If Democrats Really Want to See Wages Increase....

Every good New Hampshire Democrat knows that the best way to have an immediate impact on jobs and the economy is to increase the cost of doing business.  Making it cost more to run a business acts like a tax on the business owner, and Democrats love taxing business.

Enter HB127, An act relative to the state hourly minimum rate.

Rep Tim Horrigan and admitted socialist Peter Sullivan (New Hampshire Democrats), are unsatisfied with the machinations of the Federal government in the value of labor relative to the task at hand and are certain that they know better, not just than their Federal master in D.C., but better than every employer and employee in the entire Granite State, what any hour of labor is (at minimum) worth.

This is an annual affair and every year we have to revisit why Democrats trying to raise the hourly rate is actually a tax on the business owner who must absorb that expense by reducing other costs or by raising prices-passing the labor tax on to you.

If you'd like a nuts and bolts math-based explanation, go here.  NHI contributor Rick Barnes has composed an excellent article that explains the costs of meddling with the cost of labor.

Or, we can go with my observations on Jan 1st, 2011 when Democrat Mike Brunelle proposed a minimum wage increase.

Take 2011-H-0239-R for example.  Mr. Brunelle would like to raise the minimum wage.  But this is a hollow populist act with a real world consequence.  It reduces opportunities for unskilled or under-skilled workers seeking or trying to retain entry level positions.  It adds to the cost of goods and services.  And it increases joblessness, which is a cost borne by taxpayers through unemployment benefits and the loss of economic activity.

How about this for a narrative.  New Hampshire Democrats want to raise the minimum wage to help offset rising electric rates resulting from Democrats forcing RGGI on electricity generators?

Ha!

All you need to know is that when Democrats meddle in the market everyone suffers and the opposite happens.  Every time.

Raising the minimum wage above the current Federal rate will do exactly the opposite of that which Democrats claim for raising it.  Instead of making more take home pay many employees will simply work fewer hours, pay higher prices, or have a harder time even getting a job.

Raising the minimum wage will make it more difficult or teenagers and under-skilled workers to get work.  Learn-while-you earn begins to lose it's value when the State forces employers to pay more for entry level jobs. Where the employers had previously been willing to use their own money to train new entrants to the workforce, artificially inflating the value of that labor makes doing so less cost effective.   It is more cost effective to look for and hire more experienced, older workers, who will take less time to train, mitigating costs associated with a longer learning curve.

And isn't this just the best time ever to make it harder to find work?

Artificially increased labor costs will appear in the cost of goods and services detracting from the point of raising wages while reducing commerce and--ironically--generating less tax revenue for Democrats in Concord.

What?  Oh yeah.  All the factors Democrats rely on for revenue will be negatively affected by forcing labor costs up.

If Democrats really want to do something to increase wages might I suggest that they simply cut business taxes instead?

Over time business owners will use that savings to grow their business and it can attract new businesses and more jobs.  Employers can use tax savings to offer more products or services that attract more customers.  More customers allows them to hire more people.  Greater demand on the labor pool pushes wages higher all on its own.  Entry-level wage rates will go up all by themselves--with the employer still paying freight for teaching job skills when needed.  Existing employees will find themselves getting raises sooner or more often.   Employers will have the option of providing better wages and benefits to those qualified to earn them.  And all while keeping prices stable or possibly driving them lower due to increased competition, all of which will...eventually bring in more revenue to Concord.

Raising the minimum wage will attract fewer new businesses, reduce job opportunities, retard expansion, limit choices, decrease hours, lower benefits, leave youth and unskilled workers unemployed, stagnate the labor pool, increase the welfare burden, increase the cost of goods and services, increase the cost of living, and result in less revenue in Concord, requiring them to insist on rising taxes.

Is that why Democrats like the idea so much?

 H/T Richard Barnes NH Insider

You are reading  "If Democrats Really Want to See Wages Increase…"   by  Steve Mac Donald originally posted at GraniteGrok.com (Home)

Steve has been recognized as the Americans For Prosperity Blogger of the month for December 2012

NH TEA Party Republicans Better At Revenue & Spending Estimates Than Democrats…Again!

I know… New Hampshire Democrats were losing sleep in hopes of some politically-beneficial revenue numbers, and guess what?  They were politically beneficial….To TEA Party Republicans.

The Union Leader is reporting that New Hampshire state revenues were slightly above estimates in July, with solid performances that suggest we are budgeting wisely so that the working families and small business owners in New Hampshire can continuing to drag us out of the economic quick sand in which Democrat tax and spend polices have had us trapped.

So How well did the TEA Party Republicans manage your money for July 2012?

A few highlights from the Article by Gary Rano…  

• • Business taxes returned $17.9 million, $2.7 million than budget writers anticipated and $2.8 million more than a year ago.
  • The rooms and meals tax produced $23.3 million in July, $2.4 million ahead of plan and $2.2 million more than a year ago.
  • The Department of Revenue Administration attributed the good results to an improved economy and good weather in June.
  • The tobacco tax was slightly ahead of target, producing $19.2 million in July, while liquor revenue also was about what was anticipated, returning $12.1 million. Also, the communications tax was on target returning $7.2 million for the month.
  • The real estate transfer tax is beginning to rebound after years of dismal returns. In July, the tax produced $8.5 million, 13.3 percent ahead of estimates and about $1 million more than a year ago.
  • Below estimates for the month were the securities, utility consumption, beer and gaming taxes. The only levy to produce less than it did a year ago was the beer tax, down $100,000 on returns of $1.3 million.

Numbers coming in slightly above plan.  The tax base building slowly without new taxes and fees.  None of that constant left-wing fiscal crisis.  (No 800 million dollar deficits.) Just another great reason to make sure Republicans continue as the responsible stewards of your tax dollars.  Yeah, Democrats will hate this so it must be a good thing.

Image Credit- Squawkfox.com

You are reading "NH TEA Party Republicans...Better at Spending & Revenue Estimates...Again!"  by Steve Mac Donald originally posted at GraniteGrok.com (Home)

About That “No Tax Pledge” Candidate Hassan…

It’s a well regarded fact that Democrat Candidate Maggie “The Red” Hassan, early in her candidacy for Governor of New Hampshire, took a Pledge to veto any sales or Income tax.  This is something of an election year tradition.  Democrats who have been trying to raise old taxes or pass new taxes for years find the odds of achieving the states highest office against them if they don’t pay lip service to “The Pledge.”

Governor Shaheen fell off the horse and eventually passed the state wide education funding tax.  Governor Lynch signed the pledge then later signed off on RGGI, a regressive broad based tax that actually outsourced taxing power to an unelected out of state board.  And now Maggie Hassan has stated repeatedly that she has taken the same pledge, but has she?

To her credit, Hassan’s opponent, Democrat Jackie “Tax and Spend Us” Cilley is standing firm on her Democrat roots–eager flying tax monkeys in tow.  She’ll sign a broad based tax, any tax actually, given her legislative record.  But Hassan is ignoring her radial left wing history and hoping everyone will just take her word for it.  And she’s talking it up everywhere she goes.

WMUR Political Scoop.

“I will pledge to veto any sales or income tax and commit to a balanced budget that invests in our priorities.”

Concord Fishwrapper. (If you happen to hate fish.)

In the first debate between the Democratic contenders vying to replace Gov. John Lynch, former state senator Maggie Hassan yesterday cast herself as a candidate closely aligned with the four-term governor as she vowed to veto any proposal for an income or sales tax.

(emphasis mine.)

Conway Daily Sun

“As governor, I will make sure state government spends taxpayer money on the right priorities, and I will balance the budget without an income or a sales tax,” she added.

And How about YouTube.

That’s a lot of “pledging” but according to the Coalition of New Hampshire Taxpayers, they have no record of Hassan signing the official ‘Pledge” to veto any Sales or Income tax.  And if you wander off the beaten path you’ll discover that this is not news to the Hassan of Cilley campaigns waging war for the nomination and doing it over tax policy.

Down with Tyranny (blog)

Joining the SEIU, the state’s largest safety forces unions (New England Police Benevolent Association and the Professional Fire Fighters of New Hampshire) endorsed her over “No Labels”/EMILY’s List ConservaDem Maggie Hassan.

One of the things we don’t like so much about Hassan– and feel disqualifies her for the Governor’s job– was her willingness to sign a right-wing tax pledge. (emphasis mine.)

But when you get to the comments of this same post we learn that…

Hassan didn’t sign the Norquist pledge, but she took the NH Republican pledge. She took the Thomson/Loeb veto a state income/sales tax pledge.

So Hassan has not signed ‘The Pledge.”  She has signed a pledge.

That means that Maggie Hassan, if ever she achieves the office, will probably sign the first broad based tax to come her way.   It’s probably on her bucket list.  Given her record, there is no way she would ever turn up the opportunity, no matter what she has said.

Smokes and Mirrors – What’s Up With Tobacco Taxes?

by Steve MacDonald

All across the the Granite State Democrats have gathered in their secret underground lairs.  The unthinkable has happened.  Tobacco revenues were up last month.   (Audible Gasp!).  That’s right.  Revenues beat estimates.

This is, of course, a double edged sword for the liberal left.   When their grotesque estimates (overall) were forever coming in under target, how many times did they say, “it’s just one month, wait and see.  Give it time, they’ll come around.  We’re not that far off.” No such quarter for Republicans. ( Typical hypocrats.)   At the ugly end of the 2007 to 2010 Democrat “experiment” they were off by about a billion dollars which might suggest they have no clue what they are doing.

But when the Republican’s estimated revenues for their budget the Democrats cried and whined anyway as if they were suddenly experts; the religious left even gathered to pray for more spending.  I’m not kidding.  They prayed for more spending.  The left claimed repeatedly that Republican estimates were purposefully low to punish people.  That is what the left said.

But the overall estimates are close.  Very close.  This means the Democrats were wrong about Republicans underestimating revenue on purpose, which means they were themselves wrong about estimates again (no surprise there).  With revenue nearly in line with spending, bitching about it makes them look petty and just reminds everyone what wretched stewards they were of our tax dollars.

So left hanging without an economic axe to grind they have bet their rhetorical money on the cigarette tax cut.  But they may have lost that bet as well.

In February tobacco revenue was reported to be $900,000.00 over projections.  In April, it was above projection by close to a million.  (That’s $1,000,000.00).  In between tobacco revenues were down.  Lottery, gaming, liquor and beer, over the entire budget cycle, are all below protections.  Sales on all these items are down across the board.  It’s not just tobacco.  The message from the secret lair however is that the tobacco tax cut was irresponsible, but given the economic climate (created by Democrats, by the way), and the poor overall performance in the sin tax sector, tobacco revenue is actually doing fairly well.

Would the Democrats like to now argue that cheaper cigarettes are costing us tax revenue in beer, liquor, lottery and gambling receipts?

“Yes, we see a pattern where, during these economically depressed times, people are flocking to higher tax states to get as little for their dwindling dollars as they can.”

How about “they are doing what people always do when they have less money”–doing with less.  Oh, sorry.  We’re talking to Democrats.  When they have less they always spend more, or tax more, and then more, and more, and more.   But outside the liberal ghetto of the left wing mind real people have to make sacrifices and driving to New Hampshire to save a few bucks might not be cost effective right now.  Why?  How about gas prices?   Perhaps our current energy policy and a weak dollar have made the cost of traveling to and from New Hampshire to save a few bucks untenable.  (See, I told you we should have lowered the gas tax.)

Let me save you some time.  Democrats don’t care.  They’ve got talking points to talk about.  Dwindling tobacco taxes are killing unwed mothers and fatherless children and old people with brain disorders.  No answers, no past experience to run on, just scare tactics.

When was the last time a New Hampshire Democrat lowered a tax or spent less on government?  How about never.  To a Democrat balancing spending with revenue is the equivalent of fiscal hate speech.  Government can never get smaller, those bureaucrats and their unions finance their campaigns and vote for them.  They need that money and those votes, so screw you.  And for four years they did.  Hard.  And no amount of Tobacco taxes (which they raised several times) would have ever covered up the gross fiction of left wing revenue estimation, a felonious event they continue to perpetrate even when out of power.

But undeniable truths will not be silenced. Democrats were wrong about revenue estimates when they were in power,  Governor Lynch was wrong as usual with his budget, and if the Democrats were still in power now they’d be wrong to the tune of a few hundred million more, heaped onto the backs of people who clearly do not have extra money for liquor, beer and cigarettes, and would have even less under the yoke of the Democrats ever rising tax burden and grow government first agenda.

New Hampshire Republicans took a very bold and responsible approach to the budget, one that people are clamoring to see in Washington.   They provided relief on a dead end tax that disproportionally hits lower income earners but at least presents an opportunity to stimulate other forms of commerce, something no tax increase will ever do.  The Republicans estimated revenues in a way that avoided putting additional state tax pressures on small businesses and struggling citizens, while removing others.  And then only spent what they thought they’d have.  So far that’s worked out pretty well, and Democrats hate that.

We cant overcome the Democrats failed economic policy and disastrous energy policy agenda overnight.  New Hampshire can’t drill for its own oil.  So we have to do the best we can until we can do better.  And we are doing better.  And Democrats hate that.

And while the progressives would like to see gas prices come down for their buddy Obama, odds are very good that this price signal could encourage people from outside the state to use those savings to save even more on cross border sales of cigarette’s, beer, liquor, and lottery tickets, and Democrats don’t want to see Republicans proved right.

If the tobacco revenues eventually come it at or above projection, at the end of this fiscal experiment, all the left will have left is that $72,000.00  dollar taxpayer funded luxury remodel of the bathroom next to former Democrat House speaker Terie Norelli’s office (in the middle of the worst recession in history™ ), and another chapter in New Hampshire politics where they were completely wrong about the budget–again!

Let the New Hampshire Democrats scream at the darkness.  Everyone else, feel free to ask for a light.

You are reading "Smokes and Mirrors - What's up with Tobacco Taxes?"  by Steve Mac Donald originally posted at GraniteGrok.com.(Home)