Page 4 - Dinuba Sentinel 1-4-18 E-edition

Opinion
A4 | Thursday, January 4, 2018
In My Opinion
California legislation is l Ei k e e T w i l i g h t Z o n e
arly January in California infrastructure.
often means—as the Problem with that is announcer used to warn us that we were already
he top New Year’s resolution going to start a Dr. people have for 2018 is the Oz 21-day fix. It same as most years, to get means removing
And while Noem was complaining about government taxes, the family ranch has collected
over $3.7 million in taxpayer funded farm subsidies since 1995.
Noem attacked the reporting as “fake news,” even though it was based on legal documents she filed herself.
The reality is that the small number of estate tax beneficiaries aren’t farmers at all. They’re mostly wealthy city dwellers.
Still, the fact that the estate tax lives on creates an opportunity to make it better.
Lawmakers should institute a graduated rate structure, so that billionaires pay a higher estate tax rate than families with a “mere” $22 million. And loopholes should be closed so they can’t pay wealth managers to hide their wealth in complicated trusts and offshore tax havens.
Estate tax revenue could be dedicated to something that clearly expands opportunity for everyone else.
Bill Gates Sr. argues that the estate tax should fund “a GI bill for the next generation.” In exchange for military and community service, young adults should be able to get substantial tuition assistance for higher education or vocational training, paid for by a progressive estate tax.
If Congress were concerned about the middle class, that’s the kind of proposal that would become the law of the land.
Chuck Collins directs the Program on Inequality and the Common Good at the Institute for Policy Studies. He’s the author of the recent book Born on Third
Base. Distributed by OtherWords.org.
Fred Hall
paying some of the highest taxes in the country just for that purpose. Bungling and mismanagement meant there was never enough after
Fred Hall - Publisher Keven J. Geaney - Editor
in introducing each episode of The Twilight Zone—there's a signpost
up ahead indicating that we have entered the thresh hold of unintended consequences.
Over the coming months, we
will indeed be coming face to face
with many of the vagaries of poorly researched or miserably written legislation being pronounced upon
us by so called “leaders” of the sixth largest economy in the world. Why should we be upset because they stripped a few more of our rights
away to make those less driven more comfortable? Why should they be saddled with rational thought when
if anything goes wrong, they simply turn to the belabored taxpayer for resolution of their problems. More tax money will solve everything, right?
Anyway, one might keep in mind the fact that this group of people which we sent to Sacramento are imbued with the ability to undercut and downsize our economy until it is small enough— even for them to manage! Their limits on the skill set required to absolutely waste seems, however, to have no bounds.
For those of us who make a living in the private sector, it's absolutely imperative that we look at the downside of every decision in the context of its overall impact. We are forced then to do a risk analysis to determine if the potential damaging offset is worth the risk or is at least controllable.
An example would be our legislature caving into the demands of California's environmental community and requiring that our utility companies use more and more renewable
(more expensive) power sources in the cocktail used to generate our electricity. The result has been the most expensive utility rates in the country. Not the kind of statistic that leads to livability or maintaining a competitive edge.
Unintended consequences would be involved in rising the tax on each gallon of gasoline or diesel consumed in the State of California.
The intended outcome for that gambit was to provide money for the repairs to our crumbling
The Truth Hurts
e struggle to keep our TNew Year's resolutions
ancillary projects stole from the road fund.
Added to the fuel taxes which were added for “cap and trade” and recently renewed as well, this new fuel tax guarantees everything that moves within California's borders is going to cost the consumer more.
Want even more? Small businesses in this state will continue to disappear under the artificial up-ward pressures on the minimum wage which was designed to be an entry level number, not a career! This is a decision far too important than being placed in the hands of folks in Sacramento who have never really run a business or worked for a living in their entire lives.
Making matters worse is that a one figure meets all needs is the fact that $15 has a whole different meaning when one considers existing in San Francisco compared to the Central Valley.
Last but not least would be the City of Coalinga which recently annexed a state hospital to treat sexual deviants. City fathers in Coalinga thought it would be a great idea because it would enhance their tax base. That seemed like a good idea until Governor Jerry Brown decided we needed to expand our voter roles by allowing those same “patients” the right to vote.
During a recent vote on a safety initiative the city came face to face with unintended consequences. A voting block, formed within the facility, cast 137 votes against the tax increase because it “would have increased the cost of their cheeseburgers and the city had failed to sit down with them and negotiate in good faith.”
Unintended consequences of actions by politicians and the system surround us on a daily basis—one does not need to look very far!
But, as always, that's only one man's opinion.
Fred Hall is publisher of the Sentinel
Guest Column
HIelp for struggling millionaires is on the way t isn’t easy being a millionaire these days, repeats constantly.
especially if you’ve got less than $20 million. The only problem, as journalists Fortunately, Congress is watching out for you. recently discovered, is that her family
Yes, the Republican tax cut bonanza targets lower end millionaires for special relief. Now those struggling to scrape by with $15 million or $20 million can breathe more easily. And even lowly billionaires will be able to keep more of their wealth.
Why? Because Congress just increased the amount of wealth exempted by the estate tax, our nation’s only levy on inherited wealth.
In the bad old days, a family had to have $11 million in wealth before they were subject to the tax. This exempted the 99.8 percent of undisciplined taxpayers who, in the words of Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley, had squandered their wealth on “booze, women, and movies.”
Now no family with less than $22 million will pay it (or individuals with less than $10.9 million). This gift to “grateful heirs” will cost $83 billion over the next decade.
Gutting the estate tax is a bad idea — it raises substantial revenue from those with the greatest capacity to pay. Even in a weakened state, it would have raised over $260 billion over the next decade.
The estate tax was established a century ago during the first Gilded Age, a period of grotesque inequality. Champions of establishing a tax on inherited wealth included President Theodore Roosevelt and industrialist Andrew Carnegie, who viewed it as a brake on the concentration of wealth and power.
Modern Republicans, however, paint the tyrannical “death tax” as an unfair penalty on small businesses and family farmers. But that’s a myth.
The most vocal champion of estate tax repeal is Rep. Kristi Noem, a South Dakota Republican who became the GOP poster child for farmers touched by the estate tax. House Speaker Paul Ryan appointed her on the tax conference committee to advocate for estate tax repeal because of her compelling story.
Noem says her family was subject to the tax after her father died in a farm accident in 1994, a story she
Chuck Collins
paid the tax only because of a fluke in South Dakota law that was changed in 1995. Her experience has little to do with the federal estate tax, which has been substantially scaled down in recent decades.
healthy. This is usually accomplished by working out more or changing one's diet, or both. Data from Google states that people are most interested in getting healthier by going to the gym.
After getting bombarded with holiday sweets, going to Christmas parties and splurging on family
meals we usually have gained five to 10 pounds. Come January our goal
is to take off that extra weight we
put on. But it's never an easy task. I recommend slowly exercising a little more each week, while at the same time cutting back on the sweets. If you still have sweets remaining at your house I recommend bringing them to work or giving them to someone who isn’t focused on losing weight. If it’s
in the house you might be tempted to take a nibble, which usually turns into a bite and two or three cookies later you’re regretting what you did.
When it comes to exercising some people go all out, starting on Jan. 1. The problem with that is after a week or two most people realize they don’t have time for, or are sick of, working out. I am one of those people. If we gradually increase our work-out routine we won’t feel overwhelmed. Maybe start with a walk and slowly increase to a light jog. If the cold weather deters you, a treadmill might be the answer.
Sometimes a gym can be good, because it forces you to work-out. At home many distractions hamper us from doing our work-out. My wife already started a work-out routine
at home in the morning, but the kids usually end up grabbing her legs while she is trying to follow a work-out video.
To get healthy my wife and I are
Keven J. Geaney
sodas and sweets from our diet, but says you can lose eight to 10 pounds. I for one am willing to try it to lose that extra weight.
Google mentioned getting organized as the second top
New Year’s resolution. I also want to do more of that. I’m usually a very organized person, but have been slacking. I believe being organized helps cut down on wasted time looking for an object. I recently re-organized my book shelf and plan to re-organize my tool bench in the garage. As of
now I can’t even see the bench and my tools are helter-skelter. The other day I spent 10 minutes trying to look for a screwdriver.
Other top New Year’s resolutions by Google are live life to the fullest, learn new hobbies, spend less/save more, travel and read more.
With our kids getting older I would like to travel more and reading is a passion of mine. It is my relax and unwind time.
You can never go wrong with living life to the fullest. Enjoy every precious moment of every day. We never know what will happen tomorrow.
The main trick to making a New Year’s resolution is to be steadfast and determined to follow through with it. Most people don’t stick long with the New Year’s resolutions they make. I for one am guilty of this. Usually by March my resolutions I made are out the window.
Keven J. Geaney is the editor of the Sentinel. He can be reached at editor@thedinubasentinel.com.
Join the discussion
The Dinuba Sentinel welcomes submissions of letters to the editor on topics of local relevance. Word limit is 350.
Letters must include the author’s name, phone number and address for verification. Mail to 145 South L Street, Dinuba, CA, 93618, or e-mail to editor@thedinubasentinel.
com.
Letters will be edited for length, grammar and clarity.
Libelous letters will not be printed.
Guest columns will be considered for publication. Word limit is 650.