tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10348701.post2674354741103591613..comments2024-03-13T21:26:03.011-07:00Comments on Right on the Left Coast: Views From a Conservative Teacher: Vocabulary of LiesDarrenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15730642770935985796noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10348701.post-90639017021045963362009-03-31T05:22:00.000-07:002009-03-31T05:22:00.000-07:00Po-ta-to, po-tah-to. I assume you mean that it is...Po-ta-to, po-tah-to. I assume you mean that it isn't a tax, because people volunteer to buy lottery tickets. By that logic, the cigarette tax isn't a tax, because people volunteer to buy those, too. Any time government collects money, it's a tax . . . they can call it whatever they want, but the result is the same.maxutilshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11294262473781967372noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10348701.post-84774505440387294522009-03-30T09:07:00.000-07:002009-03-30T09:07:00.000-07:00Actually, one of my favorite sayings is that the l...Actually, one of my favorite sayings is that the lottery is a special tax on those who are bad at mathematics.<BR/><BR/>And regarding the prior two posts, in my view-- given that the tax burden here in CA is distributed in such a "progressive" fashion-- the only silver lining in the sales tax increase is that it is not progressive.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10348701.post-75278966727511663172009-03-30T06:53:00.000-07:002009-03-30T06:53:00.000-07:00Daniel, the lottery is *not* a tax. That it preys...Daniel, the lottery is *not* a tax. That it preys on the dreams and fantasies of the great unwashed doesn't change that fact.Darrenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15730642770935985796noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10348701.post-82477002173337552402009-03-30T05:30:00.000-07:002009-03-30T05:30:00.000-07:00Oh, and another thing . . .Only in California woul...Oh, and another thing . . .<BR/><BR/>Only in California would we finally recognize that earmarked taxes like the cigarette tax and the lottery make it hard to budget, and guarantee either over or under-funding for specific programs, then attempt to correct the problem by voting in more restrictions. Why not a proposition that removes all restrictions, and kicks all revenues into the general fund?<BR/><BR/>And only in California would we think it a good idea to fund a school system not on what it needs to operate, but on 'about half of whatever taxes are collected.' (Prop 98)maxutilshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11294262473781967372noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10348701.post-43537691024558318622009-03-30T05:21:00.000-07:002009-03-30T05:21:00.000-07:00We should also probably note that the rate of the ...We should also probably note that the rate of the sales tax is interesting as a curiosity, but not the relevant measure. The tax rate that matters is (total of all taxes paid)/total income. Increasing the sales tax only increases your taxes by the difference in the sales tax rate times purchases of things other than food and medicine. Therefore, it's less than 1%. <BR/><BR/>That said, when I teach taxes in econ, I can have a rational conversation with people who believe that all people should be taxed at the same rate; or that the rich should be taxed at a higher rate. The people I can't figure out are the occasional ones who believe that the poor should be taxed at a higher rate than the rich. It makes no practical or ethical sense to me.<BR/><BR/>So, why does our union consistently back taxes that do just this? The lottery, the increase in cigarette taxes, the increase in the sales tax, and the vehicle licensing fee increase are all examples of taxes which hit the poor proportionally worse than the rich.<BR/><BR/>A guess: those who do have either the inability or the desire to figure it out.maxutilshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11294262473781967372noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10348701.post-34842506962762341322009-03-28T20:09:00.000-07:002009-03-28T20:09:00.000-07:00Good point--one I've made before, but failed to do...Good point--one I've made before, but failed to do here. Thanks for the correction, which I'll make now.Darrenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15730642770935985796noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10348701.post-9595773127581517042009-03-28T19:41:00.000-07:002009-03-28T19:41:00.000-07:00To say the sales tax is increased by 1% misreprese...To say the sales tax is increased by 1% misrepresents the truth. It is being increased at the state level to 8.25%, and the one cent increase per dollar is equal to a 13.79% increase in the tax. I wish, in particular, that the media would stop parroting the "one percentage point increase" language that Sacramento has fed them, and tell the whole truth on this.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com