Comments on: Chicken Legislature needs to call special session and solve budget deficit http://tucsoncitizen.com/mark-evans/archives/111 Politics, Government and the Free Press - by Mark B. Evans Wed, 23 May 2012 16:38:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: mike_brewer http://tucsoncitizen.com/mark-evans/archives/111/comment-page-1#comment-367 mike_brewer Sun, 25 Oct 2009 04:06:08 +0000 http://tucsoncitizen.com/mark-evans/?p=111#comment-367 I have never understood why a miniscule tax on commercial, industrial and office rents is not levied in times like this. No Dad, No Mom, no car! Meaning if the State is not solvent who wants to do business here?  Why is the commercial rental industry a forgotten and protected class of revenue source? And why does this question persistently get dismissed? Tells you who runs the State eh? With a large portion of  commercial rentals, (franchises), domiciling out of  State,  Arizona does not see the profits anyhow, save, low income jobs. The irony being that the lack of sales tax is one reason we are in the red as it is. My point is a simple one, you gotta pay to play. Most all of our neighboring States have a Real Estate Transfer tax? Why is this not even considered? We would rather go to debtors prision before touching the idolatrous real estate industry--- the second largest lobby in DC.   We made our bed and are sleeping with the wrong partners. A thought to conclude with....if the State of Arizona implements sale/leaseback schemes for an instant fix, Katie bar the doors, the hogs will come to feed. This will never go to the voters for approval,and the citizens will never know who the investors are. It will be a close door desparation  move and your great-granchildren will wonder why we even hold  elections. And  we are worried about Socialism on the national scene? Plenty for all right here in  the maverick state of Arizona I have never understood why a miniscule tax on commercial, industrial and office rents is not levied in times like this. No Dad, No Mom, no car! Meaning if the State is not solvent who wants to do business here? 

Why is the commercial rental industry a forgotten and protected class of revenue source? And why does this question persistently get dismissed? Tells you who runs the State eh?

With a large portion of  commercial rentals, (franchises), domiciling out of  State,  Arizona does not see the profits anyhow, save, low income jobs. The irony being that the lack of sales tax is one reason we are in the red as it is. My point is a simple one, you gotta pay to play.

Most all of our neighboring States have a Real Estate Transfer tax? Why is this not even considered? We would rather go to debtors prision before touching the idolatrous real estate industry— the second largest lobby in DC.   We made our bed and are sleeping with the wrong partners.

A thought to conclude with….if the State of Arizona implements sale/leaseback schemes for an instant fix, Katie bar the doors, the hogs will come to feed. This will never go to the voters for approval,and the citizens will never know who the investors are. It will be a close door desparation  move and your great-granchildren will wonder why we even hold  elections.

And  we are worried about Socialism on the national scene? Plenty for all right here in  the maverick state of Arizona

]]> By: ldonyo http://tucsoncitizen.com/mark-evans/archives/111/comment-page-1#comment-366 ldonyo Sat, 24 Oct 2009 15:29:37 +0000 http://tucsoncitizen.com/mark-evans/?p=111#comment-366 The real problem seems to be that no one in the legislative or executive branches is willing to accept any solution that is not entirely their own creation and none of them are willing to work with anyone other than their own cronies. Given the gravity of the situation no idea from any source should be dismissed until it has been examined. Unfortunately, the likelihood of that happening is an order of magnitude less than the odds of winning the Powerball jackpot six times in a row. The real problem seems to be that no one in the legislative or executive branches is willing to accept any solution that is not entirely their own creation and none of them are willing to work with anyone other than their own cronies. Given the gravity of the situation no idea from any source should be dismissed until it has been examined. Unfortunately, the likelihood of that happening is an order of magnitude less than the odds of winning the Powerball jackpot six times in a row.

]]> By: leftfield http://tucsoncitizen.com/mark-evans/archives/111/comment-page-1#comment-365 leftfield Sat, 24 Oct 2009 01:07:05 +0000 http://tucsoncitizen.com/mark-evans/?p=111#comment-365 Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.  Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it. 

]]> By: Mark B. Evans http://tucsoncitizen.com/mark-evans/archives/111/comment-page-1#comment-364 Mark B. Evans Fri, 23 Oct 2009 19:41:36 +0000 http://tucsoncitizen.com/mark-evans/?p=111#comment-364 I don't disagree but these are the people we're stuck with. If the problem is to be solved they are the ones who have to do it. The deficit is more than just a number with a lot of zeroes. The state is borrowing money to operate. That borrowing comes with interest rates, which just makes the fiscal imbalance worse. We may soon get to the point where creditors stop giving the state money and then we'll be really broke, not just figuratively. I can't even begin to imagine the chaos that will cause. By waiting until January to solve the problem, especially if the solution is a tax increase, is that you start running out of months to collect the taxes needed to balance the books before the end of the fiscal year. Any leftover imbalance gets added on to the next fiscal year necessitating large spending cuts to go along with the tax increase. But if the goal of Democrats is to protect social spending and education, you'll need a really big tax increase to prevent those drastic cuts. And that will only harden the resolve of anti-tax Republicans who will insist on the drastic cuts first. Which means continued stalemate. And the JLBC is already predicting a budget imbalance of $3.3 billion for FY '11, which starts July 1. And since you need 2/3 of the Legislature to pass any tax increase, there's a really good chance it won't, and so we'll have to go back to letting voters decide, which means a May election at best and a tax that won't go into effect until the new fiscal year starts. There is a distinct possibility that the Legislature could face a $6 billion budget shortfall for FY '11 - $3 billion carried over from this year and $3 billion from next year. That's nearly 100 percent of next year's expected tax revenue. I don't think most people truly understand just how bad this is and I think it's why the Legislature is ducking it. The problem is so enormous they have no idea what to do about it. Like I said, we are in serious trouble. And that's not hyperbole. I don’t disagree but these are the people we’re stuck with. If the problem is to be solved they are the ones who have to do it.
The deficit is more than just a number with a lot of zeroes. The state is borrowing money to operate. That borrowing comes with interest rates, which just makes the fiscal imbalance worse.
We may soon get to the point where creditors stop giving the state money and then we’ll be really broke, not just figuratively. I can’t even begin to imagine the chaos that will cause.
By waiting until January to solve the problem, especially if the solution is a tax increase, is that you start running out of months to collect the taxes needed to balance the books before the end of the fiscal year.
Any leftover imbalance gets added on to the next fiscal year necessitating large spending cuts to go along with the tax increase. But if the goal of Democrats is to protect social spending and education, you’ll need a really big tax increase to prevent those drastic cuts. And that will only harden the resolve of anti-tax Republicans who will insist on the drastic cuts first. Which means continued stalemate.
And the JLBC is already predicting a budget imbalance of $3.3 billion for FY ’11, which starts July 1.
And since you need 2/3 of the Legislature to pass any tax increase, there’s a really good chance it won’t, and so we’ll have to go back to letting voters decide, which means a May election at best and a tax that won’t go into effect until the new fiscal year starts.
There is a distinct possibility that the Legislature could face a $6 billion budget shortfall for FY ’11 – $3 billion carried over from this year and $3 billion from next year. That’s nearly 100 percent of next year’s expected tax revenue.
I don’t think most people truly understand just how bad this is and I think it’s why the Legislature is ducking it. The problem is so enormous they have no idea what to do about it.
Like I said, we are in serious trouble. And that’s not hyperbole.

]]> By: radmax http://tucsoncitizen.com/mark-evans/archives/111/comment-page-1#comment-363 radmax Fri, 23 Oct 2009 19:13:36 +0000 http://tucsoncitizen.com/mark-evans/?p=111#comment-363 Appears to me the pondering elephants and jackasses are equally adept at fiscal irresponsibility. Appears to me the pondering elephants and jackasses are equally adept at fiscal irresponsibility.

]]>