Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

petepont OP t1_iuavsmu wrote

Copying my comment from the other place I posted this with a summary:

> Harwich Cranberry farmer Leo Cakounes has become the face of opposition to Question 1, the ballot measure that would raise taxes on the state’s highest earners – up from 5 to 9 percent for any income exceeding a million dollars.

>...

>“Question 1 isn’t just a tax on annual salary,” he says. “So when farmers like me sell our family farms or homes, Question 1 would nearly double our taxes, punishing us for our years of hard work”

You may have seen his face on TV or posters. He's been the main person railing against the proposed tax increase on the rich. But....

>But Cakounes is going to do just fine in retirement, whether or not Question 1 passes. A search of Registry of Deeds records across the state reveals the Republican former local politician, sometime radio and podcast host, tour operator, and farmer is sitting on property worth millions, including rental properties in Harwich and Belchertown. He estimates his home and the land on which it sits are worth $3 million.

Color me not surprised at all. The article is also full of fun quotes like

>“Don’t portray me like I’m a friggin’ crybaby because I don’t want to spend 40 grand on a million dollars,” he said. “I couldn’t give a s**t about 40 grand, but this tax is not good for the Commonwealth.”

and

>“I’m not a goddamned slumlord,” he said, then cautioned me. “Don’t blow that off.”

Seems like a nice guy, and exactly the sort of person this tax is supposed to effect

117

SouthShoreSerenade t1_iuay7ve wrote

>“Don’t portray me like I’m a friggin’ crybaby because I don’t want to spend 40 grand on a million dollars,”

If you don't want to be called a clown, don't wear a rainbow wig, a big red nose, long squeaky shoes, and facepaint.

76

bubalusarnee t1_iuck7ik wrote

if one does not like fleas, one should not lay with dogs.

9

LetsPlayCanasta t1_iub40di wrote

Here we go: it's always necessary to belittle and dehumanize these rich cranberry farmers since it makes it easy to rationalize why they should pay more taxes and not you.

−46

SouthShoreSerenade t1_iub43h9 wrote

Lick that boot! Lick that boot! Lick that boot!

40

modernhomeowner t1_iub66ou wrote

The difference is this cranberry farmer did his own work, made his own opportunity for success. Nothing says boot licker more than someone who has to punch the time clock at a business that was someone else's opportunity.

−51

LetsPlayCanasta t1_iub71sl wrote

Yeah, I'm so sick of these high and mighty [checks notes] cranberry farmers.

−34

Ok_Wealth_7711 t1_iubkr5h wrote

The rich are the rich, regardless of your personal perception of their industry.

Having worked as a farmhand, I can confidently say any "farmer" who is making over a million per year is not a farmer themself.

21

LetsPlayCanasta t1_iub3tw5 wrote

>adding that he always treats his tenants well, and charges them below-market rent because he knows working people need housing.

Yeah, what a monster. He built up a business and owns property earned over years. Clearly he must be punished.

−23

tjrad815 t1_iub8628 wrote

Imagine thinking having to pay your fair share in taxes is a punishment

45

LetsPlayCanasta t1_iubdv7w wrote

Everybody in MA pays a flat income tax. How is that not fair to everyone?

−1

tjrad815 t1_iube9ob wrote

A person making $30,000 a year needs to use all of that money just to stay alive. A millionaire also needs to use $30,000 to stay alive, but he has hundreds of thousands of dollars leftover. That excess money should be taxed at a higher rate.

39

LetsPlayCanasta t1_iubfbfh wrote

That $30K taxpayer gets a $4.4 exemption and with a 5% rate has a tax liability of $1280.

The millionaire will pay $49780.

You have no right to tell anyone what they can and cannot keep or what they deserve.

−9

tjrad815 t1_iubfpkl wrote

A bulk of that 30k gets taxed a second time (sales tax). The millionaire's hoarded wealth just sits there.

20

LetsPlayCanasta t1_iubibq3 wrote

It just sits under a mattress, right?

Most of the time, wealth is invested in corporations that provide jobs to people. Or it sits in banks that provide capital that can be used to provide credit (business and personal loans) to people. Or it's in treasury bonds that fund the government.

But, sure, we need to hit them up just one more time.

7

tjrad815 t1_iubim88 wrote

Ah the old trickle down economics theory that hasn't proven to work out for 40 years.

23

LetsPlayCanasta t1_iubjk66 wrote

Yeah, it's funny how we've been beholden to trickle down economics here in Massachusetts until now.

After - who knows how long - with a flat and equal tax on everyone, we're going to reverse this policy.

It worked so well for Maryland: https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703976804575114241782001262

4

tjrad815 t1_iubjsri wrote

Great source there... A 12 year old Opinion article.

11

LetsPlayCanasta t1_iubkw0q wrote

>Well, the state comptroller's office now has the final tax return data for 2008, the first year that the higher tax rates applied. The number of millionaire tax returns fell sharply to 5,529 from 7,898 in 2007, a 30% tumble. The taxes paid by rich filers fell by 22%, and instead of their payments increasing by $106 million, they fell by some $257 million.

Which of the numbers here have spoiled with age?

6

tjrad815 t1_iubmpuo wrote

Which of these numbers came from a news source instead of an Opinion article?

10

LetsPlayCanasta t1_iubnx3n wrote

So I need to track down the actual comptroller office report?

Attacking the source is always the last refuge of these threads.

7

tjrad815 t1_iubpbga wrote

Imagine pretending an Opinion article is a reliable source

7

LetsPlayCanasta t1_iubq40v wrote

These numbers from a comptroller report can't be real because they're being reported from an opinion piece is a hell of a take.

An extremely weak and grasping take.

5

tjrad815 t1_iubquml wrote

Ok... Let's pretend that your source is good. What else happened in 2008 that may have also contributed to a sudden change in people's fortunes? (Here's a hint: it was a national recession)

5

LetsPlayCanasta t1_iubs7ui wrote

Yup, the WSJ article notes the financial crisis. Then there's this:

"One-in-eight millionaires who filed a Maryland tax return in 2007 filed no return in 2008. Some died, but the others presumably changed their state of residence. (Hint to the class warfare crowd: A lot of rich people have two homes.)
A Bank of America Merrill Lynch analysis of federal tax return data on people who migrated from one state to another found that Maryland lost $1 billion of its net tax base in 2008 by residents moving to other states. That’s income that’s now being taxed and is financing services in Virginia, South Carolina and elsewhere."

https://taxfoundation.org/marylands-millionaires-missing-after-income-tax-hike

3

tjrad815 t1_iubtchk wrote

I read Tax Foundation's about page. They have a clear bias against progressive taxes. I'm done engaging with your nonsense.

6

LetsPlayCanasta t1_iubtn52 wrote

Just like every other response: I don't like your totally accurate statistics because it comes from a partisan source.

Believe me, I'm used to it.

3

DBLJ33 t1_iuba7ms wrote

They already pay their fair share. This is asking for more.

−29

The-Shattering-Light t1_iubw4nm wrote

No, they don’t.

Flat taxes aren’t fair and disproportionately hurt low income people.

14

DBLJ33 t1_iud91x9 wrote

Poor people aren’t making over a million so what does this have to do with them.

−4