Control

Senator and Progressive-Democratic Party Presidential candidate Kamala Harris (D, CA) wants the Federal government to pay a significant fraction of public school teachers’ salaries.

What a terrible idea.

The Federal government paying a significant fraction of public school teachers’ salaries means Federal government control of our public schools. Those schools are in enough trouble; we don’t need the Feds getting in the way, also.

Aside from that, this is just another Progressive-Democratic Party attempt to grab our money, this time to deny it to our heirs.  Again.

Apart from both of those, this is another example of the Progressive-Democratic Party’s contributing to the erosion of our families, illustrated by this claim of Harris’:

Our country’s success is a product of the two groups who raise our children: parents and teachers. We are not paying our teachers their value[.]

Teachers help raise our children? No, that’s the exclusive province of parents; schools are not ex loco parentis child care centers, and teachers must stop being babysitters and do the only thing they’re hired to do: teach.

Explorations

Illinois is verging on bankruptcy, and Progressive-Democratic Governor JB Pritzker and his henchmen running this Progressive-Democrat-run State want a State constitutional amendment to raise taxes preferentially on the rich—a progressive tax.

Illinois faces a $3.2 billion budget deficit next fiscal year, unfunded pension liabilities estimated from $133 billion to $250 billion, and the worst credit rating of any US state. It has roughly $8 billion in bills outstanding.

They insist that the good citizens of Illinois—and especially the not-so-good rich ones—should pay for this failure to perform, rather than that failure be made good through reallocation of currently collected revenues.  The technical term for that is “spending cuts.”

Here’s Deputy Governor Dan Hynes (D):

You have wide acceptance that Illinois needs new revenue.  If the voters disagree with us in 2020, then we’ll have to explore other revenues.

The first statement is a dubious claim, at best.  The second shows how economically illiterate is Hynes and his Progressive-Democratic Party. He—and they—can’t even conceive of the other side of that coin: that what Illinois needs is less spending.  That what they should be exploring is spending cuts.

A Governor Misrepresents

New York’s governor, Andrew Cuomo (D), has provided another example of the dishonesty of Progressive-Democrats as he continues to whine about his State’s excessive State and local taxes no longer being deductible above a high maximum on Federal income tax forms.

He said Trump intentionally targeted states whose populations oppose him by a majority.

And

You pay your state income tax, they then tax your state income tax payment. First time ever.

No, the first is misleading.  The SALT cap was aimed at capping Federal tax deductions generally in order to level tax requirements, at least a little, across all income levels.  That only a few States have SALT set so high that their rich residents routinely exceed the $10,000 threshold is an outcome of those few States having such excessively high taxes; it has nothing to do with where the deductibility limit is set.

The second is an outright lie.  Only New York, et al., are taxing their citizens’ State income; the Feds are simply not allowing wealthiest to deduct all of their State and local taxes from their Federal income tax bill.  Not allowing a deduction is not the same as taxing.

On the other hand, if there is double taxation; it’s the States applying the second income tax on the same income.  It’s their choice to come in behind the Feds’ income tax and apply a second—their own—income tax to that same income.

The States as double-taxers is demonstrated in two ways. One is the seven States that don’t have—don’t need and don’t want—an income tax on their citizens’ income, with an eighth State kicking its State income tax to the curb as of 2021, and the two that only tax dividends and interest payments.

The other is the number of States whose income tax requirements require submission of the Federal income tax data (not income data) as the basis for the States’ application of their own income tax.

And a double-taxation mitigating factor: most of those States that do apply their second income tax to the Feds’ income tax don’t have their SALT set so high that the payments aren’t fully deductible from the Federal income tax.  Only a few States have their SALT set usuriously high—and that’s the deliberate choice of the men of those States’ governments.

An Experiment in Progressivism

This one has the advantage of being live and current. The Progressive-Democratic Party has extended its control over the State of California.  The results accumulating from the several years of Progressive-Democratic dominance (now outright control) are these.  California has

  • the highest welfare numbers (a third of all Americans on welfare live in California)
  • the largest contingent of illegal immigrants
  • a burgeoning homeless population
  • onerous regulations on business and private property
  • mediocre public schools
  • high income taxes (the highest marginal rate is 13.3%) and sales taxes
  • a yawning gap between rich and poor
  • its own summer blend of expensive gasoline
  • bedraggled and crowded roads
  • a widely mocked high-speed rail boondoggle

Sadly, it doesn’t get any better than that for California.  Or for our United States if the Progressive-Democratic Party makes further gains in 2020 or beyond.

French Tax, Tax, Tax

Now the French have decided to add another tax on American multinationals—a 3% “digital-services” tax on companies that do “targeted advertising or run[] a digital marketplace,” a tax aimed in particularly at Alphabet’s Google and Amazon.com.

Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire:

These giants use your personal data and make a significant profit from it, without paying their fair share of tax[.]

This, though, is a conflation of two separate issues, cynically done in order to obfuscate the French government’s drive for ever higher taxes and never lower spending.  It may well be that “these giants” take advantage of personal data for the sake of profit.  Whether that particular profit should be taxed especially, though, is a tax matter, not a data use/abuse matter.  Especially coming, as it does, against the backdrop of the government’s men continuing to decline to say how much is companies’ (or rich folks’, come to that) fair share.