First, 45% of beacon hill won't get cut. The state's revenues are over $50Bn/year, not the $28Bn they want you to believe is the total state budget. Second, the largest employer in Massachusetts is...Massachusetts. We have the largest debt per capita in the nation. Why exactly did Springfield go bankrupt? Next, the aid to cities and towns COMES FROM the TAXPAYERS in cities and towns. If you think adding a layer of government bureaucracy to that take-and-give scheme makes things cheaper....
You think that cutting off the flow of tax money just makes everything better. That's such a hack job and only hurts people. If we want to make Beacon Hill more efficient, we need to do it through the right means by getting people into office who are dedicated to cutting the budget. You rhetoric here is self service disguised as the right thing to do. No, 45% of beacon hill won't get cut, but you really are living in a fairly land if you think cutting income tax is an instant cure. INSANE.
OK, now how are you going to pay for all those services that tax funded? Think the waste is suddenly gone? NO! This is shutting off the faucet but the pipe still leaks. Come on people, use your head. Services will be cut. Pay increases will be frozen for any money the state can't make back up in sales tax increases and other increases. This WON'T work. It will just devastate the commonwealth. You want to kill the waste? Find another way. I BEG. Please vote NO on this question #1.
You haven't done your homework. Or you are collecting a paycheck from the state. Essential services make a up a small fraction of state spending. Of course it will be hard for the legislature to figure out, so much of the revenue is being wasted.
No, I have. You're not answering questions. If 45% of Beacon Hill's income suddenly gets cut, what do you think happens? Secondly, what is with the jibe about state workers? I'm not, but I have a friend with UMASS and they are all afraid of job cuts. Third, I come from Springfield that relies heavily on state money. READ INTO. If it were not for the state taking over in 2004, we would have been bankrupt because of no direct fault of our own. This is irresponsible tax cutting. This is not a fix.
You have no clue about what dire straights some of your neighboring towns are in that rely on Beacon Hill money to just make it through. You have no clue what you're doing. You think if there is a leak (over spending) that cutting off the flow magically fixes the issue? GET REAL. That's NOT a SOLUTION.
So much for a "commonwealth". You're more for "every man for himself". Don't TELL me what I know and don't know. You guys aren't even "above board" about what you are telling people.
If you're not going to consider that which you don't know, and engage in dialogue, then you don't belong commenting here. State workers pay no state tax, get free healthcare, and have a nearly fully funded retirement plan. Why do they deserve more than those who employ them? How do -we- pay for the next midnight pay raise? From -our- salaries? -Our- healthcare funds and -our- pension savings?
Oh come on. IF I were to engage in an ad hominem attack as you just did, I'd say you need to understand how the taxes get used. The fact of the matter is that you are talking about axing 45% of the states income BEFORE they have a chance to become efficient by trying to force their hand. That means that the first things that will happen is that other taxes will rise and state jobs will be cut. Put yourself in THEIR shoes for a second and see how you'd like that. THEY will be victimized by this.
First, 45% of beacon hill won't get cut. The state's revenues are over $50Bn/year, not the $28Bn they want you to believe is the total state budget. Second, the largest employer in Massachusetts is...Massachusetts. We have the largest debt per capita in the nation. Why exactly did Springfield go bankrupt? Next, the aid to cities and towns COMES FROM the TAXPAYERS in cities and towns. If you think adding a layer of government bureaucracy to that take-and-give scheme makes things cheaper....
torch9t9 3 years ago
You think that cutting off the flow of tax money just makes everything better. That's such a hack job and only hurts people. If we want to make Beacon Hill more efficient, we need to do it through the right means by getting people into office who are dedicated to cutting the budget. You rhetoric here is self service disguised as the right thing to do. No, 45% of beacon hill won't get cut, but you really are living in a fairly land if you think cutting income tax is an instant cure. INSANE.
Kiltedwolf 3 years ago
You are mistaken about what I think.
torch9t9 3 years ago
OK, now how are you going to pay for all those services that tax funded? Think the waste is suddenly gone? NO! This is shutting off the faucet but the pipe still leaks. Come on people, use your head. Services will be cut. Pay increases will be frozen for any money the state can't make back up in sales tax increases and other increases. This WON'T work. It will just devastate the commonwealth. You want to kill the waste? Find another way. I BEG. Please vote NO on this question #1.
Kiltedwolf 3 years ago
You haven't done your homework. Or you are collecting a paycheck from the state. Essential services make a up a small fraction of state spending. Of course it will be hard for the legislature to figure out, so much of the revenue is being wasted.
torch9t9 3 years ago
No, I have. You're not answering questions. If 45% of Beacon Hill's income suddenly gets cut, what do you think happens? Secondly, what is with the jibe about state workers? I'm not, but I have a friend with UMASS and they are all afraid of job cuts. Third, I come from Springfield that relies heavily on state money. READ INTO. If it were not for the state taking over in 2004, we would have been bankrupt because of no direct fault of our own. This is irresponsible tax cutting. This is not a fix.
Kiltedwolf 3 years ago
You have no clue about what dire straights some of your neighboring towns are in that rely on Beacon Hill money to just make it through. You have no clue what you're doing. You think if there is a leak (over spending) that cutting off the flow magically fixes the issue? GET REAL. That's NOT a SOLUTION.
So much for a "commonwealth". You're more for "every man for himself". Don't TELL me what I know and don't know. You guys aren't even "above board" about what you are telling people.
Kiltedwolf 3 years ago
If you're not going to consider that which you don't know, and engage in dialogue, then you don't belong commenting here. State workers pay no state tax, get free healthcare, and have a nearly fully funded retirement plan. Why do they deserve more than those who employ them? How do -we- pay for the next midnight pay raise? From -our- salaries? -Our- healthcare funds and -our- pension savings?
torch9t9 3 years ago
Oh come on. IF I were to engage in an ad hominem attack as you just did, I'd say you need to understand how the taxes get used. The fact of the matter is that you are talking about axing 45% of the states income BEFORE they have a chance to become efficient by trying to force their hand. That means that the first things that will happen is that other taxes will rise and state jobs will be cut. Put yourself in THEIR shoes for a second and see how you'd like that. THEY will be victimized by this.
Kiltedwolf 3 years ago