If that’s true, why does the insurance commissioner get $105,350 a year when she never went to college and does little but go around to functions to shake hands and get her name and face out there for a possible run for higher office, while others do her work for her? I don’t know about her personal life and don’t care to. Is she the exception that proves the rule?

Riiiiight…that’s the same guy who put up a post about holding every legislator who signed the budget accountable for destroying the government. Here’s a money-line from that post:

Any one who voted for this budget abdicated their responsibility as a legislator.

Geezer, basically, it’s not in the talking points, so it ain’t ever going to happen.

Once again, you don’t get it. We don’t like taxes any more than you do. We’re just responsible about balancing what government does with what it costs to do it. And, unlike you, we recognize that private industry is just as likely to screw us, if not more so, as government is.

In short, we’re concerned with tax policy; you folks are obsessed with it.

I didn’t follow your link, Mike, because I’ve been disappointed before — I have no intention of watching you sit at the kitchen table again. But if you’re going to point us at the Laffer Curve, I would suggest you — unlike most Republicans — try to process the fact that it has a peak and TWO slopes descending from it. That is, if you cut taxes too much — as Bush did — you see declining government revenue, just as you see if you increase them too much.

However, that is not what I wanted to address. This is: “Take a look at income and it is directly tied to education and hours worked. It is also tied directly to a stable personal life.”

I know a lot of educated people with very stable personal lives who are struggling, and some have lost jobs. I also know some who are, as someone here said earlier, smart as a “fence post” and are doing quite well. A stable family life might help since it generally helps one avoid alimony and child support, but there are plenty of examples to the contrary out there.

Assuming this is right — which is not a good idea with these guys unless they produce their backup for these numbers in detail — why would you presume that most DE taxpayers are thinking that they have too much government? Much of the political effort over the past few months was to preserve services — it isn’t as though there is a massive groundswell to reduce the size of the police force, or to actually make you cool your heels at the DMV for a couple of hours to get your registration….

But I repeat that I have no confidence in any of these numbers until O’Neill produces backup.

The failed philosophy of the Democratic Party to punish successful people because of jealously only leads to lower productivity.

Delaware does not have a revenue problem. Delaware has a huge spending problem.

For the last twelve years, inflation has been hovering around 2.3-2.4%. Since 1993, government spending in Delaware has increased 6.36% each year.

Bloated government, high tax burdens equal higher tax obligations which disincentivizes productivity and innovation. The latter means fewer jobs and eventually lower revenues.

Let’s stop this vicious cycle and do what Jack Markell said he was going to do – cut government spending. Now is the time to have every government agency submit to performance audits and then its time to cut the fat.

Stop penalizing the hardworking citizens of this state and country.

No matter — Mr. Shallow Bench still keeps providing priceless material to help prove his fundamental stupidity and unfitness for duty in his next office run. And at least for Mr. Shallow Bench, the Internet truism really seems to be True:

On the Internet, everybody knows you’re a jerk.

Hopefully soon, “Delaware Republican Party” will bring up all Mike Protack posts.

And keep referencing Mike Protack, Leader of the Delaware Republican party.

I think someone’s in love.

Taxes punish work and in the end lose revenue.
Read and learn:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124329282377252471.html

The example I used had nothing to do with tax code it has to do with the simple fact if you make more money and pay the same tax rate you will pay more in taxes. Very simple, even for a liberal who always hate anyone else who succeeds.

As for Cassandra, she would have to study to be a moron. You can call me anything you want but you are as smart as a fence post.

The simple fact is liberals will never be happy unless tax rates go up and up and government spending goes up and up.

One simple but low tax rate with minimal deductions will increase revenue. However, liberals are to slow to understand the higher and more complicated taxes are the more the wealthy avoid them or produce less.

Mike Protack

Lacking an automatic inflation index created the AMT fiasco that requires Congress every December to scramble to keep a large number of middle-income tax payers from paying a tax designed for something like 100 very high bracket taxpayers annually when the AMT was first created.