Michigan Votes Forum

Even when compared to other stupid liberal spending bills, this one is particularly stupid. $100 for gas, for anyone making less than $50k? That's a tiny, useless subsidy. It's also a horrible precedent to set, that the government now assumes partial responsibility for our fuel costs.

I'm not convinced that this was a good idea. If they are too incompetent to file some paperwork, how well are they caring for the elderly?

Thanks to my Senator, Arlan Meekhof, for taking a stand against these misguided handouts. Let the markets pick the economic winners, not the guys in Lansing.

Off topic reply: I agree 100% with taxing all income fairly, pension income included. Why should we carve out a special exemption for one type of income, or even more narrowly, one specific type of retirement income? Face it, if pension income had been taxed from the start, absolutely nobody would be seriously talking about carving out an exemption

Well, at least two guys got this one right. Stop the special treatment of certain groups, people, or areas! Level the playing field!

Why a new tax on retread tires? Honest, serious question. Why? Are we trying to discourage the use of retread tires? Increase new tire sales? Increase the number of retreadable tires thrown into a landfill in favor of new? A new tax just because we like new taxes?

Oooh, that's great. Can I get a tax credit for things I buy for my job too? No? Well then this seems highly unfair, and it should be killed asap.

I'm all for tax breaks, but not stupid ones like this one. Let me see if I can understand the logic behind it: A person buys a house, and the value goes down. Poor, sad, person. Lets let him deduct that loss from his income tax to make him feel better. But to take that same, idiotic logic a step further, why not do the same thing for other investments

Sure. Lets make life as a corporation doing business in Michigan just a little bit harder. And while we're at it, make groceries cost a little bit more for the people.

Brilliant! Except that it will just end up costing taxpayers more, when the state has to pay twice as much for a flag.