editorials

This plan seems sensible. Glad we don't have to deal with the obstructionist GOP house and senate any more, and this plan doesn't change things dramatically as Dayton's would do. His plan went too far.

I would rather have budget slashing tea partiers in control of the country and the state budgets. Dayton is so far out of reality he needs to take a pill. Spending has been, and is the problem. A few years ago, to avoid layoffs in the mine I work at, the union voted for a 32 hour work week. The vote was 90% in favor of the hourly and pay reduction. Due to lower demand/pricing of iron ore ( reality, hint,hint) we realized for the good of the workers and their families we would share the pain. After a month no one noticed the reduction in pay and everyone loved the extra day off. After a few months, we were back to 40 hours, to most of our dismay. Contrary to our spend more than they have "leaders", the world will not end if they cut spending. A 20% reduction,permanently- will become business as usual in no time at all. The scare tactics of less police, fire, teachers is a bunch of baloney. Just do it. Please no more taxes!

If you Google Earnst & Young State Tax comparison....you willl see how every state compares when you look at all the taxes on a business (sales, property, income, unemployment)...and in that study (which they do on an ongoing basis) Mn is in position 10 for lowest overall tax on businesses..The B to B sales tax will move it down the list; but we are not the highest......so the whiney businesses are just that, whiners! Seems to me that Fifo just moved from Mn to California....which is one of the highest. So there is more to the conversation than just sales tax.

Dayton's tax proposal is just cruel. Women running hair cutting shops and cleaning services would have to charge sales taxes under Dayton's proposal and would lose business as a result. I agree with the commenter who says Dayton is so out of touch that he needs a pill. Dayton is a rich boy who should not be in the governor's office because he doesn't know a thing about how ordinary Minnesotans have to live.

I will bet the editorial board a bottle of 12-year old Glen Livet single malt Scotch against an editorial page mea culpa to me personally when I win, that a $1.60 a pack will produce less than $40 Million in new revenue. Bill G.

Basically, let's scrap the one new tax that would affect the Star Tribune - because that is the only tax in the group that would distort markets and put any businesses at risk. That's just too funny. Every other tax increase mentioned - even though they would obviously distort other markets - is just fine.

Why not keep this simple and let people understand how they are getting screwed. Add a sales tax on clothing and keep the rate where it's at. Increase the income tax for all income levels. That's it. No gimmicks, no hiding the fact that we will all be paying more.

I don't like the Strib budget either (but a slight improvement on the Dayton budget, but ever so slight). Dayton's budget increases revenues (for those of you in the "spin" world, that means taxes) by $2.1 billion and increases spending by $1 billion. Overall the state budget grows by $1 billion. Here are 2 much better ideas. One is just to decrease spending by $1 billion. That solves the problem and is the responsible approach. But given that Dayton and the DFL are bent on increasing taxes, the second idea is to reduce spending by $500 million (i.e., half a billion) and increase revenues by $500 million. This means that for every new dollor in tax, there is one less dollar in spending. That's a truly balanced approach! Do we really need to increase spending more than $500 million? And, however they increase taxes, the amounts are small enough that no single constituency needs to suffer much. And a reduction of $500 million in spending won't hurt any single program in a way that anyone would notice! I still prefer the first approach - but I think that the second approach is fair and balanced.

We need a $1 tax per cup of coffee sold! and $8 per 3 lb can sold! That will generate revenue.

The Strib's plan boils down to the tax version of NIMBY. Only I call it NOMWE - Not Outta My Wallet Ever!

The logic behind sin taxes only works if the added tax revenue is earmarked to address the specific costs which government incurs from that behavior. If the dollars are just put in the general fund the justification fails--it's just easy to keep raising those taxes. And, maybe we should increase the tax on candies and fast food--more harmful to more people than alcohol and cigarettes.