Mark Dayton says $4 billion per biennium available by taxing the rich
On the same day Gov. Tim Pawlenty announced $1.2 billion in cuts — but no tax increases — as a way to resolve the state's budget crisis, DFL gubernatorial candidate Mark Dayton was in Albert Lea offering his own budget solution at a coffee shop talk.
Raise $4 billion every two years by making "the wealthiest 10 percent pay the same in income taxes as everyone else,” he said Monday, reports the Albert Lea Tribune.
The paper said:
[Dayton] said the wealthiest 10 percent of Minnesotans pay only three-quarters of their proportionate share and the wealthiest 1 percent pay only two-thirds, while the middle class is burdened with the tax load.
He said Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty and his supporters have created a regressive tax structure, left the state’s roads and bridges to crumble and, by cutting aid, left municipalities to cut services left and right.
“The solution is raise taxes, but not on everybody,” he said.
Dayton added that the Republicans will muddle his message to make voters think he wants to raise taxes across the board.
He met with 20 voters at The Trumble’s Restaurant in Albert Lea, as part of his 87 counties in 87 days campaign swing.
More like this
- Could Dayton tax plan generate $4 billion extra in biennium? Revenue department estimate differs
- Make Minnesota civilized again: Generate progressive revenues
- The Deets: Does our tax policy allow rich to be lazy?
- Tom Horner and Republican Party take jabs at Dayton's Plan B budget
- Senate income tax increase doesn’t hit the middle class
Recent Stories
Most Commented
-
40 comments
-
24 comments
-
22 comments
-
19 comments
-
16 comments
Comments (9)
Everyone in Minnesota has been slapped up ad nauseum with the "family around the dining room table" "live within your means" examples, but Timmy and Seify and their buddies leave out a piece of the picture.
At that same family table is a fabulously wealthy aunt or uncle or grandma or grandpa or cousin who doesn't know enough to look after him/herself, and has never appreciated, acknowledged, or even noticed the help they continuously receive.
The rest of the family has always looked after that wealthy relative's needs because they believed they were all part of the same family (and hoped for a large inheritance?).
Now mom and dad have lost their jobs and rather than dipping into his/her own funds to assist the rest of the family, that wealthy relative who's been living off the rest of the family's largesse and sitting on their own resources is just making suggestions about how everyone else needs to cut back and how they need to work harder to find non-existent jobs.
i.e. EVERYONE else in Minnesota has been required to make sacrifices in these difficult times, but with Timmy's no tax increase demagoguery, it is the richest of the rich who are being held harmless - from whom NOTHING is being asked or expected, while the rest of us are expected to go on sacrificing to protect them.
May I suggest to you, my friends, that Minnesota's wealthy are not going to die and leave their fortunes to us!? There is no reason whatsoever for the citizens and leaders of this state to continue to bow to the selfish dysfunctions of some of our wealthiest residents as if there were going to be some type of big payoff at the end? There will be no such payoff.
Our wealthiest citizens were very prosperous under the tax rates in effect in earlier decades. They would continue to be so if we returned to those tax rates. It's time to do so!
My family is ready and waiting to pay our fair share. Please tax us at least as much as everyone else. I do not want to pay any less than my share, and would happily pay more if asked. Or required, which is the way it should work. From those to whom much is given, much will be required, doncha know....
Thank you, Elizabeth (#2). Many people of means agree with you and want a progressive system re-instated.
Pawlenty's refusal to tax fairly has meant the loss of a billion dollars per year during his tenure. The shortfall could have been avoided.
He needs to be fired. Now, not in November. Somehow.
As a middle class guy, I am really tired of having a higher tax burden in relative terms than the people who have all the money.
Ever since Bush and then Pawlenty came to power, the Repubs have openly and nakedly showered tax breaks on the wealthy, while leaving the middle class to carry the burden (or get the shaft, the acronym BOHICA comes to mind), and purging the poor from the assistance roles. They didn't bother to try to camouflage it - no lipstick on this pig - they just openly did it. Repeatedly. They even brag about it, having no conscience or sense of shame. Their only attempt at justification is to say that the wealthy will use extra money to create jobs.
That's not surprising, but what is surprising is that large numbers of voters, nearly half the electorate, seem to think that's just fine. Most of them are in the BOHICA crowd, yet they keep voting for these guys. Are people really that stupid? Do they really keep voting against their own self interest out of - what - ideology? Or are the Repubs putting something in the water?
I shake my head in wonder.
Where are all those jobs, btw? 10-20% unemployment, depending on how you want to measure it - where are all the jobs created by the tax breaks?
How long until those footing the bill, who are barely getting by themselves, say "Enough! You will screw us no more!"
I guess I should get into the snake oil business. There seem to be plenty of takers.
What Dayton proposes is eminently fair.
But as he campaigns, I think he also should remind voters (and journalists) how marginal tax rates work. Just as Paul Krugman does below:
"Oy. No, your income tax doesn’t suddenly shoot up if your taxable income rises one penny into a new bracket. To belabor the obvious, the tax code specifies marginal rates: your rate rises from 33 to 35 percent if your taxable income exceeds $372,950, but only the income above $372,950 pays the higher rate."
The state is far better off taking a look at the over all existing tax structure and reform it so that if nothing else, you have a dependable revenue stream that does not fluctuate wildly like it currently does. Our revenue system is too cyclical.
I think that business's would like to see state government, both expenditures and revenue to be a little more predictable and reliable. So that you don't face the question of whether you need significant tax increases when revenues are down.
Mr. Dayton and the rest of the commentors on this subject must have missed the report that came out last week showing how many people have left this state in search of lower taxes. Over 54,000 people have left the state and that calculates into over $3 billion in tax reenue lost all because liberals believe that there is an endless supply of money and that the rich don't pay their fair share. I guess Mr. Dayton and the commentors have never looked at the Tax Incidence Report either. It proves that the rich pay their fair share of income taxes. To those who are happy to pay more, go ahead and cut a check to the state because I'm sure they will accept it. I for one don't want to pay more for using the same amount of roads, sewer, water, services,etc. as everyone else just because I work 50 - 60 hours a week and made something of myself while other choose to let the government take care of them.
This state does not have a revenue problem, it has a spending and priorities problem.
#7 mentions out-migration as due to state tax rates, based upon:
http://freedomfoundationofminnesota.com/documents/TaxMigrationStudy.pdf
This is the dumbest “study” I’ve seen in a long time. If in doubt, read the report itself.
The outfit that published it, The Freedom Foundation of Minnesota, says on its web site that it
“…actively advocates the principles of individual freedom, personal responsibility, economic freedom, and limited government.” I guess that advocacy includes proposing any fallacy which might tend to promote their idea of “limited government” – in this case, lower taxes.
From their paper: “The data shows that people with higher-than-average incomes are leaving Minnesota for states where taxes are lower (especially income taxes), union membership is lower, population density is higher, cost of housing is lower, and the weather is warmer.”
They have taken one fact (moves from MN) which is associated with other facts (the 5 listed above), picked their favorite, and then formulated a tautology: people are moving out of MN because of high taxes! Dear Reader, YOU can do this, too! Pick your favorite from these 5, and formulate your own tautology! There are a lot of people who will simply swallow it whole!
So when people move from MN to FL, could it possibly be due to the warmer climate, the ocean, or the extensive retired community? NO WAY! It’s because of lower state taxes in Florida!
If you move from MN to Arizona, is it because of your health needs, the dry climate, or its extensive retired community? RIDICULOUS! It’s the tax rates, dummy!
If you move to a state with lower housing costs, could the economical living costs be a factor? WHAT! Haven’t you learned a thing from this study? It’s the state tax rates, obviously!
The only thing that enables publishing nonsense like this as a “study” is that the people moving out of the state were not interviewed, so they could not state for themselves what their reasons were. That allows outfits like this to ascribe any reason they like for a migration.
I think this is Mark Dayton's way to avoid being invited to family get-to-gethers.