» OLD MESSAGE ARCHIVES «
The Pop Culture Information Society...
Messageboard Archive Index, In The 00s - The Pop Culture Information Society

Welcome to the archived messages from In The 00s. This archive stretches back to 1998 in some instances, and contains a nearly complete record of all the messages posted to inthe00s.com. You will also find an archive of the messages from inthe70s.com, inthe80s.com, inthe90s.com and amiright.com before they were combined to form the inthe00s.com messageboard.

If you are looking for the active messages, please click here. Otherwise, use the links below or on the right hand side of the page to navigate the archives.

Custom Search



Subject: Is your state tax friendly?

Written By: GWBush2004 on 05/07/05 at 8:24 am

http://www.stateline.org/live/ViewPage.action?siteNodeId=136&languageId=1&contentId=28297

State by state tax burdens (starting with the highest tax burden and going to the lowest):

1 Hawaii…..              3,047.61 
2 Wyoming…..              2,968.00   
3 Connecticut…..              2,937.01 
4 Minnesota…..              2,888.63 
5 Delaware…..              2,862.03 
           
6 Vermont…..              2,844.96 
7 Massachusetts…..              2,602.26 
8 New Jersey…..              2,411.94 
9 California…..              2,388.18 
10 New York…..              2,383.82 
           
11 Michigan…..              2,379.22 
12 Wisconsin…..              2,274.66 
13 Washington…..              2,239.74 
14 Rhode Island…..              2,228.36 
15 Maryland…..              2,215.69 
           
16 Maine…..              2,199.51 
17 New Mexico…..              2,102.88 
18 Nebraska…..              2,083.46 
19 West Virginia…..              2,065.57 
20 Pennsylvania…..              2,043.11 
           
21 Kentucky…..              2,041.34 
22 Nevada…..              2,029.50 
23 Arkansas…..              2,027.13 
24 Illinois…..              2,004.92 
25 Alaska…..              1,966.66 
           
26 Ohio…..              1,961.39 
27 North Carolina…..              1,940.79 
28 North Dakota…..              1,938.31 
29 Kansas…..              1,931.17 
30 Indiana…..              1,916.88 
           
31 Virginia…..              1,907.92 
32 Idaho…..              1,900.78 
33 Oklahoma…..              1,823.70 
34 Louisiana…..              1,777.13 
35 Florida…..              1,768.56 
           
36 Mississippi…..              1,765.32 
37 Montana…..              1,753.71 
38 Utah…..              1,753.53 
39 Iowa…..              1,737.69 
40 Oregon…..              1,697.66 
           
41 Arizona…..              1,672.41 
42 Georgia…..              1,650.31 
43 South Carolina…..              1,620.67 
44 Tennessee…..              1,616.00 
45 Missouri…..              1,584.65 
           
46 Alabama…..              1,549.28 
47 New Hampshire…..              1,542.61 
48 Colorado…..              1,532.59 
49 South Dakota…..              1,378.37 
50 Texas…..              1,367.36

Link: http://www.census.gov/govs/statetax/04staxrank.html

Subject: Re: Is your state tax friendly?

Written By: danootaandme on 05/07/05 at 8:36 am

Yes, yes, but what are the services in return for taxes? Percentage of taxes to wages?  I am sure you will be posting the gain in jobs without posting the fact that employment remain stagnant due to the fact that any jobs gained were offset by jobs lost(and of course no mention of people who have dropped off of the roles completely).  Depth GW, the story beyond the headlines.  Jeez....

Subject: Re: Is your state tax friendly?

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 05/07/05 at 9:29 am


Yes, yes, but what are the services in return for taxes? Percentage of taxes to wages?  I am sure you will be posting the gain in jobs without posting the fact that employment remain stagnant due to the fact that any jobs gained were offset by jobs lost(and of course no mention of people who have dropped off of the roles completely).  Depth GW, the story beyond the headlines.  Jeez....

TAX = BAD
Stop there, and you're a Republican!

It is more important to ask upon whom is the tax burden most burdensome.  It is not enough to say, "high income people pay more taxes!" 

It is no surprise Taxachusetts ranks seventh, the problem I have with the high ranking is the availability and quality of services continues to sink like a stone!  I'm so disgusted with the Massachusetts state government I could hurl!

Subject: Re: Is your state tax friendly?

Written By: ElDuderino on 05/07/05 at 10:23 am

Anyone else perplexed as to why a red state like Wyoming is number 2?

Subject: Re: Is your state tax friendly?

Written By: GWBush2004 on 05/07/05 at 11:24 am


Anyone else perplexed as to why a red state like Wyoming is number 2?


That's what I was thinking.  It seems two states went off track: Wyoming and New Hampshire.  Wyoming being the only red state in the top ten states with the highest tax burdens, and New Hampshire being the only blue state to be in the top ten states with the lowest tax burden.

Subject: Re: Is your state tax friendly?

Written By: GWBush2004 on 05/08/05 at 10:33 am


It is no surprise Taxachusetts ranks seventh, the problem I have with the high ranking is the availability and quality of services continues to sink like a stone!  I'm so disgusted with the Massachusetts state government I could hurl!


Can you say "big dig?"

The average person in Hawaii pays $3,047.61 a year in state taxes, while the average person in Texas pays $1,367.36 a year in state taxes.  But at the same time I'd wager that their services are almost the same.

When a state has more money, they tend to waste more.

Subject: Re: Is your state tax friendly?

Written By: GWBush2004 on 05/08/05 at 12:02 pm

Tax Cuts 101

Let's put tax cuts in terms everyone can understand. Suppose that everyday, ten men go out for dinner. The bill for all ten comes to $100.
If they paid their bill, proportional to current demographics, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do.

The ten men ate dinner in the restaurant every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily meal by $20."

So now dinner for the ten only cost $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still eat for free. But what about the other six, the paying customers? How could they divvy up the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his "fair share?" The six men realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being "paid" to eat their meal.

So, the restaurant owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% savings).
The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12. (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18. (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59. (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to eat for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings. "I only got a dollar out of the $20," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth. "But he got $10!"

"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than me!"

"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I only got $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!"

The nine men then surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for dinner, so the nine sat down and ate without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill.

And, that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction.

Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up at the table anymore. There are a lot of good restaurants in Europe and the Caribbean.

Subject: Re: Is your state tax friendly?

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 05/08/05 at 4:54 pm


That's what I was thinking.  It seems two states went off track: Wyoming and New Hampshire.  Wyoming being the only red state in the top ten states with the highest tax burdens, and New Hampshire being the only blue state to be in the top ten states with the lowest tax burden.

I'll bet Wyoming also ranks near the top in federal subsidies as well.  Almost all the ranches and extraction industries are on BLM land.

Subject: Re: Is your state tax friendly?

Written By: ChuckyG on 05/09/05 at 9:00 am


That's what I was thinking.  It seems two states went off track: Wyoming and New Hampshire.  Wyoming being the only red state in the top ten states with the highest tax burdens, and New Hampshire being the only blue state to be in the top ten states with the lowest tax burden.


Sales Taxe


that's why New Hampshire is lower.  If you own property, you get creamed in taxes in New Hampshire.  So if that list conviently doesn't average in property tax, (which if the tax burden is only $1,500 for New Hampshire, I bet it is), New Hampshire looks like a bargin.

Check for new replies or respond here...