To: from occupied ga
At state government one equates to the other since states can't run on deficits like the fed.
Not true at all. At a set tax rate, as the economy goes up and down, tax revenue follows. When the economy was down, Perdue cut spending. Now that the economy is up, tax revenue is up, and it stands to reason that spending can rise with it. As long as the spending is on the right things, and it doesn't result in a tax rate increase, I have no problem with that.
Are you seriously trying to suggest that he can't accomplish anything with a $16,000,000,000 budget.
No, I'm not.
Cutting programs and taxes is accomplishing something - something pretty worthwhile from my viewpoint.
I agree wholeheartedly. I also believe that making improvements to education, government services, and foster care are important too. There are a good many roads that need to be improved, and some that need to be built. I expect these things from a good governor.
posted on 01/17/2005 6:28:19 AM PST
(Freep the world!)
the tax rate might not increase, but the total tax has increased. If the state is taking the same proportional bite of a larger pie, then the state is taking in more money, hence a tax increase even though the rate remains the same.
As long as the spending is on the right things, and it doesn't result in a tax rate increase, I have no problem with that.
I think we're saying the same thing here. It's just that you think it's OK and I don't.
posted on 01/17/2005 6:57:57 AM PST
by from occupied ga
(Your government is your most dangerous enemy, and Bush is no conservative)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson