Toward a fiscally healthy diet
Imagine your favorite NFL team entering summer camp following an off-season training regimen of no exercise and a diet of unlimited Big Macs, Twinkies, and Coke. Sound outrageous? Such a thing would be unheard of in the competitive NFL, but among several of our country’s flabby state legislatures, I have to wonder.
Vacationing in western New York last week, I picked up a copy of the Buffalo News. Two items caught my eye. The “Quote of the Day” in Friday’s sports section came from Buffalo Bills receiver Roscoe Parrish who said, “It’s training camp, so every day you go out there, you got to approach it like it’s your last.” Contrast Parrish’s compete-for-survival attitude with New York Gov. David Paterson’s front-page remarks about his state’s bloated budget. “It doesn’t tax much, either,” Paterson said.
“How much is not much?” the Buffalo News asked. “Try $1 billion — [in new taxes] at least.” Compared to last year’s New York record-setting budget, with tax increases of a whopping $6-to-$8 billion, this year’s budget doesn’t tax much. How about another Twinkie, Gov. Paterson?
New York could use a leader with Parrish’s training camp mentality because states, like NFL teams, play in a competitive league. The NFL has 32 teams; the United States has 50 “teams” and New York is projected to finish dead last (50th) according to a competitiveness study by the American Legislative Exchange Council. ALEC uses 15 variables in its “Economic Outlook Ranking.” Consider some of these New York Twinkies:
Top marginal Income Tax Rate: 12.62%
Rank: 50
Top Marginal Corporate Income Tax Rate: 15.95%
Rank: 50
Property Tax Burden per $1,000 of Personal Income: $42.81
Rank: 43
Recently Legislated (2008-2009) Tax Changes per $1,000 of Personal Income: $91.75
Rank: 50
Tax policies like these are causing New York and other states to lose fans. ALEC reports that New York is the biggest loser in “net domestic migration” — people leaving New York for other states — over the past 10 years with a loss of 1.7 million residents. California follows New York by driving away more than 1.4 million wealth generators, and Illinois and Michigan are only slightly less bad by chasing off nearly 650,000 and 450,000 respectively.
Where are these migrant taxpayers going? The top gainers are Florida (projected 5th best economy in 2010), Arizona (projected 3rd best economy), Texas (19th), North Carolina (21st), and Georgia (9th).
Still not convinced states play in a competitive league? ALEC reports that Indiana’s (#20) Gov. Mitch Daniels put up a billboard on the Michigan (#26) border saying, “Come on IN for lower taxes, business, and housing costs.” Idaho’s (#7) Governor C.L. “Butch” Otter wrote a “love letter to neighboring businesses in high-tax Oregon” (#41). And a convenience store straddling the Kansas-Missouri line (#s 25 and 15) built a new location 100 feet further into Missouri to reduce its tax burden by $1.4 million.
The ALEC report makes several common-sense recommendations based on proven tax and budget practices to make states more competitive. Moreover, ALEC provides compelling evidence that raising tax rates actually reduces tax revenue. So why do flabby states like New York continue their losing ways when several states compete effectively year after year? And why do our federal leaders in Washington, D.C., do the same? ALEC’s study offers 50 diets to choose from and economic health-conscious legislators will want to steer clear of New York’s Twinkie diet.

















Click to Print
Include Comments











back to top8 Comments to “Toward a fiscally healthy diet”
The expiration or renewal of Bush’s tax cuts for the rich has nothing to do with business hiring plans.
Report comment to moderator
#1 Scroop Moth
Please tell me why the federal government should treat people differently just because of income differences? Shouldn’t government treat everyone the same?
If government treats differently then that is pre judging people.
Report comment to moderator
“If government treats differently then that is pre judging people.”
Excellent. I’m glad you agree with the repeal of Prop. 8.
Report comment to moderator
#3 Buddyglass
Prop 8 was just a definition. The same definition as always. No change.
Report comment to moderator
I recently moved from Oregon to Idaho. How refreshing to see government reducing expenditures rather than raising taxes to meet income shortfalls. My fear is that all of the people moving here from high-tax and high-control states will begin expecting the old familiar government services that they left behind and vote in the bureaucracies here that they left behind. (It is already happening) Individual responsibility is not natural to the human heart.
Report comment to moderator
BOB — I take it you are asking about the ethical and practical justifications for the graduated personal income tax.
The legal justification is obvious. Article I.8 doesn’t require an equal division of the tax burden between each citizen, in absolute value. Granted, that was before the 14th Amendment. Maybe there’s an equal protection argument against graduated taxes. But wait. The 16th Amendment empowers government to collect taxes (plural) on incomes (plural). This nifty little tool of the devil allows for the confiscation of different tax rates for different incomes. The government can tax all the incomes below $50k one way, all the incomes above $500k another, etc.
Still, you might ask, does the Constitution make this moral?
The classic answer is that the income tax is like a sliding franchise fee or royalty. Those who derive the most income get the most and highest value from society and from the government services that enable prosperity. There’s no such thing as an autonomous producer of income. It works. Over 97 years, the income tax has promoted the blessings of prosperity, virtue, and liberty. Besides, one can’t complain of not having prior notice.
I concede that all of the above is not an argument for big government. If you think that big government is evil, the fact that can deliver prosperity would simply make it more fearsomely abhorrent. If big government were counter-productive, at least you could expect it to comed crashing down. All big governments will end up like Greece. But if big governments are productive and add value to the economy, then they will simply go on from strength to strength.
Conservatives need a more honest set of arguments about the evil of big government. They harp on economics because those are the arguments that persuade independent voters, not because money is the primary consideration of conservative ideology.
Report comment to moderator
You wonder sometimes what planet people come from. Obviously one where the head stays in the sand.
Report comment to moderator
ℋÅℙℙ℣ ℬḯ℞ṭℎḍạỷ!!! Chas!!! ♥
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDmag.com's Community section to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!