[Vision2020] Isaac Young and State Income/Sales Tax

[Art Deco]

I refer to my previous post about electing the terminally dumb.

w.
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Tom Hansen 
  To: Moscow Vision 2020 
  Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2010 12:52 PM
  Subject: [Vision2020] Isaac Young and State Income/Sales Tax


  Greetings Visoinaires -

  Since Isaac Young refused to participate in KRFP's call-in debate last
  night, I will post my questions here . . . for open discussion.

  On June 19, 2010 Isaac Young stated on his Facebook page:

  "We save money at the state level by limiting the size of state
  government. The money we save by doing this will allow us to eliminate the
  state income tax. Then every one is taxed fairly (sales tax) by their life
  style and how much they consume. By reducing the regulations on all
  business and streamlining the permit process, you are able to get citizens
  to work more quickly."

  http://www.facebook.com/pages/ILikeIke/112506065442567?ref=ts

  -----------------------------

  According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the state of Idaho realized $1.3
  billion in state income tax revenue in 2009.

  http://www.census.gov/govs/statetax/0913idstax.html

  Question:  Specifically, what state positions would  Mr. Young eliminate
  and/or which specific state programs would Mr. Young eliminate/reduce to
  compensate for this loss of state income tax revenue?

  -----------------------------

  Mr. Young suggests that eliminating state income tax would level the
  proverbial playing field as "every one is taxed fairly (sales tax) by
  their life style and how much they consume."

  According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the state of Idaho realized just $1.2
  billion in state salestax revenue in 2009.

  http://www.census.gov/govs/statetax/0913idstax.html

  Realizing that state revenue realized from state sales tax would have to
  make up for the $1.3 billion loss, resulting from the termination of state
  income tax, this would leave two options (one being consumer dependent and
  the other potentially initiated by the state government.

  1)  The consumer-dependent option:  CItizens of the state of Idaho would
  have to purchase twice as much as they did the year prior to the
  elimination of state income tax.  These citizens would include those with
  low or no (as a result of unemployment) income.

  This option, as much as we may strongly disagree with its suggestion, may
  be the better of the two . . .

  2)  The government-initiated option:  Increase state sales tax from six
  percent to twelve percent.  This option may have a somewhat measurable
  adverse impact on families of high income.  But, could you imagine the
  impact it would have on low and no income families as they make their
  weekly trip tlo WinCo to buy groceries (something everybody needs,
  regardless of life style.

  ------------------------------------------------------

  Thoughts, V-peeps?

  Tom Hansen
  Moscow, Idaho

  "The Pessimist complains about the wind, the Optimist expects it to change
  and the Realist adjusts his sails."

  - Unknown


  =======================================================
   List services made available by First Step Internet, 
   serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
                 http://www.fsr.net                       
            mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
  =======================================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20101027/d574055c/attachment.html