• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Kansas revenues will fall $1 billion short in 2015 and 2016 due to tax cuts

Status
Not open for further replies.

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
Jul 17, 2005
42,001
3
1,840
Cut taxes, infinite revenue!

TOPEKA

Kansas will collect $1 billion less in revenue in 2015 and 2016 than its projected expenses following massive income tax cuts signed into law by Republican Gov. Sam Brownback.

The new revenue estimates released Monday revealed that Kansas would burn through about $380 million in reserves and still need to cut $280 million to balance its current budget for fiscal year 2015, which ends next June 30.

The problem continues in 2016 when revenues are projected to run $436 million short of expenditures, the estimates show.

http://www.kansascity.com/news/government-politics/article3729756.html#storylink=cpy

With the revenue stream in serious jeopardy, now the Republicans will be forced to reluctantly cut poverty programs that they hoped would be safe. :(
 

Averon

Member
Aug 27, 2008
10,060
0
1,210
Kansas deserve this. They just re-elected the clown who is chiefly responsible for this.
 

-COOLIO-

The Everyman
Jun 9, 2007
27,186
21
1,615
anyone else read the title and think that keanu reeves was in serious shit?
 

KingGondo

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
25,389
0
0
It's OK guys, the Laffer curve just needs more time to work!

Which it will now get, because Kansas somehow reelected the people responsible for the mess they're in!
 

kirblar

Member
Oct 9, 2010
63,315
1
860
Brownback getting re-elected was sheer insanity. Every rational person in the state just got told to move.
 

Zaphod

Member
May 13, 2005
2,456
0
0
Heart of Gold
Well their taxes were cut, so they have that going for them.

The only ones that got a big cut were business owners. Their income taxes went to 0. While my overall taxes and tuition went up to pay for it with sales taxes and underfunded universities.

They had a chance to fix that on election night and didn't so...

Kansas deserve this. They just re-elected the clown who is chiefly responsible for this.

I don't deserve any of this.
 

Mixolydian

Member
Jun 23, 2014
1,639
0
0
Elected by a very narrow margin. Only the people who voted for him deserve this.

Thank you. I sure as hell didn't want him back. This was squarely an issue of some people of a conservative state voting for someone because of a big 'R', and not taking a step back and seeing how much he's screwed up.
 
Oct 25, 2009
2,219
0
870
I love how modern "fiscal responsibility" involves only cutting spending, as if increasing how much money you take in somehow isn't part of the equation as well.
 
Feb 9, 2006
13,553
0
1,475
www.duanecunningham.com
Elected by a very narrow margin. Only the people who voted for him deserve this.

Yeah, exactly. Final numbers:

Sam Brownback 49.96% Republican
Paul Davis 46.06% Democrat
Keen Umbehr 3.98% Libertarian

Kind of sucks for the nearly.... actually, over half of us who still have to bear the brunt of his bullshit despite voting against him.
 

kirblar

Member
Oct 9, 2010
63,315
1
860
Dismantle "Big Government" because it's ineffective.

Government is ineffective because of dismantling.

Dismantle "Big Government" because it's ineffective.

Government is ineffective because of dismantling.
Yup. Not that there aren't areas where there's legitimate overreach- but those areas are usually not the safety nets that the GOP is intent on dismantling.
 

tanod

when is my burrito
Dec 15, 2006
11,704
1
1,230
Iowa
I have lots of bills.

Using Brownback Republican's math, I should quit my job. That will force me to cut back.
 

dabig2

Member
May 15, 2007
9,221
0
0
hype alley
With the revenue stream in serious jeopardy, now the Republicans will be forced to reluctantly cut poverty programs that they hoped would be safe. :(

Starving the beast. Brownback and his cohorts accomplished exactly what they sought to do. To be fair to Kansas, this has been the playbook of Republicans for generations now, so I don't necessarily blame them for reelecting him to now activate step 2 of starving the beast. I'm positive a lot of the FYGM Kansas crowd though won't care too much as long as they receive their meager scraps. Because again, none of this is new.
 

kamspy

Member
Dec 16, 2008
11,579
0
0
Cincinnati, OH
I drove through on my way to vacation in Golden.CO to enjoy the freedoms there....

I think I stopped and bought gas though, so there's that. Pretty sure they had the only toll booth between Cincy and Denver too.

I say we make it a solar panel. Kansas is the crappiest state I've ever driven though, and I drove through Missouri the same day, and have driven through Alabama.

It's literally just a field. I don't know how they expect to collect a billion dollars in tax in a giant field.

I'm going with "turn it into a solar panel".
 

Klotera

Member
Sep 9, 2005
931
0
0
Kansas City, MO
I'm so proud to be from Kansas. So many jobs created *tear*

The best part is that they lure companies over the state line from KCMO with huge tax breaks, then claim they created jobs (as if no one in the area crosses the state line for work).

So, they take tax money from KCMO, but don't even give it to their people. They just give it to the corporation.
 
May 17, 2010
9,127
1
0
I think I stopped and bought gas though, so there's that. Pretty sure they had the only toll booth between Cincy and Denver too.

Yeah, it does have the only toll road between Cincy and Denver.

I say we make it a solar panel. Kansas is the crappiest state I've ever driven though, and I drove through Missouri the same day, and have driven through Alabama.

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Worse than Missouri? With their shitty roads and XXX dens of ill repute every two miles on I-70? You must have been high during that part of the trip.

It's literally just a field. I don't know how they expect to collect a billion dollars in tax in a giant field.

Most of it is a field, yes.
 

garath

Member
May 8, 2007
13,515
0
0
But isn't the pitch that cut taxes = more spending which = more revenue? /smh

Poor Kansas. A billion is not small.
 

dabig2

Member
May 15, 2007
9,221
0
0
hype alley
This is not an accident. You cut taxes, then they are "forced" to cut spending on programs they don't like.

Exactly. The below article should be required reading regarding anything involving fiscal policy explanations of the 2 major parties:
http://www.commondreams.org/views/2009/01/26/two-santa-clauses-or-how-republican-party-has-conned-america-thirty-years

<snip>
Democrats, he said, had been able to be "Santa Clauses" by giving people things from the largesse of the federal government. Republicans could do that, too – spending could actually increase. Plus, Republicans could be double Santa Clauses by cutting people's taxes! For working people it would only be a small token – a few hundred dollars a year on average – but would be heavily marketed. And for the rich it would amount to hundreds of billions of dollars in tax cuts. The rich, in turn, would use that money to import or build more stuff to market, thus increasing supply and stimulating the economy. And that growth in the economy would mean that the people still paying taxes would pay more because they were earning more.

There was no way, Wanniski said, that the Democrats could ever win again. They'd have to be anti-Santas by raising taxes, or anti-Santas by cutting spending. Either one would lose them elections.

When Reagan rolled out Supply Side Economics in the early 80s, dramatically cutting taxes while exploding (mostly military) spending, there was a moment when it seemed to Wanniski and Laffer that all was lost. The budget deficit exploded and the country fell into a deep recession – the worst since the Great Depression – and Republicans nationwide held their collective breath. But David Stockman came up with a great new theory about what was going on – they were "starving the beast" of government by running up such huge deficits that Democrats would never, ever in the future be able to talk again about national health care or improving Social Security – and this so pleased Alan Greenspan, the Fed Chairman, that he opened the spigots of the Fed, dropping interest rates and buying government bonds, producing a nice, healthy goose to the economy. Greenspan further counseled Reagan to dramatically increase taxes on people earning under $37,800 a year by increasing the Social Security (FICA/payroll) tax, and then let the government borrow those newfound hundreds of billions of dollars off-the-books to make the deficit look better than it was.

Reagan, Greenspan, Winniski, and Laffer took the federal budget deficit from under a trillion dollars in 1980 to almost three trillion by 1988, and back then a dollar could buy far more than it buys today. They and George HW Bush ran up more debt in eight years than every president in history, from George Washington to Jimmy Carter, combined. Surely this would both starve the beast and force the Democrats to make the politically suicidal move of becoming deficit hawks.

Brownback didn't fuck up. He's just instituting the same gameplan we've seen for 40 years now by Republicans. And yes, it's still very, very successful especially when you can rely on the FYGM crowd to fight against the lower classes for the scraps.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.