New taxes for Mass taxpayers?

[DryRain]

Patrick favors income tax hike
Broad-based levy vital to transit, education plans

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/2013/01/16/patrick-set-propose-income-tax-increase/jLMHtefUHvUOeZuGfwguRK/story.html

Governor Deval Patrick will deliver his state of the state address at 7:30 PM Wednesday, Jan 16.

Increased income taxes and driving or car registration fees are rumored to be part of a large plan to improve roads and mass transit as well as school and college funding.

Comments and questions and other thoughts?

[TheCowsCameHome]

1. I hope not.

This won't set well with taxpayers at all.

[graham4anything]

2. New roads and mass transit, school and colleges need money. Taxes pay for good things

The entire country should do what California's Jerry Brown did.

and they are going to have a surplus for the first time soon because of it.

It's amazing some people don't understand how government works and what is needed to make it work.

(yet the people that whine the most about not wanting to pay taxes, want freebies all the time)

[4Q2u2]

8. Sometimes

New roads are always needed. Due to their nature though, as soon as they are built they are obsolete. But the time to build them is in good times. The mass transit they are proposing is in an area that will do little benefit. Colleges are tax free and have raised tuition 300% over inflation in the last 20 years. Not to mention the Endowments of the 3 major colleges in Boston are larger than the State budget, as well as the social destruction these institutions have had on the local neighborhoods. Most of us know exactly how government works that is why we want to keep our money and spend it on our families. It amazes me that so many people do not trust the government on the death penalty, social justice and privacy will blindly hand them their money.

[ROBROX]

21. CALIFORNIA'S 0.25% FOUR YEAR TAX INCREASE

A majority of the sane people VOTED for something the legislature would NOT do.

Finally a tax increase to pay for good things. The only problem is that the poor and middle class will pay for more of this tax than the RICH.

Another sad day for the GOP when something goes right for a democratic state........

THE WEST COAST RULES

[bunnies]

3. .41%

Doesnt seem too unreasonable.

[4Q2u2]

4. Not Proportionate

They are talking about raising multiple taxes just not income. Gas, sales, and possibly road usage tax. All these will hurt the poor, working class, and lower middle class more than anybody. I know that I am on the edge of bankruptcy and .30 a gallon gas tax increase coupled with a road usage tax will ruin me. Most roads in are in good to very good shape, the bridges need work. The mass transit they are talking about nobody wants and will not use. That kind of money is this difference between my children playing sports and going to camp and not. Mass already has a voluntary check box to pay a higher rate of income tax if a person wants to, the number of people that do this is less than 1%.

[DryRain]

5. I'm wondering about that, too! As a senior...

I don't favor large tax increases on those with limited income.

Perhaps a bigger tax deduction for the first $25,000 or more in income to OFFSET these fees and taxes?


I'm not sure how this could work, but 30 cents a gallon on gas seems a bit high. How about just 5 cents a gallon?

Increased fees on licenses, registration, inspection, etc, very hard on low income, I agree.

Thirty cents a gallon might make me drive to NH to buy gas, 10 miles away, 20 miles, (.7 gallons at 28 MPG) round-trip would be offset by routinely buying 15 gallons there. I could also shop of all non-food non-clothing items there, avoiding sales tax. I don't want to have to play that kind of a tax avoidance game, but there are limits to what I can afford.

[4Q2u2]

6. That will not work

Driving to NH for the gas will then increase your mileage which they are looking at to tax as well. Those fuel costs will aslo be passed on from business to customers.

[DryRain]

7. Yeah, I was half kidding. Cutting down on driving is a better option

And one which makes more sense, fewer short trips to the store, fewer miles per year. The goal is to reduce dependency upon the automobile for many, but this proposal will hurt people who have no other option, people who are working poor, people who drive for a living, people in rural areas who have to drive 10 miles to the store, etc.

Bottom line: just how many billions a year more does this state need to provide quality services, roads, schools, colleges, etc.? And where is the best place to find that money in taxes and fees? I doubt charging the working poor and elderly on fixed incomes is a good idea.

How about increasing the tax on restaurants, pro sporting events , hotels, airport landing fees, stock trades. Those are mostly paid by people who can afford to pay a little more.

[Blaukraut]

9. Cutting down on driving isn't always an option

My husband has to commute 40 miles one way to work every day. Finding another job is no option, selling the house and moving closer is also no option. 30 cents/gallon would kill us in terms of disposable monthly income to pay bills. I think more taxes is definitely justified, but let's make sure it's not a regressive tax that ends up hurting people who have nothing to spare anway.

[4Q2u2]

10. Unknown Cost

When you travel less in your vehicle with shorter trips, you are also shortening the life of the vehicle and actually decreasing efficiency in gas mileage and increasing emissions. The state has done a better job of getting school construction cost under control, see my post above about the colleges. Why do we not expect more from them, why do we let them take the easy road and raise taxes. Find the waste, fraud, and abuse first. Find better ways to work then come to the table with those and the short falls and work with the people, not just say here it is eat it. As of now, Mass has 19,000 people unaccounted for that are being issued Welfare. The average payout is 300.00 per month times 19,000 equals 5.7 million a month. The corporate tax deals they worked with large financial institutions are monstrous also.

[DryRain]

11. Where did you get your figures for 19,000 welfare recipients?

The latest figures I can find on total number of welfare recipient families in Massachusetts is about 71,200

This number from the US Census, 2010, represents about 2.7% of the Mass population that is on cash assistance income (wefare).

http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk

That's about 2.7 people on welfare in Massachusetts for every 100 people, If 25- 30% of recipients were not legitimate, we would have a tremendous problem here.

Welfare rules clearly state that if a payment is made to a recipient and the recipient does not comply with any iquiry as to their work and financial status, every quarter, or more often as needs may dictate, (moving, birth of child, etc.) the payments will stop! Daycare recipient parents must also check in quarterly, and day care centers must report attendance for each day of the month per child in order to be reimbursed.

Also, $300 a month is a rather minimal payment, perhaps to a parent with one child; (plus food stamps, medicaid, etc). Families with several children recieve more. Figures from the same link, (above) indicate the average amount of assistance per family is $4700 a year, or about $390 a month.

Often, payments made in error are returned, or simply re-claimed from banks, if made to a recipient's bank account by direct deposit. Welfare recipients committing outright fraud can be persecuted and jailed if convicted.

I can understand the 19,000 mistaken payments for total number of payments over a period of one year, including mistaken payments for day care, food stamps, etc., (which would be an error rate well under 1% per year for over 2 million payments to recipients, vendors of day care, etc.), but 19,000 a month, continuously over several months is frankly hard to believe.

Of course, in order to audit and double check payments to proper recipients, state welfare workers need proper caseloads, proper training in how to spot fraud, and proper staff supervision, computer checks, etc., all of which costs money.

[4Q2u2]

12. A funny thing happened on the way to the Election

Remember that the State was forced to send out voter registration mailings during the Senate race to all welfare enrollees. Well 19,000 of those mailings were returned to the State, showing that their database totally incomplete. It also showed they were not doing their due diligence in all of the things you listed and was required of the State and enrollees. It is small compared to the overall numbers but there are lots of small examples that add up to large amounts. I cannot afford their mistakes, it also seems that you cannot as well. Secondly most of the money does not really go to the people, most of it goes to getting the money to them. So the people responsible for controlling the money are the biggest cost.

[DryRain]

13. You are mixing apples and oranges. We need to know:

1) what database was used for the mailing? 2) when the mailing "capture" was made...(the date and time of the actual names on the list). 3) How many weeks progressed between the capture to the mailing? 4) Whether the mailing included food stamp, child care, as well as direct welfare cash payment recipients.

If all food stamp and day care and SSI and medicare recipients were included in the listing, we would have a list of over 200,00, again, perhaps parts of which were up to 3 months out of verification. (An error rate of less than 10%, by the way, if over 200,000 were sent cards).

Sending out 19,000 mis-addressed mailings does NOT equate to your first statement, namely that 19,000 people fraudulently get checks from welfare every month for a year. People move, (in and out of state, even), people GET OFF WELFARE and get jobs. People marry, change their names.

I suspect you read this story on Fox25 or the Boston Herald, and a more complete story indicates that the list used was a few months out of date, or that the list was in some other way defective. But I'd appreciate a follow-up story about the detailed auditing of that list which should have been completed by now.

[4Q2u2]

15. It was not my job

to either pick the apples or the oranges. This was the States job and they failed. I never said that it was fraud, I did state that it could be a lot of money each month going somewhere we do not know of. Find that before you tax me. As to who the mailings went out to, do you not think that the State would cast as broad a net as possible and use all of the listed demographics you have. As for the list was this and the list was that, it is their job in all those instances that the list is accurate. Good enough is not what our Government should be telling us, we should expect more and they owe us better than good enough. That is my main point in all of this, do a better job first, then come to us and work with the PEOPLE not just tax them.

I am going to mix a couple of metaphors here: If a story falls in the woods does it make it untrue. Just because a story comes from a particular source does not mean it is not true. It is up to the individual then to fact check and try to find other sources, but because it was not reported in liberal news papers does not make it false. Maybe incomplete, but they are all guilty of that sometimes.

[DryRain]

16. I hope you consider it your "job" to get the facts right.

A responsible voter does that. If 19,000 peope were sent cards to bad addresses, (out of 200,000 or more on some form of public assistance, food stamps, medicaid, day care, temporary reciipients over the past year), that's an error rate under 10%.

Try sending out voter cards to 200,000 democrats in Massachusetts, and finding a less than 10% error rate in your mailing.

That doesn't mean that 19,000 Democrats would be Republicans now, it most likely means they moved, or changed their name, or perhaps they died. It happens, especially among elderly people on Medicaid, or families on food stamps, they either die, or move, or get married. It happens more often than you might surmise. People are not furniture, they are dynamic, and move on, or they sometimes die when they are very ill.

But your Apples was the assertion that 19,000 people get welfare every month for a year and no one bothers to check, and lots of money is wasted. NO, that is not what the "facts" you came up with "prove" in any way. You claimed a "fact" and had no verifyable source, nor even a relevant "study". Just something you caught with your one moment of attention to some news somewhere which you cannot remember where, nor can you bother to defend with some actual link.

Please try to be more accurate. And please, when you put out such an outrageous statement, when the US Census confirmed only about 70,000 famlies on welfare payments in the depths of the recession in 2010, please don't put it out there and then say it's NOT YOUR JOB to verify the facts and provide a link. That's just intellectually lazy and disingenuous.

In short, you just made a big "mistake".

[4Q2u2]

17. You missed my point

It was not my job to verify the validity of the list that was used by the State. It was my hope that the State would be doing a better job at that. In terms of me doing the mailings, I am not a Billion Dollar Organization with multitudes of people in my work force. If it was my responsibility as Dept head, I would be disappointed with nothing less than 100%, because that means we missed somebody for either the original intent of the voter registration or assets may not be directed to places or people that needed those funds. Funds that even their own Dept. could use for someone on a waiting list, not just the general public.

You already had the news stories in your post, but below here is the first one and the following article, the one were the State looked into the problem and gave their response. i did not include them because you will not believe they are valid because it is a Right Wing publications. You also missed my point that it was a story that one should read and then follow up to gain more information elsewhere. My assertion was that there was 19,000 missing people on the roles from a State run database and there could be a lot of money being wasted. . So before the State asks my already strained budget to break, please do a better job for us. Then when they have their house in better order, come to the PEOPLE and have a dialog about how to fix the problems and not just default to raising taxes. That is intellectually lazy and disingenuous to quote a phrase.

I could have just as easily mentioned the waste at the Probation Office and the Hiring Scandal, the waste in construction costs on the Big Dig and the Non-Profit Rose Kennedy Greenway Association. So in one point you are correct, the example I used was a poor one in as much that people on welfare are vilified by the strong and should not be used as a rock to hit someone over the head with. They should be protected.

"The Department of Transitional Assistance contacted 477,000 welfare recipients who were on their books from June 1, 2011, to May 31, 2012," from the article linked below. Your 70,000 is short based on State own numbers.

The only mistake here is that you assumed that there was some kind of hate on my part for people on welfare. I am a Father of 4 beautiful Children whose mother is sick, making me pretty much a single parent, and me asking my State to do a better job before they put me in bankruptcy is some how hate speech. I cannot afford any new taxes, they will wipe me out. They irony being that I am just above their threshold to qualify for help. Where does it all go, look at the price of gas (one of the things they want to raise taxes on) price of food (mileage tax and gas tax will be passed on to consumers), my mortgage to keep a nice safe roof over my kids head ( I hope the deduction does not get cut by the Feds). So yes I am a little mad that the State is looking to me for more money, I am here fighting for my children.



http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_coverage/2013/01/welfare_recipients_%E2%80%98missing%E2%80%99
http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_politics/2013/01/gov_vows_review_welfare_clients

[DryRain]

19. You had a point?

The Department of Transitional Assistance contacted 477,000 welfare recipients who were on their books from June 1, 2011, to May 31, 2012,"

So, by your own figures, less than 3.8% of addresses were flawed?

Gee, wonder where that 477,000 "who were on their books" withing a year went!!!

It seems obvious that you have little background in social welfare, and, from your post, only care about YOUR OWN welfare.

"me asking my State to do a better job before they put me in bankruptcy is some how hate speech"

No, it's not hate speech, it's how we care for each and every family in financial trouble, we do it poorly, and many of them wind up in bankruptcy, sorry to say.

You seem very self-centered, and willing to cut the wages of those that are hired to protect your financial ruin from utter calamity.

You seem to think your case is somehow more worthy than thousands of others out there, and you plead for us to keep you from bankruptcy?

No, I'm sorry, I don't see public policy ever being perfect, 100% accurate in whom they offer public dollars to.

I could have just as easily mentioned the waste at the Probation Office and the Hiring Scandal, the waste in construction costs on the Big Dig and the Non-Profit Rose Kennedy Greenway Association. So in one point you are correct, the example I used was a poor one in as much that people on welfare are vilified by the strong and should not be used as a rock to hit someone over the head with. They should be protected.

Ah, but you didn't, you went after the welfare folks, the financially challenged, the poor, the disabled, the sick, the children.

Waste at the probation office? The hiring scandal? The waste in construction costs on the "big dig" from 10 years ago? The Non-Profit Rose Kennedy Greenway Association, (all of $20 million in 9 years for something that didn't work out to be perfect?)

I guess you never ran a business, only pinched pennies for your family. You never saw a business start up and fail after millions of dollars went into it. Never saw a guy open a local gas station or convenience store or a woman open a beauty shop with $50,000 to $200,000 invested and lose it all? That's what happens in America, people make choices, take chances, invest in the most likely options, some succeed and some fail.

You went after the 19,0000 out of 477,000 and made them all look like they were taking $300 each and every month from the taxpayer, but you couldn't back up that allegation with a single fact, you backed it up with a well-dated mailing list with less than 4% error rate. You evidently don't know much about statistics, about human dynamics of moving and taking chances and making bets on the best appearing options. You seem to only care that each and every tax dollar (or private enterprise dollar) is spent perfectly accurately, a basic human impossiblity, but you have your right to sing your song of complaint. After all, we all have to listen to depressed and cynical people like you, and we ought try to do better in making a difference than you folks ever tried to do in any attempt to provide ALL the facts and links to whatever you are complaining about.

Your family is in financial distress, try to look on the bright side, you actually NEED the help you are offered, and most of the other folks in your condition do, too, not 100% of them, but damn close. Now tell us how you are going to pay us back.

[4Q2u2]

25. ?

Really you never heard of any of those.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/specials/spotlight/probation/index/

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2012/04/05/big_dig_tunnels_need_54m_light_replacement_mass_officials_say/

http://www.greenspaceboston.com/2012/07/11/the-rose-kennedy-greenways-government-entanglements/

http://www.commonwealthmagazine.org/News-and-Features/Features/2012/Summer/002-Rumble-in-the-park.aspx

20 million is a lot of money no matter how many years.


As for me being self centered, these are my children and family that I am fighting for, I am supposed to be Self Centered for them. It is my duty and obligation to care and support them. They are supposed to come first in my eyes. I am also trying to keep us off of welfare and do what is right for them. Secondly, I make too much money by the State standard to qualify for Assistance. So if I cannot receive money there will be nothing to pay back. I also tend to think that the 22yrs I served in the Military qualifies as a positive contribution to our society and do not owe a debt. So how am I going to pay you back!!!

I also did correct myself by stating that my example was a bad one and wrong. Some how it was not good enough for you and I guess owning up to mistakes is of no consequences to you.

"You evidently don't know much about statistics, about human dynamics of moving and taking chances and making bets on the best appearing options"

"After all, we all have to listen to depressed and cynical people like you"

All quotes from you that have zero basis in fact, you do not know me one bit. You have no information on my back round, where I come from or have gone thru in my life, but you had no problem assigning me these traits and then following them up with this quote.

"and we ought try to do better in making a difference than you folks ever tried to do in any attempt to provide ALL the facts and links to whatever you are complaining about. "

You talk about facts, but try to insult me and belittle me based on what you think I am, without one shred of FACT.

[DryRain]

14. Cannot afford mistakes?

Yes, I understand, we should not have to pay for welfare administration, it should be self-regulating, like so much of life ????

Here you seem to have never had to visit a family in economic distress, nor do the job of keeping children and spouses and disabled and the ill and elderly safe and healthy. But that is what welfare workers do!!

I cannot afford their mistakes, it also seems that you cannot as well. Secondly most of the money does not really go to the people, most of it goes to getting the money to them. So the people responsible for controlling the money are the biggest cost.

Welfare workers literally sometimes risk their lives, visiting and verifying and ensuring the health and welfare of children, abused spouses, people very ill and the disabled. They don't make a lot of money, (about $35,000 to start with a college degree). They go into the toughest neighborhoods, where drug and alcohol abuse and illicit gun ownership abounds. They interview and assess the home life of the people they visit, encouraging positive moves to less dependence, greater independence, and a way back to self-sufficiency and healthy living.

Of course, you don't want to pay for that "biggest cost" anymore. Good luck with that!

[4Q2u2]

18. Why do you Infer the Worst in People

I made the comment "the biggest cost" because it is a shame that the people who get the money get so little of it but get almost all of the blame for the size of the budget. I know exactly what a Social Worker does and where they go, I also never said i did not want to pay that cost anymore. You make assumptions of me over the internet based on 2 dimensions of the words themselves, not remembering that there is tone and inflection associated with certain words in a sentence when spoken. That is missed in this type of forum. Relying on a negative view of what you think I meant and responding with some snarky comment meant to demean or belittle me for ideas that you associated with me is not very Democratic. I would hope that a positive view would be the default when there is some vagueness or uncertainty of a persons position, and not a rush to judgment and condemnation.

[DryRain]

20. I don't "infer"! I rely upon facts you skillfully avoid

in your tirade and sound-bite type platitudes.

Either you support public workers doing their job, or you support lazy and irresponsible reporting, the type which you are so willing to repeat here, as if 19,000 families in Massachusetts are ripping us off all year long. That's YOUR implication, from your original claim.

Now please, get yourself an education in statistics, and try to apply some ethics and open-minded understanding of human behavior, (both good and bad), to your assertions.

Don't clog a thread intended for another purpose with your baseless assertions that there are 19,000 criminals on the Welfare rolls going undetected month after month. (I bet there really are about 19!)

[4Q2u2]

22. Never said Such

Never said there were 19,000 people ripping off the system, that was you. Maybe you are not infering, maybe you are projecting.
The second article had the States response in it as to where the people were. I have never changed my thread from my original point
that I would like the State to work harder for fixes then come to the PEOPLE and let us work the problems out. All of a sudden I am Attila the Hun. Boy you have got me, I will confess. It was me who killed Lincoln in the Ballroom with the Rope.


"That's YOUR implication, from your original claim" No that is what you percieved and still refuse to acknowledge what I have clearly stated multiple times. See above.

Have a Nice Day, Hope that positive attitude keeps up.


Tirade? Did you look in the mirror before you wrote that.

[DryRain]

23. So that nineteen thousand figure had to do with that

3.8% error rate in mass mailing?

DAMN, I could have sworn you said something about $dollars being lost......oh yeah, here.........I got it......you never said THIS?

As of now, Mass has 19,000 people unaccounted for that are being issued Welfare. The average payout is 300.00 per month times 19,000 equals 5.7 million a month

You never IMPLIED this????????? You are so dishonest, you KNOW you did!!!!!!!!! I just copied and pasted you post.

Please grow up and learn how to be honest on the internet..........it's so childish to be dishonest here.

[4Q2u2]

24. That implies Nothing

It is a plain spoken statement that reads quite clearly. That there was 19,000 people unaccounted for and that there could be 5.7 million dollars unaccounted for. Never did I say someone was stealing it, as you accused me of. Never did I say it was not needed by people. Never did I say cut funding, you accused me of that. Never did I say cut workers pay, you accused me of that as well. So back to the main crux, I would like the state to work harder and make sure that money is not unaccounted for before they come to tax payers. What I did not imply or state that it should be done to every agency, not just that one. For some reason you think I am on some sort of witch hunt that is not there. Government accountability is not a bad thing. Your views of me here are based on assumptions you made with zero knowledge of me or who I am, you resorted to lies and name calling then you call me dishonest and childish. That is rich.

"You never IMPLIED this????????? You are so dishonest, you KNOW you did!!!!!!!!! I just copied and pasted you post"
That is the problem right there, I never implied anything. The implication is all yours, it is your mind telling you that is what I mean. When I have been telling you that that is simply not true. I can put my own foot in my mouth no problem, I do not need you to try and do it for me. If I do make implications, it tends to get people in trouble when others misinterpret them.

Search YOUR Soul because all the info you used to fill in my blanks came from your mind, not mine. All the assumptions you made about me are what you thought I was trying to say, and they all came from you. Are these thoughts a reflection of the true you, negative, judgmental, jealousy, anger? We have been posting back and forth for hours now and most of it has been me reminding you that I never said any of what you have attributed to me. Is it not clear that you are trying to do something that is not there, or are you so angered by some perceived attack by me that the truth is invisible Through tainted eyes. Self assessment is important in life, it will help you get over flaws and work to be a better person. I know, I am 1% of the way there, but I do have a lifetime.

[flyingfysh]

26. It's worth it

Transportation and education are good things, well worth paying for. Part of the transportation money will go to fund a subway extension a few yards from my house.

[DryRain]

27. Massachusetts is a funny small state with lots of value

We could put 20 Massachusetts in Montana, 30 in Texas, 50 in Alaska.


The "HUB" of Massachusetts is a small area within 30 mies of Boston, and that area has roads and bridges and trains over 100 years old.

How about a 0.5% tax on each and every business and non-profit within 30 miles of Boston, places like Bank of America, Fidelity, Harvard, MIT, MGH, Boston University, people who work and businesses and "profitable" non-profits who exist within 30 miles of Boston?

Such a tax allows REAL non-profits, like small colleges and hospitals to continue non-taxed.

If you want your place of business to be here, pay for the priviledge.


I bet that would net more than 10 Billion a year, when all businesses are brought into taxpaying compliance.

By contrast, asking each and every car to pay $20 more for annua inspection, even in North Adams, or Provincetown, or each driver to pay $50 more for a driver's license, and $.30 more for a gallon of gas $.30 cheaper in five neighboring states? silly

[MADem]

28. I understand it is income tax up (by a percent) and sales tax down?

I am lucky because, unless the law is changed, I will be unaffected.

MA is good to people like me on government pensions--we don't pay income taxes--we pay property taxes and sales tax and fees, but they do not tax government pensions or annuities. I don't feel bad about that; since I paid taxes for decades to the state, back when it was called "Taxachusetts" and never lived here and was lucky if I could get home for two weeks every other year.

I could have been sleazy way back when, and changed my home of residence to NH or FL to avoid taxes altogether, but I didn't, because MA was my home of record and it was the place I intended to return to after my time was up. So I paid the taxes without griping...

[Blaukraut]

29. Income tax up by .75% but individual deductions doubled. Sales tax down 1% or so

Actually not a bad idea. Makes the tax system more progressive.