Oklahoma Democrats Tried To Raise Income Taxes

[lee1000]

Opposing a reckless income tax cut for the rich and trying to prevent it from going into effect in the face of $600 million dollar state budget deficit is hardly an attempt to raise income taxes.

It's the rational adult way to deal with the severity of this real world problem, as opposed to childishly charging ahead with blinders on in a bubble, ignoring the reality around them the way the Republicans are.

Gas prices are going back up. There you go

 

[Podman]

That's always the Democrats way, tax and spend.

 

[TerryMiller]

Gas prices are going back up. There you go

Maybe, but gas prices aren't affected by gas taxes. Gas taxes are based on a specific number of pennies per gallon, not a percentage. So, if gas prices go up, the state (and the feds) still only get the same amount per gallon. That is why the left-coast states want to tax vehicle mileage instead of/or in addition to their state's fuel taxes.

 

[Dave70968]

Maybe, but gas prices aren't affected by gas taxes. Gas taxes are based on a specific number of pennies per gallon, not a percentage. So, if gas prices go up, the state (and the feds) still only get the same amount per gallon. That is why the left-coast states want to tax vehicle mileage instead of/or in addition to their state's fuel taxes.

Going to a mileage-based rate instead of a per-gallon rate won't change revenues in time with gas prices. A given car will use the same number of gallons to go a given distance, regardless of how it's taxed. The "per-mile" idea is to make up for lost revenue due to more efficient cars--which, of course, we're supposed to be encouraging.

It's just like cigarettes: on one hand, they're bad for us, so the government imposes punitive taxes to discourage us from smoking. On the other hand, the government needs that revenue!

 

[lee1000]

Going to a mileage-based rate instead of a per-gallon rate won't change revenues in time with gas prices. A given car will use the same number of gallons to go a given distance, regardless of how it's taxed. The "per-mile" idea is to make up for lost revenue due to more efficient cars--which, of course, we're supposed to be encouraging.

It's just like cigarettes: on one hand, they're bad for us, so the government imposes punitive taxes to discourage us from smoking. On the other hand, the government needs that revenue!

The government needs to cut spending, NOT increase revenue (ie take the money I've earned).