Stop The 16.7% Tax Increase

Stop the sixteen point seven percent tax increase May 5th.

Higher taxes, and the return of redistribution aided advanced by Republicans in Lansing last night.

A May 5th special election will have poor voters deciding if they will be getting more cheese.  The corporate abusers will get their pie, and the rest of us in the middle will get the bill.  Pandering welfare gimmicks, corporate cronyism on steroids and a blanket party for the working class.  Whats not to love?

STOP-167

You Betcha! (18)Nuh Uh.(2)

  26 comments for “Stop The 16.7% Tax Increase

  1. Corinthian Scales
    December 19, 2014 at 10:12 am

    This morning requires some snark.

    Yep. The Left loves its loyal poor, and that's why The Left creates so many of them.

    You Betcha! (5)Nuh Uh.(0)
  2. Kevin Rex Heine
    December 19, 2014 at 10:15 am

    All you need to do to make that picture a usable yard sign is add the words, "Vote NO on Proposal 15-1!"

    You Betcha! (5)Nuh Uh.(0)
    • Corinthian Scales
      December 19, 2014 at 11:34 am

      Oh, I can think up better art. Besides, how is it that you know that a 'no' vote is a proposal defeating vote?

      Remember, this is the obvious lie. What else is in that pile of excrement?

      You Betcha! (4)Nuh Uh.(0)
  3. 10x25mm
    December 19, 2014 at 11:57 am

    We have our work cut out for us:

    http://m.clickondetroit.com/news/michigan-house-puts-tax-hike-for-roads-on-ballot/30312126

    Disqus exchange on "Click on Detroit Mobile":

    10x25mm • 3 hours ago

    The sales tax increase proposed is actually a 16.67 % increase over the current rate, not the 1% increase touted by supporters. They obviously hold Michigander's arithmetic skills in contempt.

    Lavelle Jones to 10x25mm • 35 minutes ago

    You should show proof and show the media how to report the truth if this is real!!!

    10x25mm to Lavelle Jones • 17 minutes ago

    Divide 7% by 6% to get 1.166667. Subtract 1 and multiply by 100 to convert into a percentage. 16.6667%.

    You Betcha! (4)Nuh Uh.(0)
    • December 19, 2014 at 12:37 pm

      Common core HAS been around for a while.. just under our noses.

      You Betcha! (5)Nuh Uh.(0)
    • John Crawford
      December 19, 2014 at 2:02 pm

      It is simple arithmetic: A 6.0% Sales Tax rate yields 'X' amount of tax revenue.

      The government wants MORE tax revenue - specifically $1.3 Billion More Tax Revenue - from sales tax. To do that, they would RAISE or INCREASE the 6.0% tax rate by 16.667% (same answer arrived at by Multiplying it by 1,16667). 6.0 X 1.16667 = 7.0002%, the NEW Sales Tax rate.

      If the 6.0% Sales Tax rate pays the Treasury Dept $7,780,000,000 per year cash tax revenue (I am not exactly sure what that number is), a 7.0% Sales Tax rate will yield about $9,076,692,000 per year cash tax revenue. The added $1,296,692,000 of revenue is 16.67% more revenue.

      You Betcha! (3)Nuh Uh.(0)
      • JD
        December 21, 2014 at 3:51 am

        If we aren't willing to investigate, expose and reform the MDOT itself/their contractors...or debate how we construct the roads themselves/where our overall priorities stand (what projects to finance)...I'm not sure how any of this even matters.

        I'm past tired of arguing dollars spent vs who is spending them, what for, 'why' and who needs to be investigated right out of a career with the State of Michigan before they get their hand on even more money to waste.

        Want to influence an election or ballot proposal? Convince voters immediately beforehand that we have more problems than money.

        You Betcha! (0)Nuh Uh.(0)
      • TM
        April 20, 2015 at 3:28 pm

        Mathematical alchemy, here. I'd love it if a 1% increase in return on my 6% investment-returns were "actually" a 16.7% overall increase.

        Right now, we pay $6 on a $100 retail purchase (in sales tax, in MI). If Prop 1 passes, we pay $7 on that same purchase. That's $1 dollar more. $1 is one-percent of $100. This is a one-percent increase. Residents would pay one extra penny per dollar. This is the "actual" impact.

        A 16.7% increase would mean $16.7 + the original $6, for a total tax of $22.7 (on a $100 retail sale).

        For all the reasons not to vote for Proposal One, this "16.7% increase" talking point is an embarrassment.

        You Betcha! (1)Nuh Uh.(3)
        • April 20, 2015 at 4:32 pm

          It is a 16.6666666666666666667% increase in the tax.

          Your comment is an embarrassment.

          You Betcha! (5)Nuh Uh.(0)
          • TM
            April 20, 2015 at 5:33 pm

            Yes - Prop 1 would result in a 16.6666666666666666667% increase in overall collective revenue. This is a fact.

            This fact is being made to appear as though Prop 1 "increases the tax" (on each MI resident at every sale - by 16.7%), which it does not do. You and I (as individual residents) would not pay ("realize") this huge number. The state coffers would, because they are collecting on it, state-wide; but we as consumers would not. We would pay one extra cent (+1%) per retail purchase dollar.

            Percentage on collective revenue is one thing. Retail tax on individual sales is another. -- Prop 1 deals with sales tax rate - not with applied totals on taxes collected.

            It's an increase (to us) in SALES TAX RATE of 1%.

            For the record I am still undecided about this proposal. Am not a fan of Prop 1 and am still weighing it out.

            You Betcha! (1)Nuh Uh.(4)
            • Corinthian Scales
              April 20, 2015 at 5:36 pm

              You're really not the sharpest spork in the 616 drawer are you, Tom?

              You Betcha! (2)Nuh Uh.(0)
              • TM
                April 20, 2015 at 7:13 pm

                You are free to enlighten, Corinthian Scales.

                You Betcha! (0)Nuh Uh.(0)
                • Corinthian Scales
                  April 20, 2015 at 7:57 pm

                  Enlighten you, Tom? Nah, I'll pass on that squander of time. Besides, as Mark Twain once said, "Everything has its limit - iron ore cannot be educated into gold."

                  Watch out for rust creeping up on you, bub.

                  You Betcha! (2)Nuh Uh.(0)
                  • TM
                    April 20, 2015 at 8:46 pm

                    I realize your campaign isn't claiming a literal 16.7% increase in Prop 1 sales tax at the checkout lane, Corinthian Scales. My issue with the stop-sign graphic and slogan is that it creates a smoke-screen for the uninitiated "iron-ore" voters. Tosses out a big, scary number that isn't explained much and tends to mislead and confuse the actual amounts. But I appreciate that your site at least explains how this figure is derived - which is more than many do.

                    You Betcha! (0)Nuh Uh.(0)
            • Jason
              April 20, 2015 at 10:53 pm

              You said:

              "Yes - Prop 1 would result in a 16.6666666666666666667% increase in overall collective revenue. This is a fact. "

              no.. it would not. That is a guess. It may reduce the revenue, it may remain the same, it may increase. What it WILL Do is increase the tax charged by 16.6666666666666666667%. That is an objective fact.

              It increases the rate by 16.6666666666666666667%. When you increase a 6 cent tax to 7 cents it is increasing the tax by a penny which represents 16.6666666666666666667% of the 6 cents. Of course you know this and are probably pissing yourself with hilarity thinking this all good times. But that's ok. We know a troll when we see one. Rank amateur.

              Its not rocket science, but it does require about a second grade education.

              You Betcha! (1)Nuh Uh.(0)
              • TM
                April 21, 2015 at 1:25 pm

                Jason: On the revenue point, I defer to you, as I may have misinterpreted something you wrote earlier and this was poorly stated on my part. Actual collections do always vary and depend on all kinds of factors. So I must wave a white flag on that one.

                The only disagreement we may have probably boils down to the language used to describe what is meant by an "X% Tax Increase." -- As I read and interpret all of this, an x% increase in tax RATE is not the same as an "x% tax increase." The latter, being what I see applies at the point of sale where actual retail taxes are computed and collected (amounting to 1% extra in sales tax).

                I get where you're coming from and appreciate your explanation. FYI: I found your site when Google-searching for a derivative of the 16.7% figure, which is the only thing I have asked you about. So, trolling ... sorry, but no. I don't ever enjoy paying higher tax rates unless there are clear and measurable benefits to the community. And yes I am undecided on Prop 1. The more I hear, the less I like it. It seems there have to be better ways of getting our roads up to speed.

                You Betcha! (1)Nuh Uh.(0)
        • 10x25MM
          April 21, 2015 at 12:37 pm

          TM -

          This might help you:

          A 1% increase to a 6% sales tax would create a 6.06% sales tax.

          A 16.67% increase to a 6% sales tax creates a 7% sales tax.

          To apply a percentage increase to a percentage, you have to convert the increase percentage to a decimal fraction (each full percentage point is one-hundredth, 0.01), add it to one (representing the existing percentage rate), and then multiply this decimal fraction by the existing rate being increased. Here is the correct arithmetic:

          6% x 1.166667 = 7%

          The 16.67% expresses the increased amount of revenue that the State of Michigan would receive from transactions with identical taxable values under the two different tax rates. $ 7 versus $ 6 for a $ 100 transaction

          You Betcha! (0)Nuh Uh.(0)
          • Tom
            April 21, 2015 at 1:34 pm

            10x25MM: Thanks for this.

            The math makes total sense to me all the way up to the last paragraph. But I will get out the calculator and some paper later and run some totals.

            Per my last note, the main point I am wrestling with is over how a 1% sales tax hike would actually impact you and me at the checkout lane. Would this not still amount to a realized increase in our sales tax as one penny on the dollar (1%)?

            - Thanks.

            You Betcha! (0)Nuh Uh.(0)
            • 10x25MM
              April 21, 2015 at 4:03 pm

              Tom -

              Tough question to answer accurately because politicians deliberately complexify tax proposals to prevent this very type of calculation. On the face of it, if you are a mean income, mean expenditure Michigan household, your sales tax alone goes up $ 12 per month under Proposal 1. But businesses pay sales tax on most of the items they use and they don't pay taxes, they only collect them. So the prices of goods rise due to this 'internal' sales tax hidden in the goods' prices.

              Plug your online purchases into this calculation as well. The 'Amazon Tax' goes into effect on the same date as Proposal 1, regardless of whether Proposal 1 passes or fails. And if you buy a car or other big ticket taxable item in any given year, your sales tax really increases.

              Don't forget that your gas tax on regular unleaded goes up 12 cents per gallon immediately, much more on higher octane grades. And this tax goes up 5 cents per gallon, per year, independent of the 'wholesale price' of gasoline. So there is more damage to your family budget here; damage which escalates every year until you can no longer afford to drive.

              You Betcha! (0)Nuh Uh.(0)
              • April 21, 2015 at 4:08 pm

                I had forgotten about the stepping increase because of the cost differences between grades of gasoline.

                Doh!

                No more super ethyl for me any more.. Damn, gonna miss those flames

                You Betcha! (0)Nuh Uh.(0)
              • Tom
                April 21, 2015 at 11:51 pm

                10x25MM: Prop 1 is a big tax-salad laced with bacon bits. Laws of unintended consequence indeed apply. It's complicated stuff to sort out and tough to project, I agree, due to the very shifts and hidden "trickle down" effects you mention.

                There is SO much math being thrown around (on both sides of this) that it can bend the mind just trying to keep up. Your site is a good source of info when it comes to keeping our representatives accountable and government running responsibly.

                I still see 16% as an overblown figure but respect your right to campaign on it all the same. Thanks for letting me pick the bone over it, and for your thoughtful responses. Good wishes.

                You Betcha! (0)Nuh Uh.(0)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.