Posted by Racer on October 9, 2006, at 21:16:24
There's an ad going right now for Schwartenegger's campaign: "Help Governor Schwartenegger protect the California dream -- with no new taxes!" Basic message is that Angelides is planning to raise taxes. In fact, it says something about not being able to afford to raise families in California if Angelides is elected. (I'm so disgusted by those smear campaigns. Bring back Everett Dirksen -- at least he was clever about it!)
Of course, my understanding is that Angelides has discussed creating new taxes, which wouldn't be applied to everyone -- some sorts of use taxes, etc. And actually collecting existing taxes that are falling through the cracks now. It's not income tax, at any rate. So the ad is misleading on the face of it.
But you know what? I wouldn't mind taxes that actually did some good. If the tax money actually went to schools, infrastructure, etc? No problem -- I'm fine with that. (Always assuming that corporations also paid appropriate taxes, by the way.) Taxes are not bad in and of themselves. "Taxes" is not a bad word, there won't be an asterisk in this post because I've typed those letters in that sequence.
Could we maybe discuss something more substantive? Like maybe that whole "special interest" issue?
poster:Racer
thread:693415
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/poli/20061009/msgs/693415.html