Use prior sales tax to fund Clean Water Legacy Act
Why should Minnesotans have to endure another addition to the state sales tax?
In 1967, Minnesota adopted its first sales tax. Three percent was to replace increasing property taxes. In 1971, it increased to 4 percent to help schools. More budget problems helped to increase the sales tax to 5 percent in 1981, six percent in 1983 and another 1/2 percent in 1991. The last increase was to be temporary.
So, why not take that last 1/2 percent and apply it to the Clean Water, Wildlife, Cultural Heritage and Natural Areas Amendment, also known as the Clean Water Legacy Act. More money would be generated for water, wildlife and the arts while Minnesotans would not be taxed another iota.
Tina, Tina, Tina…
Do you realize what you are suggesting?! You are suggesting we take an existing tax and use for something other than it is being used for now.
But that would require the state to do actual work…and make “difficult choices.” That’s hard. Really hard.
Why would we do that when we can simply add more to the tax bill? No work involved there. And besides, it’s only people’s hard earned money we’re talking about. And what is people’s hard earned money after all, but simply tax revenue that has yet to realize it’s potential.
Don’t you want to see that money reach it’s potential? Right now it is stuck in come rube’s wallet where it is not free to be spent on the state’s latest and greatest idea.
Why do you hate freedom, Tina?
You’re right! The money is currently stuck in some “rube’s” wallet. But, it’s waiting to be spent on food, rent, fuel (winter’s coming) or some other necessity.
Give me a break! Why shouldn’t I ask my legislators to do a little work once in a while, instead of taking X number of trips funded by special interest?
As a one-time business owner, a one-time single parent and now having one foot in the retirement door, I know Minnesotans are taxed to death and Minnesota legislators need to be a bit more creative in how they use (not abuse) our tax dollars.
I will vote NO on the Clean Water Act to try to save us all from just another “temporary tax.”
Can’t quite tell from your response, but just in case:
My original comment employed heavy doses of sarcasm to make a simple point. The Clean Water Act is a bad idea and puts only more pressure on already maxed out taxpayers.
I voted no.
I wonder, If the vote was so far off on the US Senate race? Maybe they should do a recount on the Clean Water Act. Just maybe they would find a whole outstate county that hadn’t counted ther votes yet.