I’d be more impressed if he would roll back the income tax to 1989 levels

This'll fool them!

This’ll fool them!

Malloy wants to cut the sales tax to 1971 levels: 6%, instead of the present 6%.

By “flattening it out” and doing away with some unspecified exemptions, Malloy said under his plan the tax will drop from the current 6.35 percent to 6.2 percent this year, then 5.95 percent next year.

“Which will be the lowest it’s been since 1971,” Malloy said. “It’s a way to give some relief to the middle class.”

1989, of course, was the last year our state had no income tax. Since that tax came in – thank you, Lowell Weicker, Squibb heir with dividend, but no earned income – we have seen a flat-lining of our population, while state spending has tripled, the state workforce has doubled, our gasoline taxes and electricity costs are among the highest in the nation, and we’re now ranked 50th in the “worst states to do business in” surveys. Malloy thinks we’ll begin to address that by reducing sales tax by 0.04%. This is Democratic “leadership”.

Last week, Connecticut’s Tax Commissioner admitted that the state is dependent on “six or seven” individual taxpayers to help carry the state. Only the most starry-eyed liberal can think that this is a proper way to fund state spending; the rest of us worry that the golden geese might just fly away, and the rest of us will have to pay for all these state workers and governmental largess with, what? A higher sales tax? (Another) increased estate tax? (Another) hike in income tax? Higher business taxes and fees? All of the above?

In the meantime, the do-gooders in the Junior League and our ridiculous First Selectman Peter Tesei are doing their best to follow Malloy’s lead here in Greenwich. This state is delusional.

28 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

28 responses to “I’d be more impressed if he would roll back the income tax to 1989 levels

  1. Anonymous

    It’s actually a 4% decrease, but point taken. Unfortunately, as long as we have a lower tax burden than New York–and we do–there’s little incentive to go much lower.

    • I (sort of) figured that, even with my limited math skills, but I’m a writer, and wanted to emphasize the tiny decrease Malloy was proposing.

      • Walt

        Dude –

        You are a writer? REALLY?? And I am a porn star!! And a nuclear physistst. And a brain surgeon. I invented the condom. And the reverse cow girl. That was one of my better ones. Brian Williams can validate all of this.

        You loser.
        Your Pal,
        Walt

  2. It Depends

    Will be tough to do as CT state income tax represents about 8.7 billion dollars, more than 1/2 of the total revenue.

    • And 35% of that comes from Fairfield County (10% from Greenwich alone). If the earners get up and go, this state’s screwed.

      • It Depends

        As long as NYC is 2-3% higher we’ll win that battle.

        • Anonymous

          It’s much more than 2-3% higher. The NYC tax alone is an addition several percentage points, over and above the higher NYS income tax. No incentive for CT to lower.

        • Anonymous

          No. Comparing CT’s tax burden only to NYC is the wrong comparison. CT competes with all 50 states for investment and for people. We may lose less than NYC, but we will keep losing. The wealthy folk here in Greenwich want to become Florida residents where there are no estate or income taxes.

        • It Depends

          They all move eventually for the estate tax.
          No one dies in CT on purpose, unless they’ve already moved the majority of their assets to their heirs.

        • Mid-country Cos Cobber

          That was true when nyc was the finance capital of the world led by Wall Street, but as banks, mutual funds and hedge funds decentralize out of nyc …. It doesn’t work anymore.

          I guess that’s the point malloy keeps missing, we are competing against Florida at keeping our high earners here.

      • Libertarian Advocate

        Maybe that’s exactly what needs to happen to trigger the necessary change?

  3. i am a social liberal, and still don’t get why this state isn’t more fiscally conservative. ct could be a great place to do business positioned between boston and nyc, and with some great institutions of higher learning, and yet here we are. ugh.

  4. Anonymous

    I’m always surprised that people try to distinguish earned v. unearned income in this state. Federally, it is taxed differently; in CT it is taxed the same. Our own governor failed to mention this when asked on CNBC a few years back what he thought of carried interest – capital gain or ordinary income. He should have said it was a non-issue, but apparently didn’t understand the question. Mentioning that Weicker got dividend income isn’t relevant only snarky.

    • Not so – at the time he joined with Democrats to ram through an income tax, he coupled it with a reduction on dividend income, and thus got many retirees to go along with it (“they came for the communists, but I was not a communist, so I remained silent …”). Of course, very soon thereafter, the dividend tax came back, but that was not unexpected among all of us who know our government.

      • CatoRenasci

        You have it correct – Weicker got a personal tax cut. The other guy who should be blamed as much as Weicker was Bill Nickerson, the GOP state senator from the backcountry who voted his and his friends’ pocketbooks to reduce their taxes as rentiers just as Lowell’s plan would do his.

        And, no one at the time pointed it out. I wrote a letter to the Greenwich Slime before the election in which I pointed all of this out and they refused to publish it.

        Bad faith on the part of Weicker and even worse faith on the part of Nickerson who cast the vote that made the income tax possible.

        • Ah, the days before the Internet, when newspaper editors had a monopoly on what views would be expressed in their pages.
          They did print one of mine back then, in which I pointed out that if you gave a politician a dollar, he’d spend two: turns out, I should have said three.

  5. anonymous

    Speaking of Democrats doing stupid things, here’s the low story of the day.

    Rahm Emmanuel plans to give a ring to each boy of the Chicago Jackie Robinson Little League team stripped of its title for cheating. Teaching them early that it’s better to blame than play fair and square.

    http://weaselzippers.us/214124-mayor-rahm-to-award-bling-bling-to-chicago-cheating-little-league-team-they-didnt-do-nothings-it-was-the-adults/

  6. Chimney

    I guarantee you, if Malloy is cutting a tax, he will have three others he will raise!

  7. Walt

    Dude –

    Dude….DUDE!!! WAKE UP!! The times, they are a changing!! Jethro Tull DUDE!!

    What is the mantra of your “profession”? “Location, Location, Location”.

    Right? WRONG YOU TYRANNOSAURUS REX!! Greenwich had an advantage when there WAS a Wall Street, and commuting time mattered. Those days are gone. THEY ARE OVER!! Technology allows you to work anywhere. There is no Wall Street. Time and space are now irrelevant. But they are behind the curve on virtual sex, but that day will come. I CAN’T WAIT!!

    Anyhows, there is NO REASON to be in Connecticut. You little Nut Megger. It is mismanaged, over taxed, and unfriendly to business. If I was in charge, I would cut 30% of government employees. Tomorrow!! And no one would notice. I would cut taxes 20%, and INCREASE infrastructure spending. I would incentize businessessessesss to come here. I would encourage rub and tugs, so we are all more relaxed.

    I would work out of Beemers, so I had a direct line of communication with the common man, and more importantly, the strippers.

    This state better wake up. Or the whole state will turn into Bridgeport. I think we need a miracle. But luckily, I do believe miracles can happen.

    That scene gives me piss shivers Dude.

    Your Pal,
    Walt

    • Walt THANK YOU
      Lake Placid is great example….3,500 population pulled off Olympics twice!
      Despite State and green slime machine working against it the 1980 Games still are positive. All venues still open and incredibly well run. All because of love of sense of place, sports and nature. ( Especially my Olympic Training Center…had to brag…)
      The Soviet style “professionals” here need to be taught a lesson here…..we do need a miracle…landowners getting involved in protecting what is left of our miracle here….

  8. Anonymous

    Forget the taxes…someone has to ask Malloy to explain how spending has tripled and the number of state employees has doubled while population was flat. Until we get folks focused on the expense side of the ledger rather, we will be playing into the medias hand.

  9. Greenwich sets the standards (not just today’s GT piece on dollar raising)..
    Connecticut is managed better than Greenwich.
    Do the math/research….Town employees today, Budget today, taxes today, population today…vs 1963 Election of Weicker….( he meant and still means well) public payroll parasites are in full budget begging stride…don’t forget when Town Hall moved to where High School still should be he warned “they will fill it with paper pushers” …

    Budget begging blather bloviating bemoaning blabber bifurcation bond bragging by bitter bi-polar bureaucrats …….
    …..bring back BASE BUDGET …ZERO ,,,chances ?

  10. PresterJohn

    ” Malloy says he will propose lowering Connecticut’s sales tax rate, while eliminating the partial exemption on clothing to produce a net tax revenue INCREASE of $68 million in the next fiscal year”
    More Malloy math. He is just grandstanding, as usual, and continues to run this state deeper into the ditch.

    • housecat

      I think Anon@4:52 got it right. Malloy doesn’t understand any of it. One might say that it’s his job to understand how the tax system works, but ignorance of the subject is an endemic problem with the Democratic Party as a whole. I’ve yet to hear from a single Dem politician who knows what he/she is talking about re: any tax system: Fed income, state income, cap gains, estate – etc etc etc.