Your Economy (No Politics)

[al44]

Slimy Gavin Newscum reneges on promise not to raise taxes to cover his state’s multi-billion dollar deficit

By Olivia Murray

The ease and “fortuitousness” by which birth names evolve into perfectly descriptive and denigrative monikers seems like a God-has-a-sense-of-humor moment—a slimy-looking man that screams “greasy salesman” just happens to have a last name that can easily accommodate the word “scum” into it? Providence, no?

And, there are few things slimier and scummier than taking an oath of office to represent the people, making promises to act in their best interest, and then reneging on them—but that’s just who Gavin Newscum is.

From Susannah Luthi report at The Washington Free Beacon:

Earlier this month, the governor repeatedly pledged he would not raise taxes to solve the budget crisis—which comes just two years after he boasted a nearly $100 billion surplus—telling reporters that ‘the answer is no,’ should Democratic lawmakers bring him tax hike proposals, and that ‘there’s only so many times I can say no to the tax question.’

‘I don’t see there’s real evidence and need right now to increase general taxes … in this state and put more burden on working folks and our competitive posture’ he told one reporter who asked him if tax hikes were an ‘absolute nonstarter’ for him.

Yet, as Luthi also reports, “buried” in Newscum’s new budget proposal are $18 billion in “temporary tax hikes” for the California businesses still hanging on—over the past few years, a significant portion of the state’s businesses were forced into insolvency by government “pandemic” mandates, taxes, and crime, while many others fled the state altogether—but by “temporary” we know that actually means... permanent. From Luthi:

Newsom unveiled his budget proposal on May 10, and the tax policy details the following week. The proposal would, for the next three years, bar businesses earning $1 million or more from deducting operating losses from their taxes while also limiting business tax credits. The provisions are projected to cost California businesses about $18 billion through 2027, although they wouldn’t take effect if tax collections beat expectations. Such a scenario appears unlikely, however, given that California’s tax revenues are massively down thanks to a stagnating economy and exodus of both high-earning residents and businesses.

Now, while Newsom was making promises not to increase taxes (California already has the highest state income tax in the nation), he was spending billions—so it should have been known at the outset that his promises were empty, because from where else would the cash to cover the nearly seventy-billion-dollar deficit come? Sure, money doesn’t grow on trees, but it (metaphorically) whizzes out of Federal Reserve printers—yet that requires the federal Congress to pass another spending bill, with a way to get enough of those handouts into California’s coffers.

What else besides a deficit would come from in-the-hole spending? Does a government spending program ever accomplish what it was supposed to and then close up shop? Not remotely. Has the financial security of the nation increased or decreased as the size and scope of the government has grown? Obviously a rhetorical question.

Of course, Newscum’s cronies haven’t conceded that the “suspension of established tax credits and net operating loss deductions” equates to tax hikes; instead, they’re selling the idea that businesses would pay more to the tax man as measures “designed to protect small businesses” in the state—please for the love of all that is good, just don’t.

“Ask not for whom the [tax] bell tolls; it tolls for thee.”

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2024/05/slimy_gavin_newscum_reneges_on_promise_not_to_raise_taxes_to_cover_his_state_s_multi_billion_dollar_deficit.html