October 31, 2010

Vote YES on 3

Filed under: politics,taxes by Victoria Liberty @ 10:39 pm

In both 2002 and 2008, the Center for Small Government sponsored a ballot initiative to eliminate the Massachusetts income tax. Unfortunately, it was defeated each time. Now, they are sponsoring an initiative – Question 3 – to roll back the sales tax from 6.25% to 3%. This is a much more modest proposal, and not quite as exciting for small government people like me, but hopefully this makes it more likely to pass.

State government simply spends too much and taxes too much. Taxes have gone up and up. Tax increases that are supposed to be temporary end up being permanent. I cannot remember any tax in Massachusetts ever going down in my lifetime. The only way that Massachusetts politicians will ever cut spending is if they are forced to.

Question 3 will cut approximately $2.4 billion from the $52 billion state budget – not as good as the $11 billion that ending the income tax would cut, but a good start. It will allow each household to keep an average of $900 more of their own money each year.

If you live in Massachusetts, please, please vote yes on 3. Even if you don’t like any of the candidates for governor, it is worth going to the polls just to vote on this question. We need to stop this unsustainable spending trend and send Massachusetts in a different direction.

July 28, 2010

Senator Kerry’s controversial boat

Filed under: taxes by Victoria Liberty @ 8:03 am

Senator John Kerry (D-MA) is facing a lot of flak for docking his and his wife’s yacht “Isabel” in Rhode Island, where he doesn’t have to pay taxes on it. I actually don’t think there is anything wrong with Kerry’s decision (and the author of this letter in the Globe agrees with me!).

Kerry is a typical Democrat who has voted for tax increases on the national level several times, so his desire to avoid the 6.75% Massachusetts sales tax does come off as inconsistent…but maybe Kerry is starting to realize how excessive taxes are in Massachusetts. I don’t agree with Kerry’s opinions about taxes if his votes are any indication, but I agree with his decision to try to avoid the sales tax (if that was, indeed, the reason behind keeping the boat in Rhode Island). When a tax is unjust, people have the right to do anything they can to avoid it.

Unfortunately, Kerry just said that he will pay the roughly $500,000 in state and local taxes that he would have owed had he kept the yacht in Massachusetts. I wish he had stuck to his guns in order to make a statement against the recent sales tax hike. Wouldn’t it be awesome if our Democratic senior senator took a stand against the ever-growing, ever-spending government of Taxachusetts?

Edit: As Jeff Jacoby points out, Kerry isn’t even doing anything illegal. He is just living his life in the way that makes the most financial sense, given the tax laws.

August 15, 2009

The Alliance to Roll Back Taxes!

Filed under: taxes by Victoria Liberty @ 11:25 am

Carla Howell and the folks at the Center for Small Government are trying to get an initiatie to roll back the sales tax on the 2010 ballot. Toward that end, there is a new campaign called the Alliance to Roll Back Taxes and a new website, RollBackTaxes.com. (I designed the header for it :) ). We’re aiming to get the sales tax reduced from the new rate of 6.25% to 3%. Check it out!

Roll Back Taxes!

Facebook: Roll Back Taxes

Twitter: @CarlaHowell

July 28, 2009

Christy’s camera

Filed under: politics,taxes by Victoria Liberty @ 2:06 pm

Mass. gubernatorial candidate Christy Mihos has put a webcam on his site showing the traffic going from Massachusetts to New Hampshire because of the sales tax hike. I think this is a pretty cool, offbeat idea, although he should find out the average number of cars crossing the border per day before the increase for comparison. I bet there will be a difference once the 6.25% sales tax goes into effect.

Check it out here.

May 19, 2009

State senate raises sales tax :(

Filed under: taxes by Victoria Liberty @ 10:38 pm

Terrible but unsurprising news: the Massachusetts state senate voted to raise the sales tax by 25%, as well as repealing the sales tax exemption on alcohol. Big surprise, the big-government-supporting, socialist thieves won, and freedom and justice lost.

All the senators who voted in favor of the tax increase, as well as everyone who protested in favor of it at the state house, should be ashamed! Thanks for taking away my money and my liberty.

According to the Boston Globe article:

“Maybe we should call this the New Hampshire economic stimulus bill,” Senator Robert L. Hedlund, a Weymouth Republican, said with sarcasm.

Right on, Senator Hedlund!

Edit: Go to Hub Politics to see how all the senators voted. If your senator voted yea, then vote them out!

April 28, 2009

The last thing Massachusetts needs…

Filed under: taxes by Victoria Liberty @ 3:45 pm

…is more taxes. But guess what the state legislature just did? Voted to raise the sales tax!

This is absolutely ridiculous. Legislators passed the tax increase to avoid the horror of having to pass a budget that was slightly smaller than last year’s and makes small cuts in programs that shouldn’t even exist in the first place. How terrible that would have been. NOT!

I have never heard of a tax being lowered in Massachusetts. All that happens is taxes keep going up and up and up, and so does the state budget. Now that we have a 6.25% sales tax, unless a revolution occurs, you can bet the sales tax is never going back down to 5%. Voting no on Question 1 was an incredibly dumb decision. Foes of the question argued that there would be huge sales tax increases if the income tax was repealed. Well, the income tax sure wasn’t repealed, and there is now a huge sales tax increase anyway!

The state government needs to do what is morally right: stop stealing people’s money and redistributing it to other people who don’t deserve it. This Globe editorial bemoans the fact that the budget would have cut $4 million from food banks, $21 in home care for the elderly, $2.4 million for homeless mentally ill people, $15 million in emergency rental assistance, $4 million for students who are flunking the MCAS exam, and $22 million for drug and alcohol recovery programs. But what’s wrong with that? What’s wrong with people having to (gasp!) pay for their own food, their own home care, mental health, and addiction services, and their own housing, or to study for the MCAS themselves using books or the Internet? Liberals might respond that people simply cannot pay for these things. Well, if you don’t pay for something, you shouldn’t get it. If private charities want to operate food banks, fine. But it is simply wrong for people to have their money forcibly taken from them and given to those who have less.

The Globe makes one interesting point. “Those who think they don’t need government services should thank their stars, and dig a little deeper,” the editorial reads. First of all, it is probably not true, as the Globe suggests, that success or failure in life is entirely due to luck. But perhaps it is to some extent – for example, maybe people get jobs because of their looks, the employer’s bias, or random chance, instead of their merit. That would mean that society is sometimes unjust in distributing wealth, and that some of the poor deserve to be rich and vice versa. But this is where liberals and libertarians disagree. As a libertarian, I believe that the way to solve this problem is to change the rules for how society distributes wealth, to ensure that wealth is being distributed justly. Liberals, on the other hand, have no problem with the unjust rules, but then once the wealth is distributed they want to take money from people simply because they have a lot and give services to people merely because they don’t have much. This is never the right thing to do, since it does not take into account whether the wealthy people justly earned their money, or whether the poor people actually deserve more than they are getting. Disparities in wealth are not a bad thing. What is bad is for people to get what they don’t deserve, and taxes and social programs don’t do anything to fix that.

Hopefully that long rant gave you an idea of why I philosophically oppose government-funded social programs. It’s also worth adding that in addition to being morally wrong, tax increases are bad for the economy. We need people to buy more stuff to get us out of the recession, and raising the sales tax is certain to cause the exact opposite to happen.

Thanks, Speaker DeLeo! Your budget proposal almost gave me hope for Massachusetts, but now you took that hope away. It’ll just be another year of exorbitant taxes, socialist redistribution of wealth, intrusive and oppressive government, and a ballooning budget. Hooray!

NOT!!!!