What would you recommend to help reduce the state deficit?
Posted at 5:00 AM on February 4, 2010
by Eric Ringham
(30 Comments)
Filed under: Politics/Government
The Minnesota Legislature convenes today, and it faces an immediate problem: How to erase a $1.2 billion deficit in the current budget. Today's Question: What would you recommend to help reduce the state deficit?
Comments (30)
I don't know, reduce spending? When we spend more than we make, we are forced into bankruptcy. Seems simple enough.
Why do we think that it makes sense to penalize the producers in this state (and country) by forcing them to support the non-producers through more taxes? If a non-producer chooses that he/she does not want to produce, then they should get nothing from me or anyone else. Sad, but true. The non-producers are the class that is bringing this state and this country to its knees.
Would you rather pay taxes for schools and you programs, or for law enforcement and prisons?
Stop this insane "investment" in education. I don't know why people are still so beholden to this illusion of how great education in Minnesota is. Take Minneapolis schools where the drop-out rate is what, 35%? Who would buy stock in a company that has a product failure rate of 1/3? What kind of investment is that. Teachers unions are always crying poverty, yet the districts continue to build schools that will pass for 5-star hotels. Teachers unions have such a strangle hold on local districts forcing tax increases every election year. Then there's higher ed where a college education will put a student so deep in debt as if the graduate will have already bought a house even before he get's his first job, (serving coffee at Starbucks mind you). So what the state must do at least in part to reduce the deficit is cut their so beloved education "investment" from 75 percent(!) to 25 percent of the sate budget. It boggles the mind that of all things, schools, hog more of the state budget than roads, bridges, justice or health care. It's criminal. I agree with Gov Pawlenty at least in part that the current so called "education" model is a relic from the stone age and the powers that be [teachers unions] are only in it for their own greed and that even if we were to allocate ALL of state revenue to schools it still wouldn't be enough. It's one big money pit and only getting deeper. Will schools suffer? Well too bad, join the club. We all like to say how the weatherman is the only guy who can tell lies and still get paid, well apparently teachers can fail and still not just get paid.. but get a raise! How many other industries in the economy would tolerate such corruption? Except for Wall Street that is.
A no taxes lottery. I'm sure Minnesota taxpayers would be interested in taking a chance to have their 2009 taxes completely refunded. I would. If there was a 1-in-50 chance that I might have all my state tax refunded I would pay $10, maybe more for that chance. Just exactly what the odds would be and the cost of the lottery ticket would have to be determined by the mathematicians in the Department of Revenue. Possibly exclude persons making over $250,000 a year, or some other upper limit of income. I've never bought a lottery ticket in my life, but I might do it on this idea if the odds were right.
What is left to cut or reduce? Didn't the guv pretty well take care of that with his "unallotments"? Let's face facts--it's time to raise some taxes as unpleasant as it may be.
One idea that can put a dent: Allow liquor stores to stay open on Sundays. There is a lot of tax money we leave on the table right there. Lets stop giving this revenue to Wisconsin when folks have to cross the border to buy beers for a football game! Its pro-business and an untapped revenue source.
The deficit in Minnesota is a shared problem. Therefore the solution should be shared ina reasonable way way progressively raising taxes on everybody, including corporations. Current deductions should be examined and reduced-not just eliminated. All programs now funded by the state should be examined and most reduced a small amount. But let's give up the politically motivated meat ax approach to cutting spending.
Here's another motivating idea. While the legislature is in session, let's institute a fine for every government leader of, let's say $250 every time they make a political statement about the budget and the spending proposals.
Welfare should be a temporary assistance program, not a replacement for a career. Free money should only be free for so long, otherwise it demotivates people to better themselves. There are too many people that live off of their monthly state payments.
Also, I think it's completely ridiculous that single mothers get refunds that are larger than the amount they've paid in all year.
Increase taxes through a PROGRESSIVE income tax. I earn $22,000 and feel that I could pay more. Of course, my situation might be unique, but the system of claiming deductions helps us figure out what is fair for everybody.
There is SOME waste in state government that could be eliminated, but there are also a lot of state workers who are each doing the work of 2 or 3 people since budgets have been cut previously, so any cuts need to occur at the top first.
I never thought I'd agree with Marty Seifert about anything, but I think we should consolidate among and across state, county, and city agencies as much as is feasible, eliminating as many of the highest-paid management and executive-level staff as possible. The Health and Agriculture Departments are (mostly) together in one building now, and they share some things already. Why can't we have just one commissioner's office and one human resources office for both of them together? We don't need a commissioner for each agency, and we certainly don't need all the staff that go with each commissioner's office.
Agency consolidation is a longer-term deal, but there are some things that could be done immediately: e.g., pass a bill this month that slashes 3 or 4 whole commissioners' offices (including staff) and put other commissioners in charge of those agencies, in addition to their current agencies. They can work harder just as the bottom ranks of their agencies have already been doing. We could save hundreds of thousands -- maybe millions -- of dollars.
Comments texted to MPR:
Raise taxes on the wealthiest. We can't afford these any more. -Mike, St. Paul
I would reduce all the wasteful spending for things such as corporate subsidies. -Richard Franco, St. Paul
State agencies are really top-heavy. I think we should cut a lot of those $80-$100,000/yr jobs, including, or especially, Pawlenty's political appointees and cronies. Democrats should have the &%#@s to pass a law that gets rid of all of those political appointees. It'll mean they don't get to make those appointments either if we ever get a Democratic governor again, but those expensive positions are superfluous no matter which party has the gov's office.
We should also make wealthy Minnesotans pay their fair share of taxes. Democrats HAVE used this argument before (despite what an earlier poster said), but Republicans are really good at spinning crafty rebuttals, and the governor is all too happy to veto anything anyway. It's appalling and disgusting that someone who earns not-even subsistence-level wages pays a higher percentage of those wages in taxes than fat cats in mansions do. That is so wrong!
I like the idea of raising taxes for those who earn over the median level of income. The rate of increase could start out very low (say, a .10% increase), and gradually get higher to where the wealthiest are paying at least the same percentage as the poorest.
Why not have state government do what the private sector has been forced to do? Freeze/reduce salaries and benefits OR reduce the work week of non-critical, public employees to, say, 36 hours, thereby limiting the need for lay-offs. Having a job with less income is better than having no job and no income!
Increasing taxes (except on the wealthy) makes no sense during a recession. Eliminate loopholes in the current tax code that allow too many people/and corporations to reduce or eliminate their tax responsibilities.
Eliminate public subsidies to able-bodied people who don't work (or even bother trying to find work), and don't reward welfare recipients with more money just because they
are irresponsible enough to have more kids.
Fairness.
I'm currently working on my 2009 taxes. I'm a small business (no employees) and make less than $100k. My taxes put me in the 53% tax bracket (Fed, State, FICA).
We read / hear about people & companies that make several times more than I do yet pay less in taxes.
Raising taxes doesn't seem like a great idea to me.
As easy as 3-2-1.
Three words: Zero Based Budgeting. Don't assume that the way it was is the way it must be.
Two words: Within means. Stop trying to keep up with California.
One word: courage. Politicians must be willing to sacrifice some sacred cows.
Restore income tax levels to pre-Ventura era and require that the Governor/Legislature forecast revenue and expenses out 5 years to ensure revenue will be sufficient to cover anticipated expenses.
Tax clothing and food if necessary though this will be a burden on those at the lower levels of the economy - both clothing and food being basic needs.
Just keep taxing? When does the golden goose stop laying golden eggs?
What happens when the productive people stop working hard?
All the MPR's start adding up. Don't cut my subsisdy! Force someone else to pay for my subsidy!
What is the purpose of government?
Nice to have vs. Need to have
If we don't, we will become the next California.
If the elected officials are as concerned about the budget shortfall as they want us to believe and since they own a major piece of the problem maybe they should offer to take a cut in pay for the next two years! I always have to laugh at the politics and political maneuvering that they want us to believe is in our best interest when issues of this magnitude come before them. We also should run every word and idea through the strainer of the fact that some of these very people are running for the governor job and want to make a good impression. These people are not above using their position and microphone to further their political campaign.
I still have to believe that term limits are part of the answer, if you know that you only have a certain amount of time to get the job done you might do things differently, job pressure makes us all work differently/better.
According to the 2009 Minnesota Tax Incidence Study, prepared by the Minnesota Department of Revenue, our Governor Pawlenty's tax cuts have created an uneven tax system, favoring the wealthiest Minnesota income earners. In fact workers earning $12,000 per year pay an annual tax rate of 12.5%, while those in the highest decile pay 3-5% less. For the worker earning $12,000, that 5% comes to $600, more than one paycheck. Why are the people who are living well below the poverty line (living paycheck to paycheck) being asked by the Governor to pay more? I should think that a Governor with his social values, and with all of his wealthy business connections would be reasonable and help people living in poverty and make the case for those who have the funds to INVEST in the state, instead of focusing on giving themselves a break all the time. Then, I here about the lawsuit and how he cut food programs for the poor in the worst recession to help his buddies and the funders of his PAC! I'd like to see some lawmakers hold him to task for this moral discrepency. We hear about his wonderful moral character all the time, let's put it to task and shed some light!
http://www.mn2020.org/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&SEC=%7B8D1D175B-8512-457E-8EBD-01F9800AAE48%7D
Why are we cutting $5 million food programs for the elderly so that millionaires earning millions every year can make more and more money? If it truly is to "create jobs" then where are they? Where are the good paying jobs and the investment by those most able in this state? Where are these amazing income generators? Where is the accountability? We're in the worst recession since the Great Depression? Well why is that? I want to hear these questions asked in the legislature!!!
The current system continues to give more and more to the wealthiest, while people who have no means to increase their wages or improve their opportunities (children & elderly) continue to flounder. Children make up the largest portion of people living in poverty. Families with children are the highest growing sector of homeless. I'm hoping to see some accountability and some responsibility and a lot more stewardship from our lawmakers.
This year I'm not asking millionaires making millions every year to pay more than me, I'm asking them to pay the same rate as me. I am voting for and expecting fairness in taxation. This is a moral issue and I can't understand why the Dems aren't citing this study done by the Minnesota Department of Revenue. Minnesotans overwhelmingly voted to raise taxes in 2008 for the Legacy Amendment. The majority of us are smart, caring folks who want our state to thrive! Let's capitalize on that!!!
Pretty clearly taxes have to be raised. As others have noted, a graduated scale should be used. If it were up to me, income taxes would go up on everyone making more than the state's median income ($66K according to a newscut post the other day). People making more than twice that should see a bigger bite taken out of their income.
Regarding Gary's / Marty's proposal to change how benefits are calculated for people who haven't lived in MN very long, it sounds like a jobs program for the public (i.e. gov't) workforce. It sounds incredibly complicated to manage, making me wonder whether it would make an appreciable difference in the budget, in the real world. In other words, it sounds like typical sound-bite-friendly nonsense that doesn't really work, along the lines of 'tax cuts pay for themselves'.
Sales tax on clothing with an exemption for thrift stores could add a lot to the bottom line without discouraging these sales. I doubt seriously that the sales tax would discourage purchases.
How about a state tax on food and or clothes, it is done in other states.
If you drive west on Highway 55 past Plymouth, you will see on the south side of the road the Hennepin County DOT complex. Notice how the building is rather large with elaborate exterior wall finishes and big, sweeping arcs? Now, compair that to Polaris's world head quarters just a half mile down the road. Their building is generally square with just standard exterior wall finishes.
Point being, when the state spends money that isn't theirs, they tend to over design buildings which inturn substantially raises the cost. When a private company puts up a building, they tend to do it more cost effectively. Both buildings have the same end result; one just cost a whole lot more.
The first thing that needs to be done is to educate our policy makers on how to make decisions using data. They need to understand the difference between good data and bad data, how to interpret the results of analyses, and the consequences of errors in drawing conclusions. This economic crisis is too important to be left to the whims of political competition and ideological bias. Anyone working on it needs to be able to suspend assumptions and use cold hard facts and logic to arrive at actions that will optimize the state as a system.
This also requires, of course, that they do understand that the state, as any large organization, is a system, and that optimizing any of its subsystems--whether counties, districts, offices, cities, demographics, etc.--risks disaster, without an understanding of the impact to the rest of the system.
Of course, it's idealistic to think that politicians would put politics aside and try to make policy based on balancing real concerns and needs. They don't have to live in the real world...they just have to appear to be fighting for whatever interests will glean them the most votes in November. This is especially true this year, when we have the perfect storm of an election year, a pair of political parties polarized to an unprecedented extent, and a governor with presidential ambitions. The question, however, wasn't "what's realistic to expect?" but "what would [we] recommend?"
One thing I would definitely NOT recommend would be getting rid of MPR. Political winds are increasingly driven by fringe elements appearing in gladitorial combat, in arenas presided over by left and right wing pundits whose job is to create the greatest polarization possible for ratings. It is good to have a safe harbor in that storm; where the important ideas are discussed, evidence is presented to support opinion, and the listener can weigh the ideas on the merits of that supporting evidence.
In a democracy, where the efficacy of the government ideally depends on an informed electorate, a truly unbiased news source is not a "nice to have." It's a "must have."
Regarding Garyf's comments at 7:42, MPR's annual report for 2008 (latest available) says it's total government support that year amounted to only 8% of MPR's revenue, and most of that came from CPB, which is funded by the federal government, not the State of Minnesota. Whatever money comes to MPR from the State (if any in fact does) is a tiny sliver of the budget problem the legislature has to deal with this year.
It seems to me that the first step in solving our political impasse on this issue (and others) is for ideologues to quit muddying the waters with inflamatory comments based on unfounded assertions.
I would like to see property and income taxes raised while increasing the degree to which they are graduated. This seems like a no-brainer.
Expand the sales tax base to include cloting and services, like most other States with sales taxes. It makes no sense that a wrench or a toaster is taxed, while a designer garment or premium haircut is not.
I would make sure all are paying the same level of tax, rather than protecting those with the greatest ability to pay more, then I would eliminate ALL corporate welfare before touching the safety et for real people in need, and then I would factor in inflation in spending. No one with half a brain except for our Governor thinks a budget is balanced by counting inflation in revenue and not in spending.
A first step would be to stop the flow of people coming here for our generous welfare.
Set up a two tiered scale. One for people that have lived here one year and one for people that haven't lived here for a year.
The people that haven't lived here for a year get the same public assistance they got in their former state.
This has been proposed by Marty Seifert.
Next, cut money to MPR. That's a "nice to have program" not a "need to have program". They are the 800lb gorrilla of public radio with state of the art studios and posh digs. They can run advertizements now on their station. MPR is not some poor little KFAI or KMOJ, its a fat cat in public radio circles. So, pay for GMAC or pay for a elitist public radio giant?
| February 2010 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
| 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
| 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 |
| 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 |
| 28 | ||||||
Master Archive
Recent Entries
- Have changes to the airline passenger experience affected your willingness to fly?
- Should marijuana be available for medical use in Minnesota?
- Do the struggles of Minnesota's business icons signal trouble for the state's economy?
- Do you know whether insurance would cover your losses in a major storm?
- What kind of recycling program would you be likely to use the most?
- Would you support paying people for organ or tissue donations?
- Have personal relationships in the workplace ever presented a problem for you?
- Do you think Facebook is a passing fad?
- Will you be less likely to visit the Minnesota Zoo without its dolphins?
- Should authorities in the Twin Cities change the way they warn people about tornadoes?
Public Insight Network
The Public Insight Network draws upon your experiences to help shape our coverage.More
Categories
Services
In The Spotlight
-
Sound Learning
Looking for ways to ensure your students are doing quality research from credible sources? Sound Learning is a launching point to Minnesota Public Radio's content on the Web. -
The Current Music Blog
Your daily note for good music, news and pop culture. With attempted jokes.
- Become a Member
- Member Connect Accounts
- Leadership Circle
- Sustaining Members
- Member Discounts
- Become a Sponsor
- Tax Information
- Planned Giving
- Vehicle Donation
- Donate Stock