FT 8-06: Commonwealth Budget for FY2019 (Passed)

[Southern Delegate matthew27]

As representative of the left wing population of this commonwealth I won't settle for anything less then 25% taxes on the 1 million+ column. The rich use most of the resources and have the least to lose. We also need to upgrade our infrastructure, pay for better education for our children and so much more.

$50K - $100K (0%)

$100K - $150K (3%)

$150K - $200K (8%)

$200K - $500K (14%)

$500K - $1M (18%)

$1M+ (25%)

We should also make it illegal to offshore to other countries for the rich.

[Southern Delegate matthew27]

Nay

[Southern Delegate matthew27]

I will vote nay on any bill that drops the rate on 500 thousand and above tax brackets. 15% for one million dollars or more is insanely low.

I am open to lowering taxes on the 50-100 thousand per year bracket, but only with increases at the top to maintain the surplus.

[Southern Delegate matthew27]

Fully on board with a negative income tax.

Will we need to call in the GM for the revenue projections on drugs?

As long as it is directed towards the avg worker that makes under 50k per year.

That is who deserves a bigger piece of the pie. I could get behind such a negative tax.

[Southern Delegate matthew27]

Am currently thinking of these following tax brackets:
-2%
0%
2%
5%
10%
15%
20%

Not sure on exact income thresholds yet but the highest will be in the hundreds of millions. Also will be added in taxes from the drug bill and cutting the tobacco and alcohol taxes and gut the firearm tax altogether.

How about this amendment? It isn't right that the top 10% is taking something like 90% of the wealth and this would start to fix that.
-8% for 0 through 30k
-2% for 30.1k through 50k
2% for 50.1k through 99.9k
5% for 100k through 249.9k
10% for 250k through 499.9k
15% for 500k through 999.9k
20% for 1 through 10 million
25% for 10.1 million 2 billion
30% for 2 billion and upward

[Southern Delegate matthew27]

I mean those are probably too high given current levels of spending and my intent of allowing the surplus to last but I'm not forcing a vote on it. Can we save the "10% is taking 90% of the wealth" rhetoric for real life please? I think most here support progressive taxation - the key is I'm trying to get the target amount of revenue (~$25 billion or so from progressive taxes) without too much of a surplus.

Ok, I won't talk about that.

What do you think about this?
-4% for 0 through 30k
-2% for 30.1k through 50k
2% for 50.1k through 99.9k
5% for 100k through 249.9k
10% for 250k through 499.9k
15% for 500k through 999.9k
20% for 1m and up.

[Southern Delegate matthew27]

I'd rather keep the taxes the same on the rich and reduce them for the little guy.

[Southern Delegate matthew27]

aye

[Southern Delegate matthew27]

If it helps the workers I am open to lowering the carbon tax a little as long as we have enough revenue to pay for infrastructure investment, plastic clean up and science.

My goal is to help the workers and that is what matters.