Saturday, June 10, 2017

New York Times Touts Higher Kansas Taxes

From earlier this week but still worthy of consideration . . . The nation's paper of record takes aim at supply-side economics and gloats over a political victory against a governor that was unpopular within his own party. Checkit:

Opinion | Kansas Rises Up Against the Trickle-Down Con Job

The Republican Legislature and much of Kansas has finally turned on Gov. Sam Brownback in his disastrous five-year experiment to prove the Republicans' "trickle down" fantasy can work in real life - that huge tax cuts magically result in economic growth and more, not less, revenue.

7 Comments:

Anonymous said...

But of course! Haven't you heard that higher taxes are the solution to every problem?

Anonymous said...

Decent school district certainly helps ^^^. If you don't believe me, check with that ultra liberal real estate association.

Anonymous said...

Some outstanding citizens and taxpapers will actually be impelled to move to Florida now.

Businesses will go to Texas but maybe just a few.

Anonymous said...

If the New York Times said it we all know it has to be true. In fact the libtards believed everything they said that Comey said except the part where he thought he said the New York Times was printing certified fake news and bullshit about Trump and the Russia investigation.

Anonymous said...

You guys crack me up. How much failure do you need to see to accept it failed? What is conservative about running millions in debt? What is conservative about using a Mastercard to pay Visa? Because that's exactly what Kansan has been doing for all of Brownback's administration. His tax policy brought no jobs and no extra income to the state. All he did was pass the largest tax increase in state history. What is conservative about that? I'm so confused what a conservative is. My property taxes went up 15%. I know people whose went up 22%. What is conservative about that? Why should Koch Industries, which operates in over 60 countries be called a LLC? Why should billionaires pay no income taxes? Why should a lady that operates a daycare out of her house be classified the same as a multi-national billion dollar company? And don't tell me it's because they'll hire more people because they're saving on taxes, that's bullshit. Companies hire when their workload exceeds what the current employees can do, simple as that.

Anonymous said...

10:18 Whats your point?

Anonymous said...

^^^ not 10:18 here but pretty sure 1018 would say do you , oh nevermind. Apparently you are cognitively fuckered up