Then again, these people are undeniably out of their fucking minds, engaging in all the off-the-wall, leftist, fantasy-based folly I tried so hard to get away from by moving up here. Let's have a look, shall we?
1. New Hampshire could completely eliminate the property tax with a 5.3% income tax...
Uh-huh. And I'd be one rich mother-fucker, if I could shit gold bricks out of my ass.
You see, that one statement pretty much voids their entire argument. For, once liberals get in power, and open up a revenue stream, that's it. There's simply no way in hell any newly-created income or sales-based tax would eliminate, or even reduce, the property tax burden on New Hampshire homeowners.
That fallacy was one of Deval Patrick's campaign cornerstones south of the border last fall. And, the (supposedly) highly-educated voters in Massachusetts ate that shit up with gusto - damn, you bet! (100 bonus points for the pop culture reference there) Only after the election, did some of these people come to the realization that, "Hey, the Governor has absolutely nothing to do with municipal property tax assessment and collection! Who knew?"
Why, it's almost as if a liberal politician was talking out of both sides of his ass at once. Say it isn't so!
2. or a 13% sales tax.
Yeah, because we need something to free up some of those parking spaces at all the malls around Salem, Nashua, and Plaistow. Seriously, people, try opening your fucking eyes. I'll explain it in as simple terms as I know how. Stop me if I start to go too fast, or use too many polysyllabic words.
People from Massachusetts come to shop in New Hampshire, in large numbers, to save 5% on the cost of their purchases, due to the lack of state sales tax.
This creates a demand for goods and services that is met by retailers and businesses moving into the area and opening shop, or expanding their current businesses. This is called "growth".
This creates "jobs".
Liberals love creating jobs, right?
I wonder sometimes.
As the number of job openings increases, employers will do what they must to attract quality employees to fill these positions. One such means of accomplishing this is to offer higher starting wages than the competition. I'll pause to let the cringing among the area's leftist population subside. It's a natural reaction to any discussion involving free market principles.
Another way employers can lure quality employees is to offer health care coverage on more attractive terms than their competition might be.
Why, it's almost as if more job opportunities, higher wages, and better healthcare opportunities could be brought about by allowing a business-friendly (read: low tax burden) environment to take hold in one's community, without an overbearing state government trying to control every aspect of life within its borders.
One only needs to look south across the state line into Massachusetts to see what's happening in this little thing we call "reality". Massachusetts continues to hemorrhage population, year after year, to the point where one of its representative seats in Congress might be in jeopardy after the next official census count. As more and more people and businesses decide to pull up their tent stakes and head for greener pastures, the state leadership continues to do NOTHING to realistically address the situation.
Faced with this unenviable situation of increasing numbers of educated workers (read: tax revenue or host organism) fleeing the state, the "progressive" leadership in the Bay State has decided to pursue the "solution" of aggressively documenting the illegal aliens residing in the state (read: financial burden or parasite organism) to make up the difference.
As more and more companies relocate out of state, or decide not to locate in Massachusetts in the first place, the number of job openings goes down. As the ratio of job seekers to job openings increases, wages drop as the quality of the applicant pool goes down accordingly.
But, wait, it's liberals to the rescue, once again!
Next, they'll raise the minimum wage and force employers to pay higher wages than the market would otherwise bear under normal operating conditions. And if the company should choose to decrease its percent contribution to employees' health care plans, or eliminates them altogether, to make up for the higher wages it now has to pay its workers, why, they'll pass a law to mandate healthcare as well. And, they'll impose financial penalties on those employers who don't want to follow them off the cliff into the sea.
Then reality sets in.
1. More employers relocate out of state.
2. More people move out of state to where the jobs are.
3. More legislation is enacted to lure more illegal aliens to take their place in the census rolls.
4. Everyone congratulates one another on doing what feeeeeeeels good.
7. "But, it's for the children! We need more money for education!"
The quality of education a student receives has no direct correlation to the amount of tax revenue collected by the state. It's all about what a state or municipality chooses to do with the money once they get it. Two words: Wilfredo Laboy (Google him).
Tell you what. Calculate the average amount of money spent per student per year in this state. Then, give me ten times that amount of money and ten 15-year-old kids to educate. I'll have them filling out college applications in 9 months' time, guaranteed.
"But, it's just a teeny-tiny tax increase. We need this!"
OK, here's another one:
Show me ONE state with a higher overall per capita tax burden than New Hampshire (you've got about 48 to choose from, at last check), wherein the teachers' unions and their "progressive" co-conspirators in the state legislature have issued a proclamation stating that public education in that state is adequately funded.
Public education in this country will never be adequately funded, as long as one's assessment of such funding levels comes from those who stand to gain the most, financially, through increased government spending.
But, I digress.
Back to the post at hand.
3. For people living in New Hampshire but working in Massachusetts, which has a 5.3% income tax rate, an income tax would be "free:" it would simply transfer their tax payments to NH instead of MA.
If anything should serve as a warning sign (we're talking bells, whistles, lights, and sirens here), it's a liberal telling you you're getting something for free.
"See, your next-door neighbor didn't steal your newspaper. It was the guy across the street. What are you complaining about?"
4. An income tax rate of 6% rather than 5.3% would bring another $330 million to the state.
Well, shit! Why not go for an income tax rate of 26.5%? That would bring another $10 BILLION to the state!!! Right? What's not to love? Free everything for everybody! I'm buying!
Seriously, what is wrong with these people?
They simply won't be happy, until everyone, in every state, in every country on the planet, is equally over-taxed and forced into a state of total reliance on the government (read: the United Nations) for their every want and need.
Screw that, fucking bigtime!
Someone, please, for the love of God, get these kids their binkies and sippy cups and get them in front of Blue's Clues until they calm down some, and are able to demonstrate some rational thought capabilities. It's best we let the grown-ups run things around here.
Now, in defense of this "elwood" person, who wrote that post over at Blue Hampshire, he did include this little disclaimer:
...I'm not claiming this is a clear plan for a more sensible tax policy.
Well, no shit.