Published: Tuesday, Nov. 20 2012 12:00 a.m. MST
AgreedRepublican thinking...Raising taxes on necessities
of life, such as Food, is good -- Raising taxes on the uber wealthy 1% of
America's Millionaires and Billionaires is bad.And they need a
thinktank to figure out why they keep loosing elction after election.
Sales taxes on food are the most oppressive tax ever devised. They literally
take food out of the mouths of those who struggle most. The state needs to look
elsewhere for revenue.
Amazing that in a republican state you can't stand the federal government
taking money from your paycheck to pay for wars and debt but you'll take
food right out of children's mouths.
Utah's legislature always goes for the wrong solution.
Republican group-think is that the federal government taxes = stealing but
taking food right out of the mouths and food budgets of families is necessary.
Despite being the reddest of red states, Utah is hardly a low tax state. We are
ranked 22nd as the most taxed state in the Union in a Tax Foundation analysis.
If we need more revenue we should increase taxes on income, not the
more regressive food tax. Of course, our legislature could take a cue from Mitt
in Massachusetts, and increase the various "fees" we all pay. This way, they could claim to have not raised our taxes.
Why not raise severance taxes on minerals torn from Utah's rocks?Oh, right. That would reduce profits for the Big Boys who have purchased
their legislative services.
Of course you know that we should tax the poor heavily and the rich lightly.
The rich are our job creators! If poor people can barely survive, who cares?
What have they ever done for anybody? Says the good, God-fearing Utah Republican
During the oil crisis in 1974, I remember the same day President Ford
recommended a 10-cent increase in the federal gas tax to reduce consumption,
Gov. Rampton proposed a 5-cent increase in the state gas tax, to compensate for
How did this become a Republican v Democrat issue. I agree that taxes
shouldn't be raised on food. I believe it was a republican governor who
lowered the taxes. Since when are democrats against taxes. It is true that we
are a relatively high tax state. And yet every single year, without a single
exception, since I have lived in Utah, democratic legislators have tried to
garner support for tax increases in Utah. The only reason taxes are as low as
they are is due to the refusal of the republicans to go along with it. Due to
the high percentage of school age children, Utah spends an inordinate amount of
its budget (relative to other states) on education. Utah has a well deserved
reputation as one of the best run states in the union. You can thank Utah
republicans for that. Put the democrats in charge and we would be standing in
line with California looking for someone to bail us out.
BYUtah Fan said: "I believe it was a republican governor who lowered the
taxes."...and would that be Huntsman? The same that has been
called everything BUT a republican during the last year, especially by the right
wing cons here on these comment boards, how he was the worst Gov. and NOT a
republican.But when it fits your narrative he's a republican?
The solution to the transportation shortfall is twofold. The problem with gas
taxes is that if you raise taxes on gas too much, it would have a similar effect
as a food tax on those who pay a larger percentage of their income on those
products. Additional funds need to be raised to fund much needed
education and infrastructure improvement projects, but must be done in
conjunction with a revised vehicle registration fee system. Rather than per-mile
taxes that have many flaws, Utah should implement a vehicle value-based fee. Why
not reward those people who own smaller, more efficient vehicles and tax the
larger, more expensive vehicles for greater wear and tear on the transportation
infrastructure. It works very well here in Arizona, and I love that
I have an additional incentive to own a smaller, less-expensive car.Also, UT should run a Prize-Linked Savings lottery, but now i'm being
To "LDS Liberal" raising taxes on food would be just like raising taxes
on medical devices, taxing people who don't buy thier own health insurance,
taxing people with health insurance plans worth more thatn $10,000/yr (average
cost of insurance is $13,000/yr).But, lucky for us, that was all
brought to us by the Democrats in an effort to "reduce" the cost of
care.So, using liberal logic, since increasing taxes on health care
is good so must raising taxes on food be good. Didn't you see the article
about how obesity is a problem. Maybe by raising taxes on food, people will eat
less and not get obese.
Let's look at the State and local taxes that we pay. We pay property taxes
of about $125 or more per month. We pay gasoline taxes of $25 or more per
month. We pay State income tax of about $250 per month on an average household.
In addition, we pay almost 7% sales tax on non-food items.What is
the role of government? Why should the average household pay $400 per month plus
sales tax to the State and local governments? What
"services" should be eliminated? The cost of feeding children are the
responsibility of the parents. If there is no father in the home, he should
either pay or be jailed. He "invited" those children into the world
with his actions. He is responsible. Feeding those children is not a duty of
government when the father is known.The most "heartless"
thing that we can do is to enable people to receive welfare where they will live
in poverty for the rest of their lives. Make people be responsible for their
actions. Government is not our "nanny".
Mike Richards:"The most "heartless" thing that we can do
is to enable people to receive welfare where they will live in poverty for the
rest of their lives. Make people be responsible for their actions. Government is
not our "nanny"."So, you are advocating that we do
nothing. Let them either sink or swim right? Letting them sink would be the
preferred option for you it sounds like rather than help them. I would rather
we take care and look after those that cannot as opposed to letting them just
rot. What are you teaching their children? That their parents were
failures because they couldn't succeed? If you lost
everything, would you want or would you try to do it all yourself like you are
stating you want them to do now? What if while you are trying it yourself, you
find out that nothing is available. Would you want help then? Or would you
just go on a long walk and let nature take its course?All these
ideas that people have about cutting services, put yourself in their shoes and
think about what you would do. If you still feel strongly, go teach it to them.
@ Makid,I have cousins who have spent their entire lives trying to
"game" the system. They were as healthy as I am. They had the same
opportunities that I've had. They were raised in the same
"environment" as me, yet, they chose to let someone else pay their
bills. They chose to let someone else "give" them food and shelter and
clothes.What did they learn? They learned that if they were clever,
they wouldn't have to work for a living; that they wouldn't have be
responsible; that they could do whatever they wanted and that someone else would
pay.What has been the result? Ruined lives. Babies born out of
wedlock. Mothers and fathers who have done nothing to sustain their own
families because they knew how to get the "government" to pay their
bills.I've seen it first-hand. I've seen the ruined
lives. I've seen people whose only goal was to "game" the system.
No problems were solved. "Welfare workers" only encouraged
them to continue to accept welfare. No work was required. No effort was
required. Lives were ruined. People were wasted.That's what the government does. It wastes lives.
Mike RichardsSouth Jordan, Utah"The most
"heartless" thing that we can do is to enable people to receive welfare
where they will live in poverty for the rest of their lives. Make people be
responsible for their actions. Government is not our "nanny"."I have cousins who have spent their entire lives trying to
"game" the system.================ Hmmm
let's take a look at this....Heartless is to standby and do
nothing and let people die.As I read it, that is your stance.As a member of the LDS faith - YOU of all people should be the one helping
your family.1. Self2. Family3. Church4. StateWhine and cry all you want Mike, but it seems you have let your family
down.Ironically, you blame the Government for your non-action.I shall pray with all my bleeding heart for you AND your family.[I'll also gladly pay my taxes to help them out, since you
won't.]Call me a Socialist....
Re Mike RichardsIf government is not our nanny, then get off Social
Security and go get a job.
Most economists and other experts agree that the gas tax needs to be raised. For
instance, Greg Mankiw, who's a highly regarded Harvard economist and
Romney's main economic adviser, has long urged a $1 increase (phased in
gradually). The users of roads need to be the ones bearing the full costs of
road construction etc. Right now, less than a third of UDOT's
>$1 _billion_ budget comes from the gas tax and use fees. Subsidizing roads
so heavily distorts people's incentives and leads to greater sprawl, less
use of more efficient transportation alternatives, etc. When the price of using
the road reflects the cost to society of your using it, people will make much
more balanced transportation decisions, traffic congestion and smog will be
decreased, and people will be better off.
Property taxes should pay for roads and infrastructure. Gas tax and food tax
and any other sales tax is misplaced tax.
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments