LETTER TO THE EDITOR:

Time has come for a state income tax

Rob Gardner, North Las Vegas

Monday, Jan. 26, 2009 | 2:05 a.m.

As a teacher in the Clark County School District, I am not pleased with the prospect of a 6 percent salary cut. I imagine that other state workers feel the same.

Why penalize those of us who are already underpaid and doing a good job? Why not implement a 1 percent state income tax, would level the playing field and have all Nevadans contribute toward our state deficit?

Discussion: 18 comments so far…

By KDR81

1/26/09 at 7:29 a.m.

Suggest removal

Mr. Gardner, if you are underpaid raising an income tax and lowering the income of other people is not the way to do it. The state is not facing a large revenue crunch as we're being told. (It is certainly not a deficit - a deficit would imply that we've spent more than we are taking in, the next budget is balanced, for now).

Your underpaid problem rests with the County and the contract with the teacher's union. If you deserve more money you should be given the opportunity to earn it...meaning we need a merit pay system and the means to prove that you are an effective teacher.
By bdover

1/26/09 at 7:31 a.m.

Suggest removal

1 percent becomes 2 percent becomes 3 percent. Gov Arnold in Cali wants to increase to 10%. Just like our sales tax, which we increased in 2003 to get more cops. Now Henderson cops want more Tahoes and such out of a tax increase.. The problem with teachers is that they're used to having a permanent job, like the cops, so they don't mind taxes. Write on the chalkboard 100 times, Mr. Gardner:

Recession or Depression = Flat Broke
By jfnance32

1/26/09 at 8:08 a.m.

Suggest removal

State income tax will not help your problem in this budget. It will take years to admen the state constitution.

Also, having no state income tax is one of the few reasons why businesses move here. I know the state worker does not give a hoot about private jobs.

You should be pushing for an increase in sales tax. That too will harm our economic enginee and result in private layoffs, salary reductions and benefit cutbacks. But the state worker is a protected special class of people that we all need to slave for to make sure they are well taken care of.
By esquared

1/26/09 at 8:27 a.m.

Suggest removal

So KDR81, was the Gov. lying when he said state revenues were down 35%? That sure sounds like a revenue 'crunch' to me. Face it. Nevada has ridden the wave of federal money and gambling revenue as far as it will go. Did you not think that whenever the economy flattened, all that disposable income that is brought into and spent in Vegas would be the first to go? By cheapening the Nevada educational system, gutting the health care system, and yet continuing to play the conservative game of no taxes, this Gov has pushed Nevada to the bottom of the barrel. The businesses that could be drawn into Nevada for all the positives the mountain west has to offer stopped giving Nevada serious consideration a year and a half ago, when it was clear that this state would not adequately fund education and health care. Time to put up or shut up. An income tax is an investment in the future of Nevada. Nevada can no longer afford the short-sightedness of the above commentators. Write on the board a hundred time: No investment=No future.
By esquared

1/26/09 at 8:39 a.m.

Suggest removal

Hey Nance? Why has Wisconsin brought more new employers into their state than Nevada? They have an income tax. AND it's freakin cold there! But, their schools, from an aggressive pre-K to UW Madison, make Nevada schools look third world. Their health care system is light-years better than Nevada. Those 2 strengths equal happier, more contented employees. Your 'pull-up-the-ladder, Jack, 'cuz-I'm-aboard' mentality has Nevada becoming a joke in the business community. All that your Nevada has to offer are boobs and gun fire. The better Nevada is willing to invest in the future.
By Houstonjac

1/26/09 at 8:50 a.m.

Suggest removal

State income tax? California has one . No great budget performance there. Lived there, seen that.
We best hang in there, and wrestle this economic crisis to its end. It will end, and we'll survive. Teacher pay cuts--not good. State income tax--much worse.
By KDR81

1/26/09 at 9:41 a.m.

Suggest removal

State revenues are not down 35%. The governor doesn't know what he's talking about, partially because he's getting bad advise, and partially because governments calculate budgets backwards.

The state is planning on spending $17.3 billion. We will spend $17.5 billion this biennium and we spent $15.9 in the last buget. Do you see a 35% reduction there? (X year - Y year)/Y year is the math formula.

You can only get a 35% reduction in revenue by assuming imaginary revenue increase first.
By KDR81

1/26/09 at 9:45 a.m.

Suggest removal

I should also note that California's more diverse tax system allows them to spend $1,000 per pupil more than Nevada. 43 percent of Nevada's 4th grade students can't read at grade level while 47 percent of California's 4th graders can't read (and that is an improvement from 50% just 2 years ago).
By redferret

1/26/09 at 10:22 a.m.

Suggest removal

KDR,
you just highlight the point that there hasn't been a 35% reduction, so why should all schools receive a 35% reduction. And this is coming from the "education" governor. I agree cuts need to be made, but cutting schooling by that much defies reason.
By jfnance32

1/26/09 at 10:26 a.m.

Suggest removal

esquared:

Wisconsin income per capita is $40,593.

Nevada income per capita is $49,371.

According to http://www.ssti.org/Digest/Tables/013008...

Nevada is ranked 3rd in the measurement of the creation of new companies and the death of existing companies as a share of total firms.

Wisconsin is ranked 44th.

Wisconsin is one of the highest tax states in the union, including having an personal income tax.

Nevada has for many years been number one in population growth rate. This pass year it ranked 8th.

Wisconsin is ranked 36th.

So your Wisconsin vs. Nevada examples fails miserable when used to say Wisconsin is attracting more businesses and wealth over Nevada.

Just an FYI, Wisconsin has major government budget problems even though it has "broad base" taxes and a "diverisified" economy. They are considering to either layoff or cut wages for 60,000 state workers.
By payrolldept

1/26/09 at 12:15 p.m.

Suggest removal

As a NV resident for the better part of 39 years, I'm always dissapointed when NV voters go to the booth and support a tax increase of any sort. I've sat in on meetings to discuss these increases and the only folks supporting are those that have moved here fairly recently from their former high tax state.
They moved here to enjoy the lower cost of living, but they fail to understand what we need to do to maintain that benefit. That, or they think they don't mind paying a bit more, as long as it's less than what they paid in their former state.
I MIND!!
By johnevegas

1/26/09 at 12:21 p.m.

Suggest removal

esquared: "All that your Nevada has to offer are boobs and gun fire."

Even though Nevada republicans are pro-gun, I do not think it is fair to refer to them as "boobs". Misguided? Sure. Blind as a bat? You bet. But boobs? No. I've seen boobs before. They look different, mostly.
By kevjandon

1/26/09 at 1:51 p.m.

Suggest removal

Creating a new revenue source so that more money can be thrown at the problem will not solve anything.

The State and every agency they give money to over spends. Period. Merit pay is the way to go. Pay teacher more who have kids that develop more. Pay gov. workers more whose agencies save money. Sadly the system is set up the other way. Teachers are forced to pass kids that can freakin read and gov. workers are told to spend it all or you loose funding next year. Gov. needs and overhaul.

As for the unions, teachers get screwed and your union sucks. That's why your pay sucks. Become an administrator at CCSD. Their union is where the money is.
By KDR81

1/26/09 at 2:40 p.m.

Suggest removal

A fair question red,

Part of the 35% reduction in higher ed spending comes from what they hopped to spend in the last budget. Some of the cuts are coming from what they actually spent - meaning there are real budget cuts to higher eduction (but its not a 35% reduction in real spending - at least we don't know that yet because we don't have actuals).

The real cuts to higher education are being used to pay for real increases in spending in other areas of government (even though the budget is smaller than what they wanted to spend in 2007).

THere is still no 35% decrease in revenue.
By KDR81

1/26/09 at 3:03 p.m.

Suggest removal

I should also note that Andrew Clinger admitted that the budget "cuts" for the next biennium add in the budget cuts from this current biennium. That means the $472 million in budget cuts for higher education include the $115 million cuts we've already done.
By Brian

1/26/09 at 4:33 p.m.

Suggest removal

jfnance,

I have a teacher friend in Wisconsin who makes $77,777.78 per year. And in Wisconsin, they have a law that teachers must receive a 3.5% raise minimum every year. hmmmmm

Who has it better? Nevada teachers or Wisconsin teachers?
By jfnance32

1/26/09 at 6:58 p.m.

Suggest removal

I guess the taxpayers really get screwed in Wisconsin.
By gmag39

1/26/09 at 7:33 p.m.

Suggest removal

Or, Nance, perhaps they are smarter in cheeseville and VALUE education and actually see the wisdom in investing in their future.
Contrary to your "philosophy" on taxes, they do ocasionally pay dividends!