
But it's the $4 billion in new fees and taxes that are sure to aggravate everyday New Yorkers, who would be paying more for a host of services:
An "iPod tax" that charges state and local sales tax for "digitally delivered entertainment services" - in other words, that new Beyonce song you download.
State sales tax at movie theaters, sporting events, taxis, buses, limousines and cable and satellite TV and radio.
Costlier driving with the repeal of the 8-cents-per-gallon sales tax cap on motor and diesel motor fuel, plus and increase in the auto rental tax.
Tuition increases at SUNY and CUNY, $620 and $600 a year respectively.
A 50 cent tax on cigars. The current tax is equal to 37% of the wholesale price, or 34 cents a cigar.
No more sales tax break on clothes and shoes worth $110 or less, except during two weeks a year.
Higher taxes on wine, beer and flavored malt beverages. He would also impose an 18% tax on non-nutritional drinks like soda.
The rich would pay more for luxury items through an additional 5% tax imposed on cars costing more than $60,000, aircraft costing more than $500,000, yachts costing at least $200,000 and jewelry and furs costing in excess of $20,000.
In addition, a host of a fees, including those related to motor vehicle licensing and registration, parks and auto insurance, would go up, as would various state-imposed fines.
Brought to you by the state with the town that not only doesn't sleep, but has the city with its own income tax.
Tim, I predict a new wave of outlaws in the Big Apple, particularly among those who've felt free to steal music, anyway.
No kidding! I wonder if they'll try to tax torrents next? I suspect the RIAA will increase their NY monitoring.
Taxes will lead to revolts, Tim. Watch the youth who gotta have their toys get mad.
And when they piss off Amazon, Apple, Zune, and all of the other online content retailers.
Brought to you by the state with the town that not only doesn't sleep, but has the city with its own income tax.
Brought to me by the state whose electorate in a fit of stupidity gave Hillary Clinton a seat in the Senate.
And which appears poised to give Caroline the seat through birthright.
I hope not, it takes more than a name.
But be happy for those on welfare. They will see their, ahem, "income" increase by 10% per year for the next three years.
Yup, over a thirty-percent increase.
New York is currently governed by an amateur. I hope Giuliani runs for governor in 2010.
Hmmm...it's not until I moved from NY to CA that I truly realize NY is taxed like the dickens.
One of the guys that worked for me was our unit tax rep and I was no end of amazed by the taxes New Yorkers paid, federal, state and CITY income taxes. What kind of crap is that?
What kind of crap is that?
I suspect the salaries are sufficiently high that the net pay after taxes are deducted is enough for a good standard of living. When I lived and worked in Manhattan in the 1990s I contributed thousands of dollars to charities each year and was still able to put money aside for savings.
That also depends on where on the scale your income fits as well, I suspect yours was above average.
Still no mention of a millionaire's tax. Sice most of the geniuses on Wall Street who cooked up this mess are in fact New York City millionaires, that would be the most appropriate tax.
But then again, Paterson would need their permission.
New York growth plan, increase taxes...something....more economic growth! To be fair though it's not just New York that feels this way and we might get the chance to try it out federally soon.
New York needs to downsize, its expectations, its standard of living, its population.
Move WEST young men and women. Life is more like life out here as opposed to govt.-as-life.
Hmm. I completely agree with that sentiment. There are two standards of living in NYC - one for bankers and one for the rest of us.
On the one hand city planners are talking about a NYC with 12 million people, but at the same time they are doing nothing to handle the expected surge in population but build luxury condos and high rise office buildings.
There really is a maximum size that the city can't grow beyond, and I think we are already past it.
What we really need to do is start a couple of new "greener" cities from scratch. I guess the midwest is as good a place as any.
There really is a maximum size that the city can't grow beyond, and I think we are already past it.
Sounds like San Francisco...but we are required by city law to have a certain % of the new building be set aside for low income housing.
New York is dense. Public transportation and utilities can only handle so much.
The only people who want a more crowded city are the real estate developers who have dollars signs in their eyes at the prospect.
Also, "affordable" housing set asides are a joke in NYC. You have to be fairly poor to qualify and then when you do qualify you probably can't afford the "affordable" housing. I think it reverts to market rate housing if it is foreclosed upon (not sure). But worst of all there is a huge donut hole between the "affordable" set asides and the market rate housing. So unless you are poor or you are rich, there is nothing out there for you.
True enough...here in SF, it is about the same. Those in the middle are squeezed for every penny.
If it was supposed to make me angry at poor people, it didn't work.
After paying $2 for a can of Pepsi in New York...nothing surprises me.
A people usually get a government it deserves. The people of NY deserve those taxes since they keep voting for the same bunch of idiots election after election!
To all the Dems in New York, California and other liberal strongholds, who wanted to leave the union and us poor folk behind. GOOD LUCK:-)
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |