14 thoughts on “Democratic Gubernatorial Candidate Debate Today”
Ducey has laid out very specific school spending numbers, supported continuing the Prop 301 tax and has a very specific new tax plan – none. I thiink that covers all bases, even though you probably disagree. How much more specific can you get?
Loading...
Reply to Wileybud
Loading...
The tax plan is “none”.
In Republican land, schools and roads and police and courts and all the things that make America great are FREE!
Hooray!
Good lord but you’re a simpleton.
Loading...
The issue is not your distain for Republican politics but the lack of specificity that your candidates have. Aren’t you embarrassed by the scam they are perpetrating on the voters. At the forum, Farley said he would cut $3 billion in credits but he us not giving us a list. The four inch pipe line is old hat.
Loading...
You really need to start thinking things through, and stop throwing stones jn your glass house.
I’m interested, and I’m interested in the scam your party is perpetuating on all of us.
Dirty money is not my friend, and you support dirty money.
You support pre-emptive laws to block cities from enacting the will of the people.
You give $900,000.00 bonuses to your corporate owners.
You support racist laws that tear apart families.
Your high horse is more like one of those 25¢ rides they used to have in front of shopping malls.
And a grown man on a kids ride just looks foolish.
Loading...
Will somebody please ask what specific “tax loopholes” each plans to eliminate and how much each will bring into the general fund.
Rob Robb of the Arizona Republic recently commented on the lack of specificity in the Dems plans, specifically Garcia’s and Fasarley’s. Some exerpts of Robb’s column follow:
THE SALES TAX LOOPHOLE IS NONSENSE
In his press release, Garcia referred to “over $13 billion in corporate taxes that go uncollected every year due to give aways, carve outs and credits.” That’s a reference to a tax expenditure report produced by the Arizona Department of Revenue.
Of the total, nearly 90 percent are statutory exemptions to the state sales tax. But, contrary to spin, these exemptions aren’t loopholes. They are overwhelmingly designed to limit the sales tax to its intended incidence, a tax on the final sale of a retail good. In fact, the major exemptions for retail goods are for food and drugs.
To get any real money requires a fundamental change in the nature of the sales tax. To extend it to services or to make it like a value-added tax, levied at each stage of production. I’m in favor of both. But it ain’t closing loopholes.
GARCIA’S PLAN LACKS SPECIFICS
In any event, Garcia’s plan only identifies four loopholes to be closed: horse vitamins, 4-inch pipes, the lease of private jets, and the sale of fine art to out-of-state purchasers. And what would closing these “loopholes” raise? A whopping $13 million.
His primary opponent, state Sen. Steve Farley, plays the same game. Farley has claimed that closing sales tax “loopholes” could raise $2 billion. In a recent tweet he upped the ante to $3 billion. But here’s what I think is a very safe bet: Between now and the election, Farley will not produce a list of specific sales tax increases he proposes that will raise $3 billion.
Garcia’s plan references the fact that 74 percent of Arizona corporations pay less than $50 in income tax. AZ Schools Now, a lobbying coalition, references the same figure and proposes a minimum corporate income tax of $500 a year. It’s a terrible idea. Corporations that pay no income tax are, in large part, startups or dormant.
Garcia doesn’t explicitly endorse the $500 minimum corporate income tax. But, according to AZ Schools Now, it would only raise $17 million a year.
Loading...
That misspelling of Steve Farley’s name was a typo. Not a negative slight.
Loading...
I agree, they should get specific, but you know why they won’t. Dirty money will come at them.
Can you show some examples from GOP candidates giving specific details of their tax plans?
Because this seems to be how both sides play the game now.
FYI, it’s good that you corrected the name thing, but no one really cares about being the spelling police, it’s not like this is Trump’s Twitter account.
Loading...
Ducey has a very specific plan and he will be their opponent.
Loading...
Senator, you didn’t answer FSNT’s question. Here it is again:
“Can you show some examples from GOP candidates giving specific details of their tax plans?” Just saying Ducey has a very specific plan won’t cut it.
Senator Artful (sans art) Dodger.
Loading...
See reply above in main thread.
Loading...
The number one obscenity, corporate and individual tax credits for “donations” to private tuition organizations. Thats pretty specific. And its big money.
Loading...
While not insignificant, I would not call it big money. Looking at the last DOR report it appears to be about $120 million but I may have missed something.
If Dems claim to want to get Arizona out of the near-last or last place slot in ed funding, you need to find about a billion dollars in new revenue, as a start. I hope that that challenge is addressed at the debate and if sales tax increases or exemptions are mentioned, someone points out that regressive taxation is not liked among Ds.
Loading...
Rob Robb is an apologist for the Ducey administration. I don’t take anything he says seriously. For example, closing the sales tax loopholes would raise $13.7 BILLION, not the incorrect $13 million that Robb cites. For a more informed article I refer you to the Arizona Republic article “Fact Check: Farley right on revenue lost from tax exemptions” at https://goo.gl/NT11mK
Ducey has laid out very specific school spending numbers, supported continuing the Prop 301 tax and has a very specific new tax plan – none. I thiink that covers all bases, even though you probably disagree. How much more specific can you get?
Reply to Wileybud
The tax plan is “none”.
In Republican land, schools and roads and police and courts and all the things that make America great are FREE!
Hooray!
Good lord but you’re a simpleton.
The issue is not your distain for Republican politics but the lack of specificity that your candidates have. Aren’t you embarrassed by the scam they are perpetrating on the voters. At the forum, Farley said he would cut $3 billion in credits but he us not giving us a list. The four inch pipe line is old hat.
You really need to start thinking things through, and stop throwing stones jn your glass house.
I’m interested, and I’m interested in the scam your party is perpetuating on all of us.
Dirty money is not my friend, and you support dirty money.
You support pre-emptive laws to block cities from enacting the will of the people.
You give $900,000.00 bonuses to your corporate owners.
You support racist laws that tear apart families.
Your high horse is more like one of those 25¢ rides they used to have in front of shopping malls.
And a grown man on a kids ride just looks foolish.
Will somebody please ask what specific “tax loopholes” each plans to eliminate and how much each will bring into the general fund.
Rob Robb of the Arizona Republic recently commented on the lack of specificity in the Dems plans, specifically Garcia’s and Fasarley’s. Some exerpts of Robb’s column follow:
THE SALES TAX LOOPHOLE IS NONSENSE
In his press release, Garcia referred to “over $13 billion in corporate taxes that go uncollected every year due to give aways, carve outs and credits.” That’s a reference to a tax expenditure report produced by the Arizona Department of Revenue.
Of the total, nearly 90 percent are statutory exemptions to the state sales tax. But, contrary to spin, these exemptions aren’t loopholes. They are overwhelmingly designed to limit the sales tax to its intended incidence, a tax on the final sale of a retail good. In fact, the major exemptions for retail goods are for food and drugs.
To get any real money requires a fundamental change in the nature of the sales tax. To extend it to services or to make it like a value-added tax, levied at each stage of production. I’m in favor of both. But it ain’t closing loopholes.
GARCIA’S PLAN LACKS SPECIFICS
In any event, Garcia’s plan only identifies four loopholes to be closed: horse vitamins, 4-inch pipes, the lease of private jets, and the sale of fine art to out-of-state purchasers. And what would closing these “loopholes” raise? A whopping $13 million.
His primary opponent, state Sen. Steve Farley, plays the same game. Farley has claimed that closing sales tax “loopholes” could raise $2 billion. In a recent tweet he upped the ante to $3 billion. But here’s what I think is a very safe bet: Between now and the election, Farley will not produce a list of specific sales tax increases he proposes that will raise $3 billion.
Garcia’s plan references the fact that 74 percent of Arizona corporations pay less than $50 in income tax. AZ Schools Now, a lobbying coalition, references the same figure and proposes a minimum corporate income tax of $500 a year. It’s a terrible idea. Corporations that pay no income tax are, in large part, startups or dormant.
Garcia doesn’t explicitly endorse the $500 minimum corporate income tax. But, according to AZ Schools Now, it would only raise $17 million a year.
That misspelling of Steve Farley’s name was a typo. Not a negative slight.
I agree, they should get specific, but you know why they won’t. Dirty money will come at them.
Can you show some examples from GOP candidates giving specific details of their tax plans?
Because this seems to be how both sides play the game now.
FYI, it’s good that you corrected the name thing, but no one really cares about being the spelling police, it’s not like this is Trump’s Twitter account.
Ducey has a very specific plan and he will be their opponent.
Senator, you didn’t answer FSNT’s question. Here it is again:
“Can you show some examples from GOP candidates giving specific details of their tax plans?” Just saying Ducey has a very specific plan won’t cut it.
Senator Artful (sans art) Dodger.
See reply above in main thread.
The number one obscenity, corporate and individual tax credits for “donations” to private tuition organizations. Thats pretty specific. And its big money.
While not insignificant, I would not call it big money. Looking at the last DOR report it appears to be about $120 million but I may have missed something.
If Dems claim to want to get Arizona out of the near-last or last place slot in ed funding, you need to find about a billion dollars in new revenue, as a start. I hope that that challenge is addressed at the debate and if sales tax increases or exemptions are mentioned, someone points out that regressive taxation is not liked among Ds.
Rob Robb is an apologist for the Ducey administration. I don’t take anything he says seriously. For example, closing the sales tax loopholes would raise $13.7 BILLION, not the incorrect $13 million that Robb cites. For a more informed article I refer you to the Arizona Republic article “Fact Check: Farley right on revenue lost from tax exemptions” at https://goo.gl/NT11mK