McGreevey's "Millionaire's Tax". The New York Post editorially exults today in the idea that a proposed "millionaire's tax" in New Jersey might send millionaires fleeing for New York. It is to laugh.
+
Millionaires can live anywhere they want, and tax levels are not the most important thing to them. Millionaires who want to live in New York will do so. Those who want to live in New Jersey will do so.
+
And property-tax relief, which is what Governor McGreevey's income-tax increase is largely about, would benefit the very same rich people who would experience an income-tax surcharge. Indeed, it is not knowable how much the tax lowering on their expensive real estate will go toward cushioning the income-tax surcharge, but it's got to help the rich at least as much as other property owners, especially given how much their assessed valuation is to begin with.
+
Governor McGreevey has done an astonishing job of balancing the budget in a very difficult period produced by the Republican mismanagement of the national economy, which is only now starting to recover from the ravages of Republican trickle-down economics and then, probably, only because of pent-up demand finally being expressed as purchases because people just couldn't wait any longer.
+
People don't feel significantly more secure in their jobs or more confident of the economic future. But they're tired of waiting for things to get better, tired of putting off purchases out of fear that things are going to get worse. The Republicans count that as consumer confidence.
+
More likely, it's mere resignation to the fact that the individual cannot control the economy, and it's better to live well now than sacrifice and live badly now just to try to save for the future, because we can't really save for the future because interest rates on consumer debt are so high that what might have gone to saving must instead go to credit-card companies.
+
Ordinary people know that there is no way in hell they are ever going to be able to save enuf to provide the six-month cushion that economists urge in case they lose their job. So they admit that if that unhappy time comes, they will just have to go on unemployment or even welfare until they can find a job again — at less pay and lower benefits.
+
Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we lose our job.
+
Meanwhile, New Jersey's Governor is doing what little he can to reduce economic unfairness by increasing the only progressive tax we have, the income tax, and cutting one of the unfairest of regressive taxes we have, property tax.
+
Actually, we should have essentially only one tax: on income. All regressive taxes of every description should be abolished, from sales taxes to excise taxes on alcohol to gasoline taxes that make it hard for poor people to fill their tank. Maybe we should leave high taxes on tobacco and dedicate those receipts to healthcare, but all other regressive taxes should be abolished, to promote economic equity across society. McGreevey hasn't gone that far, but he's taken a valuable first step with his proposed "millionaire's tax".
+
Perhaps John Edwards is the best choice for a Kerry running mate, in that his youth and region would add balance to the Democratic ticket. But if, for any reason, Edwards is not chosen or decides not to run, John Kerry would be hard-pressed to find a better veep than James McGreevey, the young, nice-looking, progressive Governor of New Jersey.
+
Two candidates from the same region? So what? Clinton-Gore were not only from the same region but from adjoining states! They won. (Responsive to "... and N.J.'s Gift", New York Post, June 20, 2004)
- posted by L. Craig Schoonmaker @ 12:12 PM