[ngat]

Sorry I have not had time to reply to your last well-written post. I enjoyed reading it very much but have been out of town tending to some business. As regards the false charge against Dewhurst about the wage tax, anything that has ever been proposed for discussion in the Texas Senate to try to meet budget could be constured to be the fault of the Lt. Gov. of Texas, the way the state govt. in Texas is structured. The charge is a red herring.

Of couse there are already “wage taxes” in Texas, but there is no state income tax. Here are the facts:

Texas is one of the few states that does not charge employees a state income tax (though Texas employees must still pay federal income taxes, Social Security taxes, and Medicare tax withholdings). Texas employers are also subject to state unemployment (SUTA) tax, federal unemployment (FUTA) tax, and their share of Medicare and Social Security taxes. The employer calculates federal payroll taxes according to the Internal Revenue Service’s guidelines, and state payroll taxes according to the Texas Workforce Commission’s instructions.

[BlackElk]

With all due respect, your last paragraph betrays an insufficient appreciation of what a vile abomination is ANY state income tax on the earnings of folks working for a living. It is precisely such a tax that has destroyed Connecticut any funded its transformation into the liberal hellhole that it has become. Likewise other states enacting such a tax for the first time: Ohio (1971) under John Gilligan, Sebelius's father), Illinois (1971) under some alleged "Republican" "moderate" birdbrain, Rhode Island (1971), Maine (1971), New Jersey (1971?). Which of those states (1971 was SUCH a bad year!) would you like Texas to become? The taxes you reference are applicable in every state (except SUTA although each state has that on its own terms). They are PAYROLL taxes and NOT personal income taxes on wages and salaries.

As LG, what did Dewhurst DO to stomp out any discussion of creating a state income tax????