[an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive]
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
[an error occurred while processing this directive]

Taxes
Sunday, May 6 at 12:01 AM

Jim Schwartz of Centennial writes:

With the redefinition of ‘is’ by Bill Clinton, unbeknownst to us in Colorado was the redefinition of tax increase.
Let’s see - Referendum C was ‘not a tax increase’ though there would be more money in Coloradoans pockets had Ref C not occurred (now about $1.7 billion more than sponsors even anticipated.) And now, Governor Ritter’s property tax ‘freeze’ despite lower property values is ‘not a tax increase.’ I guess ‘not, depends on what the definition of not, is.’ ‘Not,’ in Wayne’s World vernacular.

This letter has not been edited.


READER COMMENTS

Jim,

Where should we get the money to build and maintain our transportation infrastructure, our sewage systems and our schools etc. if not from taxation?

Are you going to refrain from using the roads in order to lessen maintenance costs so that the gap between the cost of running a state and the decrease in revenue due to shrinking property values can be bridged?

Posted by Charles B on May 6, 2007 07:22 AM

Charles B - I think you missed the point. Jim did not state anything about not having taxes. His statement is about dishonesty in government. If the action of the government results in you have to forfeit more of your hard earned income - that is a tax increase. I am a believer in taxes for essential services. However it appears to me that with overall tax rates approaching 50% and growing (Federal Income, State Income, Sales Tax, Local Levies, etc) that we are becoming a socialist country where the government is going to take from the workers and give to the non-workers all in the name of fairness.

Posted by Frank on May 6, 2007 10:32 AM

This is stupid.

By this argument if you get cost of living raises every year, but stay in the same marginal tax bracket, the fact that you're paying more taxes (on your higher income) is a tax increase.

The other stupid and dishonest part of this debate is the cry "it must be voted on!"

Wake up and smell the De-Brucing! IT HAS!!!

Every school district that the law applies to has already voted to let property tax revenue increase (at the same mill levy rate), but the state law needs to change to allow those districits to keep the money.

Posted by Repugnants are liars. on May 7, 2007 10:51 AM

This "tax" freeze" is unconstitutional, a direct and blatent violation of TABOR, and I hope that the AG fights this(which I understand that he plans to). It IS A TAX INCREASE no matter how you slice it. Funding for k-12 education is already at a high in this state and education here is still better than most places in the country. Utah spends significantly LESS money on k-12 education and yet is tops in k-12 education in the US. Plenty of states spend MORE than colorado on education yet have aweful public schools. Spending more is not the answer to the problem(Democrats always seem to feel that throwing money at the problem will make it better). the probelm, is the institution that is Public education, and it is the Unions contribute to this problem. This is a tax increase in the most dishonest way. At the VERY least make this trasparent. This will have a serious impact on the economic growth of colorado if this goes forward. Lets call a spade what it really is people.... a spade.

btw-I'm sorry Repug or whatever the hell ur name is, your asertion that as you move up the tax bracket "you're paying more taxes (on your higher income)", and that "is a tax increase" is a false assertion and absoluetly makes no sence in regards to the current discussion. Get off ur soap box.

Posted by cuguy8920 on May 7, 2007 11:29 AM

Cuguy,

Where did you go to school to learn your pathetic writing skills?

Not comparable?

Your house value (upon which your property tax is based) increases, but the mill levy (tax rate) stays the same, so you pay more in taxes. You consider this a tax increase.

Your income (upon which your income tax is based) increases, but the marginal rate stays the same, so you pay more in taxes.

How is this not comparable?

Since every district in which this law applies has already followed the TABOR requirement to "De-Bruce" and allow revenues to increase, how is it unconstitutional and a blatant violation of TABOR?

Full sentences please.

Posted by Repugnants are liars. (and pathetic at spelling too) on May 7, 2007 12:18 PM

POST A COMMENT










Remember your personal info?






LATEST LETTERS
[an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive]
[an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive]