The State Of The City?

Recently, the mayor gave his State Of The City address.   He basically said that the city financial picture was not a pretty one.  Ya think?  The city has budget issues, workers on furlough,  and a looming budget defict.   Some of this seems puzzling to me, given that fact that my property taxes were doubled in the last 6 years or so.   My trash collection was reduced from twice a week to once a week.  Many roads in my area are comparable to third world country. 

Maybe the mayor can explain why he a;; smiles at a groundbreaking ceremony for the rail.  A project that is likely to bankrupt the city and not fulfill it's intended purpose of relieving traffic congesttion.  There are new construction and housing being built on the leeward side of the island.  Even if a third of these folks use the rail, the result will be more cars on the road.  Seriously, who is going to ride a bus to the rail station, catch the rail and then ride another bus to get to the final destination? 

If the problem is to get cars off the road, why don't we simply pass tougher laws on registration and car insurance and enforce them?   I have heard estimates that about a third of our cars on the streets have no registration or insurance.  What if we confiscate these cars?  Then the drivers would be forced to use the bus and we a lot less traffic congestion.   Why not synchornize the lights?  Why is the city choosing the most expensive solution to alleviating traffic?   

I believe the state of the city is sad, but it's by choice!

Taxes Explained By Beer

> The Tax system explained in BEERS
> Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100...
>
> If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this...
>
> The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
> The fifth would pay $1.
> The sixth would pay $3.
> The seventh would pay $7..
> The eighth would pay $12.
> The ninth would pay $18.
> The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
>
> So, that's what they decided to do..
>
> The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20". Drinks for the ten men would now cost just $80.
>
> The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men ? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?
>
> They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.
>
> So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.
>
> And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% saving).
> The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% saving).
> The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% saving).
> The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% saving).
> The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% saving).
> The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% saving).
>
> Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings.
>
> "I only got a dollar out of the $20 saving," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,"but he got $10!"
>
> "Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"
>
> "That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back, when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"
>
> "Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!"
>
> The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
>
> The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
>
> And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat  friendlier.
>
>
> For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
> For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible

Who Did You Vote For?

I saw a pictur eof a retired man talking to the Governor about the new proposed tax on pensions.  I am also seeing and reading about a host of other new proposed taxes.  The State Government wants to spend about a billion more than it's projected income so they call it a "deficiti" and propose to raise taxes as a means to deal with it.   While I certainly don't want to see someone who is retired pushed to the brink of poverty from a pension tax, but at the same time, what did these folks expect when they went to the voting booth?

One gubernatorial candidate (Aiona) made a promise of no new taxes and he was soundly defeated by Abercrombie.  Thus voters surely know that electing the other candidate meant new taxes to solve any deficits?  Ironically, I also see the union members in th3 background of the newsfeed about the pension taxes.  I wonder what these members have to say now?  The union could not stop layoffs and furloughs from happening and now they appear powerless to stop a pension tax.  Has the union simply outlived its usefulness?

Who did you vote for?  

More Tax On Sodas And Beers?

I read an article recently about how our politicians want to add taxes on beer, sodas, and cigarettes.  These things are bad for your health so we need to tax them more to curb their use?  Why not simply ban these iems if they are a plague on society?  Could it be that these items make the State TONS of money so they are untouchable?  We tolerate them because they are so easily taxed and consumption will continue?

Conversely then, should we not eliminate taxes on fruits and veggies, as well as necessay medicine? 

Our lawmakers say they have a budget deficit but oddly, cutting spending doesn't seem to be an option.  As I understand it, our deficit is fabricated as the State simply wants to spend about a billion more than last year so they call it a budget deficit and justify it as a reason to raise taxes once again.  Never mind that the city is about to bankrupt the Oahu residents with the rail and sewer repairs. 

Taxing Pensions

I saw the clip of the Governor giving testimony about taxing State worker pensions.  While I hope this will not make anyone fall into poverty, I was glad to see the Governor say that the Unions aren't his pals.  While various public worker unions may have been very useful at one time, I believe they have simply become heavy political activists who wants their share of pork at the troughs.  The recent furloughs were unprecedented and so is the proposed tax on pensions. 

I am concerned however, about the introduction of various new taxes instead of seeing more proposed cuts.  If the State doesn't have enough money, then they should live within their means instead of taking more and more from an already overtaxed population.  It only gets worse with the groundbreaking of the rail and the city's requirement to upgrade and fix many existing sewer projects. 

I liken out government to the man who killed the golden goose. 

Civil Unions Progressing?

It looks like the civil unions bill is progressing and ultimately will be signed by the governor.  What I want to know is how this will impact the State of Hawaii.  I know that pro civil union supporters talk about the economic boom from passing this bill but studies show that the economic impact will be negligible on our tourism and economy. 

I am wondering if there will be social impact on Hawaii.  Will we see new businesses such as arrangements for trips to Hawaii for civil unions?  Will there certain areas where civil union supporters frequent?  How will this affect the polictians who pass the bill?  Will there be repercussions?  Will passage of this bill finally put to rest all of the debating and fighting?  I would like to hear your thoughts.

Comments are not moderated but please be civil.  Thanks!  

Gambling And Prostitution?

The creation of a State lottery is in question with the lesgislature again.   It can be used to help solve the deficit issue and fund education, the proponents say.   Thus far, the lawmakers have resisted the urge to allow gambling in any form.  I find it ironic that lawmakers take the moral high grond on gambling and in the same breath, pass the bill (232) allowing civil unions..

At this point, I see no reason to ban gambling, or prostitution for that matter.  You see, both are alive and well in the State of Hawaii.  But because they are run under cover, no taxes are collected.  What the heck you ask?  I can show compelling evidence of this.

During the course of the year, all you need is a staradvertiser sports page to make my point.  For example, why would anyone need to know the winners of a sporting event so much that it is advertised in the sports page?  Is this so you can bet a lunch with a buddy?  If you believe this, I have swamp land called Kawainui Estates to sell you.  And in the same sports page, you will pictures of pretty girls advertising relaxation.   Guess what that is? 

To sum it up, there are pockets of tax dollars that politicians can utilize if they will open their eyes.  I hope this opens yours!