Now is the winter of everyone's discontent. Gigantic budget cuts are now necessary; local aid slashed; new taxes proposed to try to patch the gaping holes in state and local budgets. Nobody's happy.
Therefore, I'm not very receptive to complaints from the beverage industry that they're being singled out in a strengthened bottle-bill proposal. Neither can I believe the claims from restauranteers who complain that a meals tax of a couple percent will seriously damage their business. At first blush, the idea is well, laughable. Doesn't a restauranteer have a heck of a lot more to worry about from a recessionary loss of employment than from a measly 1-2% tax on a bill? Do restauranteers remember that the very people who work on the taxpayer's dime take their families out for a meal every now and then?
And indeed, the general public should not feel unduly put upon by a higher gas tax, (or even higher sales or income taxes, in order to keep our roads/bridges/buses/cops/teachers/firefighters/mental health workers/etc. If we don't want quality of life to deteriorate, and if we don't want to throw the most vulnerable in society to the wolves, then we have to pay for services. (That's not to excuse any waste or inefficiency … but who can find $1.6 billion of pure waste in local budgets?)
On the other end of the revenue pipeline, I can understand how public employees would not be crazy about paying 25% of their health care premiums instead of 15%, or in moving to the cheaper state group health insurance pool. Yes, it means less money in their pockets. Yes, it means they'll be a little poorer. Yes, it means their health coverage might change. You know what? Everyone's a little poorer these days. And getting efficiencies in health care will save jobs.
Times are bad. This is a crisis. Everyone's going to take a hit — let's not deny that, and let's not deny the pain that will cause. I don't want to be unsympathetic to the concerns raised. But now's the time to give a little on parochial concerns; to pull together, take our medicine, in order to contain the damage to all of us.
if the State employee pensions were partially taxable by the Commonwealth. Let’s say we apply the 5.3% State income tax to any pension that exceeds a certain value – maybe $50K per pensioneer (that seems more than fair). Billy would then be contributing about 10 grand a year to the cause.
Is it because it probably won’t survive the U.S. Senate Republicans?
I don’t necessarily disagree on the merits, but I can’t help but think you’re playing to the worst stereotypes of Democrats regarding raising taxes. This will especially be tough to sell near the NH border. If I were a Republican strategist I’d be salivating right now at the prospect of this being the Democrats’ message.
Chris, border towns will probably be against it, I understand. GOP always wants tax cuts. Maybe it is time we paid for the Iraq debacle. Too bad the Feds don’t have to balance their budget like the states and the cities and towns.
Many people just can’t seem to see the forest for the trees . YOU–are the problem, not the solution we have “programs” for every perceived disability up to and including hang nails, with hack bureacrats consuming sixty cents on the dollar. Prevailing wage. Police welfare (unnecessary paid details) prevailing wage. The debacle of the Lowell, Boston, Fall River, Brockton, Springfield schools systems. teachers and some public employee unions sucking us innto the financial abyss. State and federal legislators that seem that they are entitled to live like successful entrapaneurs when they have never created a job or generated a buck in their sad pathetic lives. Entire families of hacks at the public trough. Entire families and generations on welfare. Teenage girls having one bastard after another. Drugs, gunfire and murder. All the result of well intentioned social engineers
<
p> “Neither can I believe the claims from restauranteers who complain that a meals tax of a couple percent will seriously damage their business. At first blush, the idea is well, laughable. Doesn’t a restauranteer have a heck of a lot more to worry about from a recessionary loss of employment than from a measly 1-2% tax on a bill?”
Charley—BMG posting 1 Feb 2009
<
p>You can’t believe it Charlie because you obviously have never owned a business. We are at the TIPPING POINT now where every cent coming in the door determines whether you stay in business or close your doors. You want to talk about multipliers. What is the net result of a business closing. Not only are his employees out of work, but now they are on unemployment but the vendors that they did business with are on the verge of going under. You folks don’t get it, because you have never gone hungry or been cold, but we are looking down the barrel of a depression and you want to give away BILLIONS of taxpayers dollars that really don’t exist and no one—NO ONE–has a clue if it will work, and many economists are now saying that the inflation will push us over the edge when the worthless money hits the streets. ALL in the name of good intentions of course!
<
p>YOU reach into your pocket and help someone out. Stop running to the federal and state tit. Those simpletons that keep on being re elected could care less—ain’t their money. Progressives have killed us all—-with the best of intentions of course.
<
p>How about—just how about, folks that live within a community and on Saturday or Sunday pitch in and help restore the infrastructure of the community.Seems to work for Amish and Mennonites. Inconvenient—-taking away jobs from the DPW and city, town, state union workers–? Then live with the result. Sleep in the bed you have made for all of us.
Your comment was too long to see on the screen all at once, but it didn’t take me longer than the first paragraph to think this must be from MCRD. I scrolled down to the signature and of course confirmed I was correct.
<
p>Here’s a thought – instead of griping, moaning, and in general coming across as a grumpy old man all the time, how about offering solutions, or at very least CONSTRUCTIVE criticism. I believe one purpose, if not THE purpose, of the original diary on this thread was to start a dialogue on taxes. Therefore, I put the question to you. What would need to happen for you be more amenable to paying for what we need? Services do cost money after all. In Sweden they consider it the height of civic duty and patriotism to pay their taxes, and they enjoy one of the highest, if not the highest, standards of living in the world. I’m not saying we would get that far, but at very least we need to get over our Revolutionary War mentality and remember at that our taxation comes WITH representation.
outstanding job addicting the populace to tax cuts, the only solution they’ve ever offered. As a stimulus, tax cuts are a mediocre stimulus at best. As a matter of fairness, tax cuts have been a major reason for income inequality in America.
<
p>Tax cuts have advanced the GOP agenda for the last 30 years, but they’ve exacted a terrible price on the country’s infrastructure and its moral center, which has disintegrated under the you’re on your own philosophy.
<
p>Taxes are a part of every well-developed, industrialized country in the world, most of which enjoy affordable health care, education, and other benefits far better than those in the United States.
<
p>We need to reopen the dialogue about taxes. Talk about taxes now should focus on sharing the burden, which is the solution to rebalancing social security, and making America a better place to live for more people.
<
p>Mark
<
p>
Mark, you are correct we do need to re-open the dialogue on taxes. On first glance I do not like paying deposit on water bottles, but we should re-cycle and it will be less litter. Restaurant tax, well if you can afford to go out you can afford to pay another 1%. Gas tax, think if we did this 30 years ago perhaps we would not be beholden to Saudi Arabia!
<
p>I do want to see reform as part of this package be it pensions, transportation, or health care. BTW those of us in the dreaded public sector are paying more for health care as well. Higher co-payments as well as increased premiums. I do not see why gov’t workers should be exempt from this.
need smart taxation, which is a lot harder to accomplish than stupid tax cuts.
<
p>I agree with making sacrifices, though when it comes to large groups of employees, like state workers, I think things should be handled through negotiations.
<
p>I asked my union president about my premiums the other day. I teach high school in East Longmeadow. I pay 30% of the premium for Health New England, a PPO (if you’re not familiar with it). 30% is the percentage of premiums for all other insurance providers, except Master Health Plus. For that, teachers pay 50%. EL also belongs to a consortium, which may minimize costs for my employer.
<
p>I pay about $6,000 in co-pays a year. An increase of $5 per appointment and prescription would cost me $3000 a year. That would be crippling.
<
p>Mark
You have 600 visits or prescription fills per year?
She pays he bills. And my math sucks.
<
p>Without checking the medicine cabinet, we have between 12 and 15 prescriptions between 4 of us. This is somewhat subject to change as medicines are tried and dropped. At least one or two of those scrips aren’t generic. I don’t know how many refills we get, but multiply whatever it is by $140 or $150 per complete round of refills and it starts to add up.
<
p>We also have a lot of appointments. One of my daughters sees her ADD specialist every six weeks. I don’t think I average more than 10 office visits a year when specialists, like the cardiologist I had to see last year or my emergency room visit and hospital stay…
<
p>Even without my fuzzy math, the expenses add up. I think my family is above the norm.
<
p>Mark
Let’s hang together through these tough times is a touch sell when you are singling out specific industries to do the heavy lifting. Why these taxes!!!
<
p>I’d much rather see a graduated income tax designed to raise additional revenues. That would be more equitable and truly reflect your notion of let’s hang together.
<
p>The meals tax raise is only laughable to you because I don’t believe you are taking the time to understand it.
<
p>What happens when tolls get raised, even by a small amount? Less people take the tolls. Not because they can’t afford it, but because they don’t believe it is fare. Look at the .25 fee being talked about for the fast pass.
<
p>Same thing will happen with the meals tax. People don’t look at it as 2 cents they look at it as 7%. People are already eating out less and now they will, especially in the days and months following the hike, eat out even less because they don’t believe it is fair. Sure it will rebound, but in those months small restaurants will be harmed and some will go out of business. To think otherwise, in my opinion, is to ignore common sense and is laughable.
when deciding whether to eat out is not, is never, “How much is the sales tax?” It’s “Can we afford it?” The latter question depends a heck of a lot more on income and security than on the sales tax.
<
p>Jim, I lived in Chicago, which now has a meals tax of 9.75-10%. Yikes — seriously, yikes. And you know what? The restaurants thrive there. The food is fantastic — far better than Boston, in my opinion. The sales tax simply is not a factor.
<
p>In any event, I’d need to see hard evidence from independent, reliable economists that a meals tax bump similar to what’s contemplated here actually would hurt restaurants. Currently, I don’t buy it — at all.
I agree with what you say in the long term, but as I mentioned above, I believe the short term logic is different – and may I suggest that your perspective may not be a predominant one.
<
p>I am not completely opposed to raising the meals tax ever, just not now.
<
p>Oh man, not only do you want to raise the meals tax, but now you are putting down Boston restaurants. Damn you Charley!
but Chicago’s better because it’s outstanding across the board.
Shouldn’t the federal funds help the situation?
Chain restaurants seem to be doing quite well. 99, Appleby’s, Not your Avg Joes. Been to all recently and they were packed. Family bars and restaurants do seem to be getting killed but I think smoking bans and DUI have more to do with the failure of the smaller places.
My comment is a carry over from another thread, I should have mentioned my concern is for small restaurants and sub stores.
I’d want to see some statistics on the effect of a tax on meals. Raising taxes during a recession is usually not good, but my guess is that taxes can be raised when it will not effect consumption.
<
p>It’s complicated to figure. If state-funded workers lose jobs, the taxes they pay decrease. Their consumption decreases. It would be hard to make a good decision without some computations I’m not capable of.
<
p>Mark
If you propose a change it should be backed up with stats or data of some kind. The way you are suggesting it should work is to say, here is the change I want to implement, I will offer no stats on how it may effect you so now go prove to me it will not have an impact!?. It doesn’t or least shouldn’t work like that (at least related to discussing the issue on its merits).
When was the last time you ever heard an industry flack or public employee union rep say, “Don’t single us out! You know, a graduated income tax would really be much fairer. So we’re working our butts off to put that into place.”
<
p>Never. You never hear it. And they never do it. First and last thoughts are always “not us!!!”
<
p>So unless those folks are willing to get out and push for something better and indeed fairer, as you suggest, then we’ll have to resort to doing things piecemeal and trying to go to areas of savings/revenue which are the least damaging and the least, uh, de-stimulating.
<
p>And I might also add … you’d think that the restaurants or bottlers themselves were to pay the tax. That (duh) is not so.
<
p>True, but what they do say is why do other services get a pass? Why not dry cleaning? lawyer services? software services? concert tickets? moving companies? etc… All would have the same inelastic demand curve you suggest at 2% right?
<
p>
<
p>They will pay for the consequences – lower demand in the short term (I know there won’t be any…)
<
p>At the end of the day, those that are proposing to make this change should be responsible for showing the impact in a more tangible way than I don’t think it will make a difference.
<
p>
That’s a good and fair question
<
p>For one thing, they don’t have the infrastructure to collect the taxes in place. That’s pretty important actually. It’s far easier to change the register/computer system from “.05” to “.07” than to implement a tax collection system where one doesn’t exist at all.
<
p>That’s a pragmatic argument, not a fairness argument to be sure — but it’s still very much true. I’m not so worried about lawyer services; thinking more about local dry cleaners and local music halls. I’d also argue that dry cleaners would be a better target than concerts. For one thing, dry cleaners are much more uniformly spread with population throughout the Commonwealth, resulting in a better distribution. Secondly, taxing concert tickets is taxing art and culture, which is philosophically different than taxing the cleaning of nice clothes. Sure, we tax the purchase of art itself (a CD or a painting), but one might argue that “The arts” hold a special role in society. Furthermore, it’s actually easier for a local concert hall to cook the books than a restaurant — the IRS can count the amount of food coming in the restaurant to see if they’re selling more than they claim, but how can you prove if the non-seated show “Joe Boo and the Ghosts” at a club on Landsdowne St was half sold out or entirely sold out?
<
p>I’d also point out that I think there’s more total money on sports tickets than concert tickets. 81×37,000 Sox games + 8×69,000 Pats games + 41×18,500 Celtics games + 41×17,500=5,025,000 tickets. If the average price were $30 (remember there are lots of high priced tix) that would generate $3,000,000 a year at a 2% fee.
Agreed, the tax infrastructure point is pragmatic and a consideration.
<
p>I choose some of those professions above so that 2 of the 3 misguided editors could relate to the taxes better (I put software services to lump myself in there too.) They are very quick to raise taxes in other industries, but not their own service based industries.
<
p>
An x% tax on the most expensive 50% of tickets sold at pro sports teams (Sox, Pats, Cs, Bs, Revs(?!))
<
p>After all, it’d be easy to implement since we’re only talking about four teams with big sales (plus Ticketmaster or whatever) and it wouldn’t punish the bleacher bums or upper deckers.
<
p>I figure if the above studies show $3,000,000 a year at the 2% fee, just taxing the most expensive 50% of ’em would generate nearly all of that $3m, maybe $2.5 mil… and wouldn’t make it more expensive for the proverbial family of four going to a ballgame.
I’d have no problem taxing legal services. But it doesn’t seem to be on the table.
<
p>As to the graduated income tax, of course that’s the best solution. But it’s a multi-year proposition because it requires a constitutional amendment. The earliest it could be on the ballot would be 2012, to take effect in 2013, and to show revenue results in 2014. Not exactly taking care of the short term problem.
http://www.massbudget.org/
<
p>One interesting article at this link traces what happened from the 1998 surpluses to the 2008 deficits – what was done, what happened, and serious number-crunching.
Will Brownsberger’s thoughts about how to restructure the income-tax burden seem timely.
<
p>Shifting the burden to the well-off would make these death-by-a-thousand-cuts taxes and fees easier to bear.