Marylanders Flee O'Malleys Tax Hikes - $1.7B in lost revenue from 2007-2010 (Baltimore: credit, new home)

[Cruzincat]

Am I the only one who wonders about the politicians who laud it over about how they have gotten people to stop smoking cigarettes, by taxing the **** out of them and then turn around and tax the productive people out of Maryland? I guess in the former case it's OK to use taxes to force people to change their ways, but people should just look the other way when it becomes cheaper to move away than it is to stay.

[phlinak]

Originally Posted by North Beach Person

I saw more roadbuilding in SoMD during Ehrlich's 4 years than I've seen in O' Malley's 6.

Gee, do you think that has anything to do with the fact that, except for PG County, southern MD overwhelmingly voted for him? What about the rest of Maryland?

I guess you missed the part where the voters rejected Ehrlich twice to Governor O'Malley. In 2006, okay, you can say that the voters were unhappy and wanted a change but in 2010, the voters knew who was in office and made a clear choice to stay the course. Not only did the Governor defeat Ehrlich but by an even larger margin than the first time.

I know some individuals like you just want to cut, cut, cut across the board because you want to pay less taxes. I get that, I pay taxes too. However, we need roads, bridges, and other infrastructure. We also need police, fire and rescue, EMS personnel, teachers, highway workers, and many, many other civil servants and we all have to pay for it because it benefits all of us. People are tired of Republicans (at all levels of government) just advocating tax cuts, tax cuts, tax cuts and no other proposals or solutions.

No matter how much you try to demagogue him, the voters like Governor O'Malley's leadership because he gets it and he's doing the best he can with what he has.

Let me be the first to say it........O'Malley for President 2016

[westsideboy]

Originally Posted by phlinak

Gee, do you think that has anything to do with the fact that, except for PG County, southern MD overwhelmingly voted for him? What about the rest of Maryland?

I guess you missed the part where the voters rejected Ehrlich twice to Governor O'Malley. In 2006, okay, you can say that the voters were unhappy and wanted a change but in 2010, the voters knew who was in office and made a clear choice to stay the course. Not only did the Governor defeat Ehrlich but by an even larger margin than the first time.

I know some individuals like you just want to cut, cut, cut across the board because you want to pay less taxes. I get that, I pay taxes too. However, we need roads, bridges, and other infrastructure. We also need police, fire and rescue, EMS personnel, teachers, highway workers, and many, many other civil servants and we all have to pay for it because it benefits all of us. People are tired of Republicans (at all levels of government) just advocating tax cuts, tax cuts, tax cuts and no other proposals or solutions.

No matter how much you try to demagogue him, the voters like Governor O'Malley's leadership because he gets it and he's doing the best he can with what he has.

Let me be the first to say it........O'Malley for President 2016

The "we need to keep spending to benefit all of us" government mentality falls apart when the tax receivers start to outnumber the tax payers. This isn't idealogical, it is financial. You can only squeeze so much blood from the people that actually make money, as opposed to living off of government checks.

The debt crisis has come. It starts at the Federal level, and trickles down to the States, then the Counties. You can laud MOM all you want, but pushing the cost of wastewater upgrades and teacher pensions to the counties is going to crush their ability to provide the services they need to provide to their residents. No doubt the disperity grants are covering up most of the damage from your view....for now. The State has plans to cut them off, then you will see it hit the fan. You will notice MOM will be long out of the State House by then.

It is easy to have "leadership" when the consquences of your actions are pushed down the pipe to the next guy.

[phlinak]

Originally Posted by westsideboy

The "we need to keep spending to benefit all of us" government mentality falls apart when the tax receivers start to outnumber the tax payers. This isn't idealogical, it is financial. You can only squeeze so much blood from the people that actually make money, as opposed to living off of government checks.

The debt crisis has come. It starts at the Federal level, and trickles down to the States, then the Counties. You can laud MOM all you want, but pushing the cost of wastewater upgrades and teacher pensions to the counties is going to crush their ability to provide the services they need to provide to their residents. No doubt the disperity grants are covering up most of the damage from your view....for now. The State has plans to cut them off, then you will see it hit the fan. You will notice MOM will be long out of the State House by then.

It is easy to have "leadership" when the consquences of your actions are pushed down the pipe to the next guy.

And besides cutting tax from those who "live off government checks" (who are "those" living off government checks, anyway?), once again, what ideas or solutions (if you have any) do you propose?

Secondly, if we have such a debt crisis, then how does the Republican Party justify federal income tax cuts for any earned income over $250,000 a year? And please don't give that old tried-and-failed saw about trickle down economics.

[westsideboy]

Originally Posted by phlinak

And besides cutting tax from those who "live off government checks" (who are "those" living off government checks, anyway?), once again, what ideas or solutions (if you have any) do you propose?

Secondly, if we have such a debt crisis, then how does the Republican Party justify federal income tax cuts for any earned income over $250,000 a year? And please don't give that old tried-and-failed saw about trickle down economics.

The GOP is just as guilty as the Dems. Bush II was a deficit spender too.


Those that live off government checks include both state workers and those on public assistance. The state workers give something back to the state for the checks they recieve. Most on public assistance don't. I advocate making those on public assistance earn their checks. I understand that some people have true disabilities that prevent them from doing anything, but the overwhelming majority of people can. Picking up trash, work crews cutting grass, painting over graffetti, community service type stuff. The idea would be that once the lunch is no longer free, there is incentive for these folks to go get higher paying jobs, they will have to work anyway now, why not work for more? At worst, communities will look nicer, which is tax dollars better spent than simply giving the money away.

Secondly, discretionary spending must end. Sorry, no DREAM ACT, no kick backs to daycare providers for serving carrots to kids instead of potato chips, colleges will have to charge tution in line with their expenditures, and students will have to decide whether going into debt is worth the degree, or not (this would also incentivize the USM system to cut unnecessary jobs and bring their payscale for administrators back to reality. If not, students will go elsewhere.) Pro Sports owners would have to pay for their own stadiums, rather than having the cost subsidized by tax payers.

Let me know if you would like more ways to cut out the fat.

[North Beach Person]

Originally Posted by phlinak

Gee, do you think that has anything to do with the fact that, except for PG County, southern MD overwhelmingly voted for him? What about the rest of Maryland?

I guess you missed the part where the voters rejected Ehrlich twice to Governor O'Malley. In 2006, okay, you can say that the voters were unhappy and wanted a change but in 2010, the voters knew who was in office and made a clear choice to stay the course. Not only did the Governor defeat Ehrlich but by an even larger margin than the first time.

I know some individuals like you just want to cut, cut, cut across the board because you want to pay less taxes. I get that, I pay taxes too. However, we need roads, bridges, and other infrastructure. We also need police, fire and rescue, EMS personnel, teachers, highway workers, and many, many other civil servants and we all have to pay for it because it benefits all of us. People are tired of Republicans (at all levels of government) just advocating tax cuts, tax cuts, tax cuts and no other proposals or solutions.

No matter how much you try to demagogue him, the voters like Governor O'Malley's leadership because he gets it and he's doing the best he can with what he has.

Let me be the first to say it........O'Malley for President 2016

Where, really, have I advocated any of the things you attribute to me. What I dislike, whomsoever is in office, is wasteful spending and spending on projects that have no real chance of succeeding or (since I'm also a local elected official) are unfunded mandates.

Want some examples?
School systems are laying off staff, increasing class sizes, denying contracted raises and MSDE approves a new discipline policy which mandates a whole new level of interventions to reduce suspensions.

Requiring ENR upgrades to sewer plants, with the promise of grant funding from the Flush Tax, and then changing the grants to loans.

Requiring all sewer users in state to pay the Flush Tax but limiting the loan funding for ENR upgrades to those systems with a rated capacity of more 500KGPD but still requiring the small systems to do the ENR upgrades, financing them on the private bond market.

Implementing a WIP program that is going to bankrupt small Counties, stop any economic development in the majority of the state and likely force a majority of the remaining farmers to cease operations.

Implementing a tax on residential electric bills with the proceeds to be turned over to the utilities with the request they "try" to develop wind power.

Requiring local jurisdictions to improve roads and then cutting the local Highway User Funds (which were to pay for those improvements) by 95%.

Requiring more and more training and certifications for law enforcement officers and then cutting State Aid For Police by 90-100%. Again that money was to be used for training.

Implementing more and more requirements for local volunteer fire and EMS services and then cutting that funding by 100%, forcing those organizations to engage in constant fund raising and cost shifting to the local jurisdictions.


Those are just the ones that come to mind without me moving from my computer and opening my files.

[InvaderBryce]

O'Malley for President 2016

I for one will be voting for the GOP candidate if the Democrats nominate O'Malley in 2016. He stands for everything that is wrong with the party today.

[HandsUpThumbsDown]

Originally Posted by westsideboy

Those that live off government checks include both state workers and those on public assistance. The state workers give something back to the state for the checks they recieve. Most on public assistance don't. I advocate making those on public assistance earn their checks. I understand that some people have true disabilities that prevent them from doing anything, but the overwhelming majority of people can. Picking up trash, work crews cutting grass, painting over graffetti, community service type stuff. The idea would be that once the lunch is no longer free, there is incentive for these folks to go get higher paying jobs, they will have to work anyway now, why not work for more? At worst, communities will look nicer, which is tax dollars better spent than simply giving the money away.
.

I'm a liberal and I approve this message

[nurider2002]

Perhaps if Maryland (or the GOP for that matter) would offer up some republicans who are more to the left on social issues, we would have a republican govenor. I admit I voted for O'Malley, although I would never do it again. He is simply out of touch with the impact of the economy on the middle class. For those of us who have lost all equity in our homes, have had to support other's who have lost their jobs, watch every imaginable tax increase possible in this state, it is infuriating. When he was mayor of Baltimore I complained that, because I had a newly constructed home in the City, my income taxes were exhorbitant compared to neighbors across the street who had older homes. O'Malley's response was, "move to the county". I did. Now, I'm paying for services the state cannot afford with no regard for taxpayers. So yes, I will move out of Maryland within the next couple of years. But, I still wouldn't vote for Ehrlich. Give me a fiscally conservative socially liberal republican and he/she will get my vote. And I'll bet a lot of other's votes too. But the republicans insist on sticking with their conservative social agenda. Leaves someone like me little choice but to see and head for a state where taxes are reasonable and services are limited based on the budget.

[North Beach Person]

Originally Posted by nurider2002

Perhaps if Maryland (or the GOP for that matter) would offer up some republicans who are more to the left on social issues, we would have a republican govenor. I admit I voted for O'Malley, although I would never do it again. He is simply out of touch with the impact of the economy on the middle class. For those of us who have lost all equity in our homes, have had to support other's who have lost their jobs, watch every imaginable tax increase possible in this state, it is infuriating. When he was mayor of Baltimore I complained that, because I had a newly constructed home in the City, my income taxes were exhorbitant compared to neighbors across the street who had older homes. O'Malley's response was, "move to the county". I did. Now, I'm paying for services the state cannot afford with no regard for taxpayers. So yes, I will move out of Maryland within the next couple of years. But, I still wouldn't vote for Ehrlich. Give me a fiscally conservative socially liberal republican and he/she will get my vote. And I'll bet a lot of other's votes too. But the republicans insist on sticking with their conservative social agenda. Leaves someone like me little choice but to see and head for a state where taxes are reasonable and services are limited based on the budget.

So what you're saying is that gay marriage and the MD Dream Act are more important to you than fiscal responsibility.


For your new Baltimore house I think you meant your property taxes were more for it than your neighbors', not your income taxes. The reason that your property taxes were more is that being new construction your assessable base was high whereas your neighbors, who had been in their houses decades were benefitting from the Homestead Exemption, which you would have, too, had you stayed in the house for several years.