===What we rebel against is the inefficient expenditure of the bounty, the refusal to enforce spending discipline, the corruption woven throughout state and local government that feeds the beast.===
Agreed, but why do you only propose mindless cuts in spending without any interest in the resulting effectiveness of governing and services?
Comment by Jibba Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 11:27 am
Thanks, Honeybear. Glad you could be so articulate about it. I have been choking on the idea that ole Hurricane is lecturing us about our moral compass and just could not get the words out.
Comment by pawn Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 11:33 am
If the Trib cut salaries, it could charge less and increase its circulation. Why don’t we try that?
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 11:54 am
I’m a dyed-in-the-wool liberal who worked for Citizen Action for a decade. I wouldn’t trust a word coming from them today…
Comment by Won't Get Fooled Again Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 12:20 pm
This is the sort of topic that really gets people going. So, here I go. First, I love it when others tell me what my my share should be. People who earn more pay more even in a flat tax situation. So let’s just be honest, you want more money. Second, schools do not need vast infusions of more money in Illinois. What they need is greater freedom to spend what they have and they need fewer “new initiatives” from the legislature telling them how to spend their money. Third, there is no single reason people are leaving Il. But all the reasons can be captured under the heading poor governance. And only those who choose to ignore the past will put the whole blame on Rauner. The Dems have led this state for decades and done more than their share of destructive governance. Now that they have full control again there is little reason to hope for change.
Comment by NeverPoliticallyCorrect Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 12:53 pm
== The Dems have led this state for decades ==
Olgivie R 1969-1972
Walker D 1973-1976
Thompson R 1977 - 1990
Edgar R 1991 - 1998
Ryan R 1999 - 2002
Blagojevich D 2003 - 2009
Quinn D 2009 - 2014
Rauner R? 2015 - 2018
Pritzker D 2019 - ?
34 years of R Governor’s, 16 years of D Governors in the past 50 years. The longest D run as Gov was 12 years.
Now if you want to argue that the D’s have controlled the GA most of those years, you might have a point.
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 1:10 pm
Kristen,
A tough choice is being made, you and your ilk don’t like the choice. That is it in a nutshell. Yours was taken away and everyone else should brace there’s taken away also. From now on don’t write anything unless you can tell us what you would cut, how much money, to the penny, the cut wii save and most importantly who will the cut benefit. You and the guy from Barrington who wants to cut everything.
Comment by Popeye Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 1:16 pm
TaxedEnough, SNAP is a program funded purely with federal dollars, not State dollars.
Ignorance is truly bliss. The only way out of the pension “problem” is to pay the money.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 1:37 pm
Now when some want to make the “tough choices” you scream and holler No Way.
What tough choices is the new administration making so far?
More spending?
More can kicking?
Only rich people will pay more, everyone else pays less?
No concessions on pensions and health care?
No elimination on pensions for legislators?
No property tax freeze legislation?
No term limits to restore faith in state government?
Continued delusion that an unspecified graduated income tax will magically fix Illinois?
Sorry I see no tough choices so far
Comment by Lucky Pierre Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 2:12 pm
Lucky Pierre
I love the style
Nice use of anaphora.
(confession, I only learned this word last week from my eldest daughter who was in the midst of literary unit in High School)
Nice build up to the last sentence.
See it’s a great style for this kind of setting.
coolness LP
Comment by Honeybear Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 2:35 pm
LP, try the minimum wage hike. That was a tough choice done quickly. It happened. Deal with it.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 2:40 pm
==People who earn more pay more even in a flat tax situation.==
Not as a percentage of their income.
As far as I’m concerned, ‘job creators’ like Rauner (who couldn’t name one job he created) need to pony up for the goods and services they’ve been receiving (at a steep discount) for years.
Comment by Jocko Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 2:45 pm
== No concessions on pensions ==
None to be had under current law …
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 3:04 pm
== No concessions on … health care? ==
If you are referring to the SERS 20 year premium free retiree health care, again, none to be had under current law. The Kanerva decision was clear on that.
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 3:08 pm
RNUG, citing facts to LP is like telling a crying two year old to stop crying.
It does not stop the crying.
Comment by don the legend Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 3:26 pm
US strongest economy for the middle class when we had a top tax rate of 70%. we keep lowering the top rate and Everytime we do the middle class shrinks.
Comment by Ghost Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 3:53 pm
==No term limits to restore faith in state government?==
That’s such a funny way to look at that issue. Term limits essentially says that we don’t have faith in voters, so we need to use the power of government to limit who voters are allowed to vote for.
And here I thought faith was a two way street.
Comment by Da Big Bad Wolf Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 4:30 pm
== RNUG, citing facts to LP … ==
-don the legend-, sometimes I do it just to amuse myself … /s
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 5:15 pm
Thanks for your take RNUG
Comment by Perrid Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 7:57 pm
-Perrid-,
I should note one thing I didn’t catch the first time though, a really big thing. This is also a back door attack on the AAI.
You don’t ‘earn’ the Tier 1 3% AAI until you are retired at least one year. Then you don’t ‘earn,’ the next 3% AAI until another year has elapsed. Taking the language literally, next year’s 3% AAI for a Tier 1 retiree could/would be considered a not yet earned benefit.
Think about that for a minute. This proposed CA would allow the GA to partially change the rules AFTER you are retired.
If they get away with this and then reset the AAI to something like the Tier 2 AAI or similar non-compounding arrangement, the State could magically wipe about 20% - 30% of the current pension debt off the books.
What is that word -Honeybear- uses? Perfidy
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Mar 5, 19 @ 8:42 pm
RNUG at 10:31 AM:
What a great post, please copy and store - it will be pertinent in about ten percent of all threads going forward until this thing is resolved.
Comment by Stuntman Bob's Brother Wednesday, Mar 6, 19 @ 4:24 am
More of the same in Illinois = spend spend spend (create massive problems and tax your way out. Creating desperation is not leadership. Where has the fiscal responsibility been? The elected officilals have a duty to maintain the states assets and have not. There is no trust in State gov because of this. I know there are those that say data may show otherwise but get to silly with a graduated tax and more people (small business owners) will make a run for the borders. Insuring that those who stay will be those that pay.
Comment by theCardinal Wednesday, Mar 6, 19 @ 5:48 am
theCardinal, our state government has proven over many decades it has no clue how to run a state. Taxpayers don’t want more money sent down the tubes.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Mar 6, 19 @ 6:32 am
@RNUG 8:42 PM
Good point. But the state has already created a complication for that path with their Tier 1 optional AAI buyout at retirement which seems to accept that the prepay for that during work locked that benefit in place.
Comment by former southerner Wednesday, Mar 6, 19 @ 7:56 am
== But the state has already created a complication for that path with their Tier 1 optional AAI buyout at retirement which seems to accept that the prepay for that during work locked that benefit in place. ==
That could be true. But I wouldn’t be surprised if the State tried to use the argument I laid out.
Comment by RNUG Wednesday, Mar 6, 19 @ 8:24 am
No scheme to get around what the state owes would surprise me at this point.
Comment by former southerner Wednesday, Mar 6, 19 @ 8:49 am
As long as the rich aren’t taxed their fair share, all other regressive taxes are just fine. FWIW, considering our income, we will pay more taxes under a progressive tax…but my son, who works 2 jobs, won’t…like he did last year…he made under $30K and had to pay, even tho he filled out his W2 with single and 0. Us? we made over $100K, but cuz we can, owned property…so we got money back…that’s just wrong.
Comment by Union Thug Gramma Thursday, Mar 7, 19 @ 9:27 pm