newsobserver.com projects - taxes - Comments

By the way, Phil

scharrison — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 18:03:05 -0400

Do you support sending the North Carolina National Guard to help secure our southern border?

Before you can do that, you'd need to bring the 4,000+ NCNG troops back from their third deployment in the combat zone, which is the result of another Republican's Iraqnaphobia. Although I'm sure they would probably prefer your Borderphobia, since they would be closer to home, methinks we've squeezed them enough already.

Re: Berger rolls a barrow full of opinions

scharrison — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 17:50:40 -0400

"He said that while the surveys themselves were not scientific, their results mirror the results of actual scientific ones."

Okay, if that were the case, why didn't he just give the Governor's office the actual scientific survey results?

Re: Berger rolls a barrow full of opinions

ttihw8582 — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 16:51:58 -0400

Protzman:

Is Berger's statment too complex for you to understand? He said that while the surveys themselves were not scientific, their results mirror the results of actual scientific ones. No nonsensical double talk there - only good ol' fashioned honesty about the nature of the surveys.

Hahahahahaha!

James_Protzman — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 16:11:07 -0400

"I would not represent this as a scientific sampling," Berger said. "I think it is representative of the results we're seeing in scientific sampling."

TRANSLATION: If you could excel at nonsensical double talk like I have, you too could be a Republican government-hating obstructionist getting taxpayer money for doing a whole wheelbarrow full of nothing. With all the media attention a good ol' white boy could ever want!

Re: Berger rolls a barrow full of opinions

GiggleBox — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 14:14:21 -0400

test...

Thanks.

Just making sure the majority still has a voice.

NEXT!

Re: Report: Tax hikes don't mean job losses

sky5714 — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 12:30:59 -0400

Mr. Jackson -
First of all, your bio is on ncjustice.org - looks like you have a MA (masters in what?) from the School of Journalism at UNC-CH, & a PhD (in what?) from the Dept. of Gvt at Cornell. And you've done consultant work for labor unions & performed collective bargaining studies. Why not share with us the subject of your degrees?

Secondly, your 2-page brief cites 2003 research from Arizona St. Univ., stats from the IRS & Census Bureau, & research from the NEA - well of course the NEA will be pro-tax. Would you cite research from the NC Pork Producers Assoc'n to push an agenda to eat more pork? No, didn't think so.

I'm confused - in your comments you refer to Nobel prize winners & the head of the OMB. I don't see any such references in the brief. I must be missing something - please clarify. Thank you.

Re: Report: Tax hikes don't mean job losses

stevejackson — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 11:19:21 -0400

That civility and a focus on the battle of ideas, so core to democracy, should be so marginalized of late by some on the right causes me as much concern as does any direction of policy, be it health, state taxation or foreign. No doubt some liberals have also joined that damaging trend and I am aghast at that, too.

While I am tempted to answer the aspersions from Mr Balfour about my economics training, it suffices to say that I do not know him and he certainly knows nothing about me or my education in economics.

If you read the analysis in the Brief - that it is better for state governments to increase taxes in order to maintain government-sponsored employment during a recession because 100% of the money is spent in-state - you will notice that this view is held by some pretty heavy-hitter economists, including Nobel Prize winners and the current head of the Office of Management of the Budget. Hardly bizarro. The idea is mainstream. The overwhelming majority of state governments through their actions to raise more revenue during this recession clearly agree.

Re: Report: Tax hikes don't mean job losses

sky5714 — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 10:36:15 -0400

What drivel. Why would such a report even get visibility here?

Let's see who's on the Board of Directors:

Rev. William Barber, head of the NC NAACP; Gene Nichol, HA!!!; Orage Quarles, publisher of the N&O; and the usual assortment of lawyers & people who are employed by non-profits. Duh, they have a vested interest in perpetuating the same tired Democratic high-tax gvt structure, where citizens, directly or indirectly, have their tax dollars used to fund these non-profits in the form of grants & contracts. Can you say "self-serving"?

Hey, I think I'm going to start a non-profit, fund it with tax dollars, then manufacture a report that argues for high taxes. Brilliant!

Re: Report: Tax hikes don't mean job losses

neo_mom — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 21:06:55 -0400

@scharrison

"you're not only engaging in the same tired, inflammatory, sophomoric, and fear-mongering rhetoric"

You mean like "tea-bagger"?

FAIL.

and the folks with the Obama as Nazi posters at the townhalls are LaRouche backers and are about as right-wing as you are... http://www.larouchepac.com/

Re: Report: Tax hikes don't mean job losses

scharrison — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 17:35:09 -0400

The folks over at the N.C. Justice Center are more than capable of defending themselves, but I do have a few things to say to Mr. Balfour:

First off, by categorizing NCJC as "an outfit driven by Marxist ideology" in your introductory sentence, you're not only engaging in the same tired, inflammatory, sophomoric, and fear-mongering rhetoric exhibited by pundits and tea-baggers with their "Obama is a Nazi!" drivel, you also started out your little hit piece with the dual logical fallacies of Argumentum ad hominem and Argumentum ad populum.

Now, I will freely admit that there are precious few issues that we can even come close to agreeing on, but, as I've said before, you guys are a pretty smart bunch. When you find yourself tempted to use language like the above, you need to consider what that can do to your overall image. Make no mistake, it would suit me just fine if the rank and file in the General Assembly, especially the Democrats (hint hint), chose to ignore the "product" coming out of JLF/Civitas. Keep going down that road and you'll find yourself where you should be, on the outside trying to look in.

As far as "Statism vs Entrepreneurship" issue, you're casually overlooking some pretty important factors. Not only do many entrepreneurs actively seek State (and Federal) contracts, a lot of them wouldn't have even sketched a rough outline of a business plan in the absence of those contracts. As a matter of fact, most (State, anyway) government contracts address issues like infrastructure and education, meaning much of those lucrative projects that entrepreneurs salivate over wouldn't even exist in the strictly private sector. If any of you real entrepreneurs are interested, here's some guidelines (pdf) for you.

While there is some merit to the "tax hurts the bottom line which discourages investment" angle, to ignore the economic reality of the State being such a huge consumer of goods and services from the private sector leaves such a gaping pothole in your bottom-line analysis that it simply must be discarded as irrelevant. Your deep-seated dislike and disdain for government is a handicap, although you probably can't see it.

Now, see? You don't have to use hyperbolic crutches like "Marxist" to engage in debate. I went through that whole thing there without mentioning Puppets or Free Market Funda...okay, I just mentioned them, but it doesn't count because I was already done. ;)

Re: Report: Tax hikes don't mean job losses

captainjack — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 14:06:03 -0400

I can think of several other opinions I might value more on the subject of jobs rather than the N. C. Justice Center.

For example, what does Elizabeth Edwards have to say?

Re: Report: Tax hikes don't mean job losses

neo_mom — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 12:42:48 -0400

Wow! What a shocker!!

A lefist-statist special interest group that suck off taxpayer dollars is applauding the budget that was created by the politicians they bought with that same taxpayer money.

How about you guys tell everyone what the NC Justice Center really is, what they really want, who backs them, and who they back.

After that ask small businesses how the tax and fee hikes will work for them? If they can stay in business, how many will they hire? Or with all the private sector unemployment, salary cuts/freezes and furloughs, how much people will really spend? Do you REALLY think that raising the sales and income taxes will entice people to spend more?

Re: Perdue: seniors promise tough to keep

PaulTerrell — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 22:25:00 -0400

If Perdue would stop hiring people for her administration making from $100k to well over $200k she might have the money to do the RIGHT things. You have to start somewhere and Perdue has been negligent in the common sense arena.

Re: Perdue: seniors promise tough to keep

taylor — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 16:25:56 -0400

I hope the initiative by the General Assembly and the governor to help seniors with lower incomes hold on to their homes--if they've lived in them at least 20 years-- by freezing the property tax evaluation will be resurrected. This is an opportunity to do a good thing for very deserving people who face enough age-related problems without worrying about keeping their homes, too.

Charles Malone,
Raleigh

Re: Perdue: seniors promise tough to keep

domewatcher — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 10:07:36 -0400

And that promise might have been made during a "senoir moment!" We all have those senoir moments so let's move on.

Or is it spelled "senior?" Those senoir/senior moments are tough.