Does it matter which party is in the governor’s office?
The 'temporary' tax hike is still with us.
Today marks the 10-year anniversary of the signing of Jennifer Granholm’s income tax hike in October 2007. Liars lie, and we have had our share over the years. On whether a particular democrat would sign on to such a drastic measure as reducing the net income of every single Michiganian?
Which is why it may have been encouraging for job makers and Michigan families when Bieda got the nod. After all, just last fall while campaigning for reelection he told the Detroit News that he was not out to raise taxes on Michigan businesses.
Q: There’s growing talk in Lansing about placing a sales tax on services that are now exempt. Would you support that approach?
A: Generally speaking, I think a tax on services, with perhaps some very limited exceptions, is something that I do not support.
One of a majority signing on to the temporary tax.
It was temporary. It was supposed to be rolled back. Given GOP has had control of all branches of the state since 2010, and how we have been sold a bill of goods on the (NEW) gas tax, who is it that really needs a kick in the ‘ass?’
Will Michigan continue to provide unchecked investments for unworthy results?
Pure Michigan has become the key phrase for all thing corruptible and cronyist. According to Cap Con, much of the taxpayer largess spent on economic development has yielded zero benefit. They point out:
“.. In addition, some investment groups received millions through the fund but created zero jobs and no proceeds ..”
“Investment” ..It has a catchy ring to it, yes?
And how much taxpayer money has been lost to cronyism over the last 7 years?
Michigan politicians have been telling us that the film credits were needed to compete with other states for years. Its just not so.
People in the industry have been remarking how successful other states have been by giving filmmakers taxpayer money to ‘create’ jobs in those states; all the while competing against Michigan’s excessive subsidizing of the vanity industry which HQs in Hollywood.
But the bottom line?
Where is that 'tax cut fever' you promised?
Reposted from the Mackinac Center
Posted by Michael D. LaFaive on November 5, 2014 at 12:55pm
Nearly a year ago, popular Michigan pundit Tim Skubick opined on MLive.com that “another disease is starting to make the rounds in this town (Lansing): Tax Cut Fever.”
Personally, this observer welcomed the prospect of a bipartisan frenzy to convert a projected state budget surplus into tax cuts, even if the politicians’ motives included wanting to “help cement their 2014 re-election bid …”
The promise was especially welcome given that Lansing then looked more ready to raise taxes than cut them. I pointed out some examples in an article published last January. Among them:
The Legislature had recently enacted $82.6 million in fee hikes. It had also granted certain local “Business Improvement Zone” authorities the power to levy additional property taxes. And there was plenty of chatter about imposing taxes on Internet transactions (an Amazon tax) and other new extractions.
While All Is Not About ONE MAN, This Example Of Pay For Play Is Clear
“If a business owner finds it necessary to take taxpayer dollars to start, maintain, or expand their enterprise, then that business model is already in trouble. If there is no NEED for the money to survive, then it is simply a matter of theft.”
Its hard to be any clearer than that.
Any politico who uses the term “Jobs created” when discussing the MEDC grants, is trying to justify the stealing that must happen first, and is central to the MEDC program. In the history of subsidizing business, one would think that the predictions of ‘job growth’ with accomplished results would speak for itself. In fact, one might think such mechanisms insofar as they are touted, would make the news at least once a month if not weekly as a raging human interest success worthy of celebration.
Conveniently, the bigger power concerns in the state capitulated to ridiculous 10% energy mandates during the Granholm administration.
In 2012, an even MORE ridiculous 25×25 requirement was promoted (and failed) as a constitutional amendment, in a state which has a monstrous electricity appetite as a leader in manufacturing. Now as the legislature approaches the crossroads of [Oh gosh we can’t meet the 10%!] and [What the hell happened to electricity prices?] in Michigan, another 35% ‘mandate’ pusher shows up with a ‘conservative’ emphasis and the useful idiots who have already signed on.
As soon as Michigan State Representative Mike Shirkey announced a solid-as-steel return to electricity competition in our state, the rust of cronyism began eating away at the plan. Snyder stepped up the call for increased renewable energy in the midst of the current mandate meltdown, and a new shadow group was formed with friendly ‘conservative’ faces to front it. (see useful idiot mention above)
Sometimes however, its worth looking to other experts who have a different take on such things.
Are the mandates even legal?
Thanks to the TB912, and Dining Room productions for another useful and informative video.
And On a related note: Cap Con today, has another take on this.