Skip to Content

Mark Kulda

Maple Grove, MN
Commenter for
5 years 24 weeks

Recent Comments

Posted on 05/17/13 at 05:50 pm in response to DFL tax deal will test economic and political strategies

It was also announced this afternoon that the Omnibus Tax Conference Committee had decided to pay for additional funds into the police and fire pension funds with General Fund money and not with the proceeds of a proposed $5 surcharge on auto and home insurance policies in Minnesota. The General Fund expenditure is a far smarter way to address the situation than a surcharge on insurance policies.

Posted on 05/10/13 at 11:19 am in response to $15 to park on street for Vikings game? Minneapolis 'smart' meters raise rates for big events

Just for comparison, I parked two blocks from the Metrodome for $2 for three hours while attending the Minnesota United FC soccer game. It's in the same area that will be $15 for Vikings games.

Posted on 05/02/13 at 11:30 am in response to Minnesota income tax increases virtually certain — but not tax reform

The House Bill also has the controversial $5 insurance surcharge to bail out police and fire pensions. The Senate fixes the pension under funding but doesn't use the ill-thought out $5 surcharge.
Still, people who hear about the proposed surcharge are quite upset because nobody bailed out their pensions when the market dropped. Plus some say a flat $5 is too regressive because it hits lower valued homes harder than the mega mansions.
And, there are those in Greater Minnesota...

Posted on 04/24/13 at 11:59 am in response to Minnesota Senate nearly grinds to a halt over weird I-35E speed-limit debate

This so-called 'creative' solution is well known in Minnesota as the "Dimler Amendment." There is already a state law that forbids the recording on your driving record of speeding violations of no more than 10 miles per hour over the limit on highways where the speed limit is 55 or 60 mph. This allows speeders to hide from their insurers their true driving record.
It has the effect of driving up premiums for people who obey the law and allows people with a poorer driving record to...

Posted on 09/17/12 at 05:00 pm in response to What Obama, Romney preexisting condition plans mean for Minnesotans

Apparently, neither has the author of the this article.
Minnesota already has a mechanism to deal with the very situation that Ms. Boyer was in.
It's called the Minnesota Comprehensive Health Association and it provides insurance to people with pre-existing conditions. The plan is required to only charge policyholders about 120% of what the private market charges, so the premiums are subsidized. The plan runs a deficit of about $100-million a year or so which is then assessed...

Posted on 09/17/12 at 04:44 pm in response to Planning for Minnesota’s health insurance exchange at risk of faltering

I don't think you can say the public likes Obamacare. It isn't implemented yet so nobody knows what it will do.
They may like some of the benefits that have already been put into place.
But most people know very little about just how much this system is going to cost or about all the tax increases that will be coming soon to help pay for it....like the 12% increase in the FICA tax all of us will be paying next year or the $10-billion in taxes on health plans starting next year...

Posted on 07/17/12 at 11:56 am in response to From Fukushima to San Onofre, doubts about nuclear power's future viability

Solar and wind are totally unreliable contrary to what you've said. If they were we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

Posted on 07/18/12 at 12:13 pm in response to From Fukushima to San Onofre, doubts about nuclear power's future viability

I hope we get even more use of wind and solar but as much as people want to think they are the perfect solution, they are mistaken.
Wind and solar right now are not economically feasable and they are not reliable enough to provide baseline power.
Maybe someday but not right now.

Posted on 04/16/12 at 11:40 am in response to Trayvon Martin case leads to corporate exodus from ALEC

Once again, the writer incorrectly referred to four of the Dayton vetoes, all dealing with lawsuit reform, as being ALEC bills when they weren't.

The bills were an initiative of Minnesotans for Lawsuit Reform which had no input from ALEC whatsoever.

To repeatedly make the same mistake calls into question the accuracy of the author's information and whether or not she is being entirely objective.

Posted on 04/11/12 at 03:12 pm in response to Asbestos-bill veto was Dayton's 7th related to ALEC efforts

In her third paragraph, she is counting the four tort reform bills that were vetoed earlier....none of which were ALEC bills. ALEC had nothing to do with them whatsoever despite what you might hear from Common Cause, which has a clear defamatory agenda here.

James Hamilton is just plain wrong when he asserts comapanies like Crown Cork and Seal didn't do enough due diligence and that the evidence about asbestos was clear a long time ago. Crown Cork owned an asbestos company for less...