Comment history

Study says lower state income taxes will lead to higher property, sales taxes

“They say that growth-oriented tax reform requires shifting taxes from income to consumption.”
We go through this all the time. The premise behind this idea is to put more dollars in the pockets of the middle and lower income families and they will consume more, which will increase demand, and make a need for more stock people at wal-mart to fill the shelves. Vah- la, jobs created.
Here is why it doesn’t work in this economy – we, the 99%, already have bills that need to be paid. When we get paid, if there is money left over from the basic needs of rent, water, gas, electricity and food, we need to go to the doctor – which we don’t do now because we don’t have insurance. Once that bill is paid, usually at least $70 to and infinite $ amount, if there is money left over, we need life insurance for ourselves and our children – which we don’t have because that was the first thing our jobs cut when the 2008 crash happened. If this is the idea, that doctors and insurance companies will create more jobs because the demand for their services increase because the 99% have more money to spend, then the Governor is spot on…however, when you pretend that people will consume more wal-mart goods because they have $10 more dollars in their pocket – you miss the reality that they aren’t able to fulfill the bills they have already committed to – we won’t consume more, because we are already over consuming.
This will not create more jobs, it will make the rich richer.

March 23, 2012 at 10:43 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Kansas House passes $14B budget; cuts $600M

If they did have one, it wouldn't be covered by their insurance as that is state money, right? So, unless they pay out of pocket for it, the wording is correct.

March 20, 2012 at 9:19 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

House committee approves splitting Kansas City, Kan.; Democrats allege 'gerrymandering'

Hey Scott - when are you going to put all the pieces together for us?
No abortion
No contraception
No education
No economic assistance

Only have sex if you are married to the opposite sex and have good, high paying jobs and a nice house.
Never get a divorce and become impoverished.

March 15, 2012 at 1:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

'No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act' contains more than tax issues

"along with homophobia and a decided reluctance to support the children they are forcing to be born, that's causing this female flight from the party."

Forcing women to have children, I will say it again - FORCING WOMEN TO HAVE CHILDREN - and NOT protecting the children when they are born from poverty - that is becoming A KANSAS VALUE.

What the republicans are trying to do, is force people to not have sex until they are ready to have a baby. They need to quit because it's not going to work.

March 13, 2012 at 11:07 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Mother of two urges legislators to reject Brownback plan to eliminate EITC

Sorry, those numbers are half unless you are self employed - but still.

March 13, 2012 at 9:58 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Mother of two urges legislators to reject Brownback plan to eliminate EITC

Yes, my understanding was that a mom and pop kind of store was using food stamps to buy food to resell in their store, and gave the food stamp recipient some % on the dollar.

March 13, 2012 at 9:54 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Mother of two urges legislators to reject Brownback plan to eliminate EITC

EITC recipients may not pay INCOME TAX, but they still pay Social Security and Medicaid, that will MOST LIKELY not be there for them when they need it. “Under the Federal Insurance Contributions Act 12.4% of earned income up to an annual limit must be paid into Social Security, and an additional 2.9% must be paid into Medicare.” For a person who makes less than $2000 per month, that 15.3% is around $60, and in my car that’s a tank of gas. If that comes out twice a month, that’s two tanks of gas. In a year, that is $720 – that is about the refund a person who makes $2000 a month gets from KS EITC – get over yourself. Why is it so hard for you to do simple math.
You do not know what people do with their money and it is inappropriate to assume that all recipients of the EITC make bad choices. Why would you think that anyway, because they don't make 6 figures a year?

March 13, 2012 at 9:49 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Mother of two urges legislators to reject Brownback plan to eliminate EITC

Bigtoe - "Low income people aren't paying medical bills with it because they have 100% free medical care under Medicaid and/or at the emergency room, also covered by the taxpayer. Most of them also probably have their food, rent and a car covered by the taxpayer."

I feel that you have confused "Low income" with those on Social Security and other programs. Those that work do not qualify for medical, nor can they usually afford to pay for it. They are actually the ones that you complain about not paying their medical bills and raising prices of medical care for everyone else. Also, at about 130% poverty level, they also do not get SNAP benefits nor could they possibly qualify for Section 8. I don't know any program that directly pays car payments. So it sounds like you really talk out of your rear.

March 12, 2012 at 4:27 p.m. ( | suggest removal )