Printable View
Who wants to revolt against the government? I owe a ton b/c of interest income, and my crappy meaningless bonus pushing me into the next bracket in NY. :mad: :mad: :mad:
I don't even get the full $600 "stimulus" rebate.
Meanwhile, the "government" in Iraq continues to use my tax dollars as a personal bank account. Thanks W.
define crappy meaningless bonus
Pay your share, hippie!
boo hoo, you make too much money, boo hoo hoo. Cry me a river. :p
I myself will be replacing every window in my house with the tax return my wife and I received.
I get my tax draft in email today and come to the Coffee Lounge to escape the thought of it and have to see this thread?! ;)
Anyway, you're barking up the wrong tree if you're blaming Bush for your taxes being high.
well, being a fellow NY'er (non city) i can attest the NY state taxes are due to an imbalance in government, medicaid, former leaders - spitzer, bloomberg, cuomo, and....get ready...NYC itself.
Annex the city, restructure state and local governments (consolidate as much as possible, there is no reason to have both town and village officials for populations under 500,000), build better roads that need less maintenance, and ditch that damn medicaid. Problems solved.
Federal level...i'm staying out of that argument.
Don't forget that the money you spend on those windows is a deduction for next year.Quote:
Originally Posted by lefteyewilly
Ditching medicaid would be a huge difference. If I'm not mistaken, the school system in NYC takes a giant bite as well. Aren't they paying some millions a year to keep misbehaving teachers in rubber rooms?
I should clarify my statement about Bush and taxes. Bush certainly didn't do much to lower taxes. So, he does deserve blame, imo. However, we're talking about Gore as the alternative. Our tax obligations most likely would have been higher under his lead. It's arguable that, given a strategy different than the Bush tax cut, tax revenues would have been lower as well. Certainly, if Gore had his way with his green boondoggle (greendoggle?), tax revenues from businesses could be severely affected, increasing pressure to raise tax rates in addition to the cost of goods to the consumer.
Both Obama and Hillary want to expand government. That isn't going to make the number owed on April 15th lower for anyone. Something to keep in mind.
Lucky you. Here in the UK it's those in low wages that are being hammered. Earn less than £18000 ($35000) and you pay extra income tax. If I got a bonus that pushed me in the next bracket I would be paying less.Quote:
Originally Posted by PAlexC
People who are poorly paid on the bottom shouldn't have to feed the tax credits and benefits to those on top. It's messed up :mad:
and i believe i can apply for energy saver government grants to replace them as well...double whammy winner :DQuote:
Originally Posted by TallGuyLittleCar
Nobody should be paying (or recieving) any credits. I guess a flat tax would just give politicians too little to do.
Of all people, it's the Eastern Europeans adopting and benefitting from flat tax systems.
Lefteye - Your view of how you're 'paying' for that excessive city on the southeast corner of your state is pretty skewed. Have you looked at how much state income tax that city contributes to the coffers as well as how much you feel is taken out?
If you want to see the state need to provide less to the city, you should push to have them reinstate the non-resident NYC worker tax. All these jagoffs (no offense, PAlexC) commuting into the city each day to get their high salaries, only to leave none on the table for the city so they can go home to their pretty little suburbs after 5:00 pm. What a load of sh*t. Are they not using the sidewalks? Throwing trash in the street? Flushing toilets, eating lunch in parks, etc? F Them. All of them. Worst thing that happened to that city (financially) in 20 years. You have Wall Streeters going home to Greenwich with a multi million dollar earnings package while leaving none to the city that affords them that opportunity. If they don't like the tax, don't work in the city that allows you to earn like that.
</rant>
I agree that NYC does contribute to the state in some manners. I honestly think that annexation would solve a bunch of problems.
Slight hole in your argument though. You're complaining about how much tax money and financial gain is lost from commuters from other areas than NYC. Where do you think that money is made up?
Sure there are some people who live outside of NYC that still live in the state, but i bet a lot of them are in NJ and eastern PA...probably due to high taxes in NYS.
They should pay too. People could not make the salaries they make in that city if they did not work in that city.Quote:
Originally Posted by lefteyewilly
Bottom line...you use the city...leave some $ on the table on the way out, sailor.
NYC repealed the commuter tax in 1999. Does the chart below speak volumes now? You want NYC to spend less by having more? Bring the commuter tax back...
City-Funded Operating Expenditures As a Share of Personal Income in New York*
http://www.nyfiscalwatch.com/assets/...07-2graph2.gif
..i can't really argue with that (other than the politics of every other city in the state doing the same thing if it happens).... if the state annexed NYC, they could easily impose that tax for the city. Do both at once and kill two birds with one stone.
You want NYC to stop taking so much of 'your' tax money...the idea is to think about it the other way. That city generates an assload of revenue for a lot of people and companies. Get more of that money to stay in the city (and...in turn...in the state) rather than thinking about ways to separate yourself from it.
No offense...Rochester is nice...but there a LOT of garbage in between Rochester and NYC that is certainly helping to drag on your tax expense dude(think meth-heads with cars up on blocks in the front yard). I don't even live in NY anymore, but argued for this and for the Rush Hour charge that Bloomberg is trying to get in now for years. Personally, I think $8 isn't even enough. Make it $20 a day so people stop driving into the city. There's plenty of mass transportation to use. Keep your cars at home jagoffs!
sorry...i was completely reediting my post when you posted. So we may be crossing paths here.
I agree there are of lot of crap towns all over NYS, but i don't see how that's different than any other state in this country.
Dude - you are so incredibly uninformed about this. This is the EXACT argument I hated dealing with when going to school in Rochester. Everyone in Western NY feels that they put more than they should into the pool and this is SOOOO not the case. Perhaps they should Annex everthing West of the Catskills and turn it into Eastern Ohio.
http://webdocs.nyccouncil.info/attac...TOKEN=33008944Quote:
Originally Posted by wikipedia
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/25/we...=1&oref=slogin
http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/...6annreport.pdf
*EDIT*
I may sound like a hardened NY'er (or moreso a NYC'er) but there's reasons for that. NYC residents get very possessive about that place. Thus the reason for this famous illustration:
http://www.thenewyorkerstore.com/assets/2/50326_l.jpg
if you're so possessive about NYC, then why aren't you arguing the same as I? Wouldn't you be better off keeping your hard-earned NYC dollars than pushing it to Albany so they can misspend it throughout the rest of the state that you hate?
actually, you can take albany, the rest of the state hates that place and everything it does anyhow.