Jump to content

Which Way To Vote On Proposal 1 ?


t-pain

  

14 members have voted

  1. 1. prop 1

    • thats the ballot language? thats the proposal? wheres the law language?
      1
    • i am voting yes
      1
    • i will vote no on this
      12


Recommended Posts

I would simply ask what "even handed approach" means.  That is a bumper sticker tag.

 

 :Let's talk real numbers and who this really effects. This doesn't help "main street" in any way really. Those are micro businesses and do not usually qualify for small business tax breaks.  If we want to talk about what businesses REALLY need tax breaks, it would be micro businesses. Ya know,.. the average self employed guys with pickup trucks out there makin a livin, the plumber with one apprenctice, the dude with the landscaping business with 3 employees. Those aren't even considered "small businesses" aye.  Small businesses , depending on sector and lobbying money spent on changing administrative rules, can have as many as 500 employees and such.  It isn't mom and pop on 'main street',... it is th ehuge factory in town that is the small business.  *shrug*.

 

 Anyhow,... read all sides and let's not parrot bumper stickers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's one for ya guys,...

 

 My true realization of the corruption in politics and lobbying and special favours in such for businesses, corporations etc  came when I read the entire Federal Small Business laws.  I don't mean like "Aw it is all corrupt and I kno wit is"..., I mean,.. in black and white you can actually read the results of millions and millions and millions of dollars in how the business laws are written. It is nearly unfathomable.

 

I mean,.. ya read a senetence and ya are like,.." I bet that cost about 5 million to change".... next line..." I bet that only cost 400,000k in lobbying fees" all the way to where millions upon millions were spent electing specific candidates in 14 states to change 3 words in a law that will make them 37 billion dollars over 10 years.

 

 Most people think it and know stuff is bad,.... but when you can actually just see the crap in black and white and how in hell such nonsense could come to be....

 

 

 I am voting against this particular proposal, I personally  do not believe it is the right approach to fix a minor problem.  It is using an opportunity to shift long term tax burdens. Losing .1% a year for 20 years type stuff. Long term,  homeowners will get dorked IMO.

 

But hey, read up yourselves and make an informed choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

btw i'd support this if they removed both the business PPT and the personal PPT at the same time.

 

a sort of 'you scratch my tax back, i'll scratch your tax back' kind of deal.

 

also, in a perverse way, i'd rather starve my local city of its tax dollars. you ever see how your city is ran? show me one city that doesnt have a gigantic empty city hall building, or a city that doesnt own a dozen empty city buildings.

 

cities spend money on dumb making whoopee stuff. cutting some fat? its ok with me.

 

also the PPT is already recinded if you read the ballotopedia page. the only thing a 'no' vote will do is make legislature come up with a new law. which will probably be like when they messed everyone over on the emergency manager law.

 

a no vote would be mostly a symbolic gesture as far as i can tell. if the legislature chooses to flower us over more? well we couldnt stop them anyways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and a toad would not bump his tail on the ground if'n he had wings...

 

this is a flawed proposal floated out to fool the public into voting for it, so the dang politicians do not have to be responsible to us, the freakin' public, for cutting business taxes and not replacing them...

 

so you and I need to pay....

 

VOTE NO 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tpain what personal PPT?  There isn't one.

 

To whoever asked I am registered to vote in MI.

 

To petyr, how is it corporate welfare? Since when did repealing an unfair tax corporate welfare?

 

To malamute, maybe an even handed approach is a bumper sticker to you but to me it means not using a state tax to benefit some cities more than others. That makes no sense. None. 

 

I am amazed how people will just jump on a bandwagon because they see shifting the burden to businesses is benefiting them personally.  Don't stop to think how lowering these ridiculous taxes draws business to the state. Just pretend that can never happen. History shows us that elimination of ridiculous taxes like this grows the economy.  One example of this is the film tax credit that Granholm signed into law.  It gave film producers a 42% tax break for filming here.  What happened was that it attracted more than 100 films since the inception of the credit. According to CNN the accounting firm Ernst and Young did an accounting of the tax credit versus the economic activity brought by the film industry and found that for every dollar of tax credit $6 were brought into the state. But hey asphyxiate the state businesses with ridiculous things like this but don't go whining when the businesses move out of state like many films have due to Snyder's reduction of the film tax credit.  At least its more fair now though right? Less corporate welfare.  Sure the films are going to Ohio now since they have more attractive incentives now than Michigan does. But at least we are standing on principle and not allowing the corporate welfare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We already explained it for you Frank. If a city wants to give incentives to businesses then they can. It's a bargaining tool for them. Proposal 1 takes that away. There are all kinds of ways that businesses get around paying taxes on their machinery already. All they have to do is move a piece of machinery around in the same building and they get a tax break. They don't need new ways to get around helping the area where they have their business. Some of the poorest areas in Michigan have industrial businesses that already find too many ways out of helping the neighborhood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lowering taxes for very profitable businesses in regards to personal property does not help small business at all... they hardly pay anything presently.  The give away is to big business make no mistake...

 

As more large businesses make their domicile off shore to AVOID paying taxes, this type of property tax is likely all you are going to get.  And who is going to pay for the damage to roads these big box stores do while under construction?  And who's gonna pay for the onsite pollution these large corporations leave behind when they move to China?  And if we were down in Texas, who's gonna build your Wall?  

 

 

This type of tax shift is guaranteed to do one thing:  Screw the average working stiff, and place more tax burden on them.....

 

Frank, it is corporate welfare because the corporations benefit directly in a financial way, when communities give them property tax forgiveness, or agree to pay for road repairs for new places like hockey arena's.  It is notable as welfare for the wealthy because they directly profit from the transaction, and it allows them to further profit from the public down the road at every step....

Edited by Hayduke
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moving machinery around doesn't avoid the tax. That's just silly.  A scare tactic.

 

Calling it corporate welfare is also silly. Basically what hayduke is saying is that since businesses can get tax breaks from property taxes then repealing this tax is welfare. Seriously guys you have no leg to stand on you just keep spouting the same thing. It's a business so make sure you can tax them as much as you can so people don't need to pay anymore taxes. Then if you rollback a tax or repeal one then that is corporate welfare. I suppose any tax cut to any person is also welfare using that same definition. Like I said, tax the heck out of business and watch them leave. Bye bye film industry. It's already happening. The film industry is moving business to Ohio because of their more favorable tax laws. Nevermind the $6 injected into the economy for every dollar of tax incentive offered. Let's just cut off our nose to spite our faces. Let's ignore the data, the economy, and logic in favor of a strong union mindset and a one track mind that thinks the best way to pay for everything is to make business do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Basically what hayduke is saying is that since businesses can get tax breaks from property taxes then repealing this tax is welfare.

 

not really, I am suggesting the property tax breaks are the welfare portion... ones that eliminate or minimize tax breaks for business that any other citizen or small business would have to pay.

 

I am suggesting in light of many corporations using loopholes of off shore HQ's to avoid any taxes at all (but then corporations are people so this must be good...not), then a property tax is entirely appropriate way to tax them. 

 

Personally, I don't give a hoot about the movie subsidies.  Perhaps they were great.  Who came up with the $6 returns figure?

 

The only one track mind going in Michigan presently is all Republican.  They control the Governors office, Lt Gov, Sec of State, AG, Senate, House and 5 of seven seats on the Sup Ct.... let's not even go into the Court of Appeals... that is only worse...  So if anyone is cutting off ones nose, it is at the behest of the Rethuglicans....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes it's the republicans with the one track mind. That's why Granholm gave the film industry the tax break and Snyder was the one who reduced the tax break. Hmm, food for thought.

 

The accounting firm Ernst and Young came up with the $6. It was in a CNN report.

 

Funny how you don't care about the film industry incentives and how that brought in business. Maybe because that example is a shining example of how tax breaks do bring in tons of business?

 

If real property tax breaks are corporate welfare then that is on the cities. That is where it should be too. A city should be able to decide what is best for it based on the potential for economic growth since the city is the one entity that is affected directly by the real property tax breaks. Levying a state tax that is then disproportionately handed out among municipalities is one of the biggest problems with the PPT. 

 

By the way, having a foreign HQ does not avoid taxes on a business. Where do you get that? If it did you can be darn sure that GM would've fled this country 40 years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i've heard that people move to florida because they avoid paying higher estate and income taxes (in michigan or california for example) by doing so.

 

or they move to florida "on paper" but spend most of the time living in other states.

http://www.cushingdolan.com/Articles-by-Our-Attorneys/Domicile-Avoiding-the-Massachusetts-Estate-Tax-and-Moving-To-Florida.shtml

 

hey frank.... hows your tax situation? :)

Edited by t-pain
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think people are confusing tax rates and tax credits/

 

 Anyhow,... it is a race to the bottom.  At what point do we just not charge a business any tax, give tax credits to said businesses to even open a business, and thus the business actually makes more in tax credits than taxes paid?  Homeowners actually have to pay a business to open in their state/town etc.

 

So at what point do businesses pay no taxes and which states will pay businesses the most money to come to their states.  Which states will maintain the lowest minimum wage rates? Which states will remove legal defenses for injured workers?

 

 

At what point does a race to the bottom end?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

walmart already has local police departments basically handling their security for them.

just ask livonia how having two walmarts is utilizing their police force.

 

i bring this up because its one of the ways a business can shift its cost to the local city.

in the same way that a business can use a public road with its heavy trucks and not help out on repairing the damaged roads.

if you've ever been to the industrial section of your city, you may notice the roads are in terrible shape.

 

i hope we move to fuel taxes and electric cars :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think people are confusing tax rates and tax credits/

 

 Anyhow,... it is a race to the bottom.  At what point do we just not charge a business any tax, give tax credits to said businesses to even open a business, and thus the business actually makes more in tax credits than taxes paid?  Homeowners actually have to pay a business to open in their state/town etc.

 

So at what point do businesses pay no taxes and which states will pay businesses the most money to come to their states.  Which states will maintain the lowest minimum wage rates? Which states will remove legal defenses for injured workers?

 

 

At what point does a race to the bottom end?

Revolution?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...