Students in Massachusetts will get free lunch and breakfast at school thanks to a new 4% tax put on people who earn more than $1 million.
We need different terms for people who HAVE a million dollars and people who MAKE a million per year. Lots of people will read this millionaire’s tax and think it will apply to them when they are nearing retirement since they finally have a million dollars after saving all their life.
That’s what the campaign to quash the bill did. That, and tried to convince people that they might have a single multi-million-dollar transaction in their life (like selling a large successful business) and have to pay an extra 4% on it.
Always a push to get the “temporarily embarassed millionaire” to support the reach. “Yeah, yanno. My little lawmowing operation that makes me $20,000 coild sell for over a million and then I’m fucked”
We need different terms for people who HAVE a million dollars and people who MAKE a million per year.
We have them. The first is referred to as “Wealth” or “Worth” and the other is referred to as “Income”. Therefore what Mass instituted is called an Income Tax.
It’s easier to sell a tax hike if you know exactly where it’s going :)
Unless you’re Waukesha, Wisconsin, where they specifically voted to stop giving kids handouts (i.e. free lunch). Because, you know, kids should work for their food or something instead of using their energy to learn.
probably the same people that say abortion is murdering kids…
I mean, cheap labor has to come from somewhere… Where do you find empoverished people to exploit if you don’t force births?
If you add underage labour liberalisation to that, you get a bingo!
I’ll raise you the most voted pre-candidate to president in my country, who said that people should be able to sell their own organs if they want to. (He plans to worsen things for workers in such a way that they would need to.)
Is this guy an ultraliberal moron or a pretend-conservative who says that but thinks abortion and prostitution should be illegal?
Strangely, both.
Of course it is. But you know, kids lives only really matter up until they are born. At that point the kids, their parents and their livelihoods and happiness…all that can fuck right off.
kids just don’t want to work anymore these days. they’re too busy with their avocados and ipad games. meanwhile the child unemployment rates are at historical highs. won’t someone think of the economy?
Waukesha County is by far the most conservative in the state, and has been playing a massive role in destroying our state’s democratic process for a few decades now.
Another fun fact about it is that they’ve been trying for years to glom onto the Lake Michigan watershed, which, geographically, it is not a part of. They want to straight up take our water, which they do not need, in exchange for nothing whatsoever of any real value.
Yeah it’s a cesspool that way.
I live in the mke area and when looking for housing Waukesha was a tempting area because of how much more house you can get for the money, but I just don’t think I can handle living there. Not to mention I want my kids going to schools in a community that gives a shit about kids and their education.
“It’s about time these kids had some skin in the game!”
-Some Republican Somewhere I’m sure.
The descriptor “free” misleads - this is exactly the type of thing taxes were always meant to pay for.
This I have always hated the “FREE STUFF!” talking point and how the mainstream bought it.
I’m not talking about demanding some middle class guy be forced to buy me an Xbox, but rather I’m asking multiple billionaires start paying just a little more in taxes (instead of ya know… constant rebates for “cReAtInG JoBs”) so that little Timmy doesn’t die of untreated pediatric cancer.
It’s not a free lunch. It’s just your taxes going to something you actually benefit from.
No shit. It literally says where the money that pays for it comes from right in the headline.
I think the point of the comment was that in the last few decades the rhetoric has been: “Taxes bad” “Government provides free bus passes to underprivileged people” Always divorcing taxes from their positive effects on society. Maybe they were trying to fight that by directly uniting the fact that the government is just a coordinator, collecting taxes and using it to buy lunches for kids.
“4% tax on millionaires pays for breakfasts and lunches for all school children” unlike the above example, is a sentence that reminds people that taxes are what provides these many positive social benefits they recieve, not “the government”, not “for free”, and that taxes aren’t always “bad”.
Or maybe I’m projecting!
Yeah but le redditor needs to show us how much smarts he is.
Of course it is free for the children.
Which I’m ok with
“Nothing is free. Free isn’t actually a word!”
So you’re implying that people regularly make $1,000,000 in annual income by working? Only about 150,000 people in the US make that much. It’s their money.
Kids don’t pay taxes. It’s a free lunch.
This comment is just an extreme lack of understanding of any tax system there is, which is wild.
Something that is free for one person will necessarily cost money for another. But for the kids, it’s free.
deleted by creator
Ok?
Imagine being this fucking pedantic. This place is legit reddit 2.0 and that’s a bad thing.
This comment is just an extreme lack of understanding of millionaires
Removed by mod
Your first sentence describes your own comment.
Every time you complain, I will post a meme you wouldn’t understand and a comment mocking your boomer ass.
State House News Service, an independently owned news wire, reported that $1 billion of the state’s record $56.2 billion fiscal budget for 2024 came from the state’s new 4% tax on millionaires. Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey signed the budget on Wednesday, making Massachusetts the eighth state to adopt a free school lunch plan since federal free school lunches which started during the COVID-19 pandemic ended.
COVID response is wild because for like 2 years we had a robust expansion of both direct government aid and healthcare coverage and accessibility, and the poof most of it disappeared. Like we literally had free healthcare at point of service for one disease which is crazy.
Great to see that at least some states responding to the demand for these heightened services. We should be pointing towards the example of COVID aid to show what the government can do if the public pressure is there. If we did it once we can do it again!
As a student who grew up attending Massachusetts public schools, this is fantastic news. Just wish that could have been me!
I used to bring a lot of boxed lunch in most days instead because school lunches were an unnecessary expense, but sometimes I’d buy school lunch if it was one I liked.
I don’t know if this applies everywhere, but my school district at least had a needs-based free lunch (and breakfast) program for those from low income families, but honestly all students deserve to eat a healthy and nutritious meal during school, which I am sure also takes quite a bit of stress off of parents.
The trouble with needs based programs is that students who receive the free lunch then get shamed by other students for being poor. Thus the movement to give the lunch to everyone. The cost per student is fairly low compared to the other expenses of running a school. Plus there are savings resulting from getting rid of the bureaucracy that figures out who is needy enough to get a free lunch, getting rid of the payment collection operation, etc, that partly offset the cost of the additional free lunches.
It depends on how you manage it. We had a system where parents could pay up front for your lunches, and students using that system got their lunches the same way the needs-based students did - the lunch lady just checked their name off the list for the day. You could guess at who had which, probably, but there was no way to confirm it.
That being said, you’re right about the bureaucracy and I’m all in favor of free lunches for all students regardless of their parents’ income.
Then, idk, sell the lunch program on a semester-by-semester basis and offer subsidies for students who can’t afford it? It isn’t rocket science.
You’re right that it isn’t rocket science, but you are still making it more complicated than it needs to be.
The solution is like how the kids are now getting ot for free in that state because of the new tax.
Ok, but why not just not? Just feed the damn kids and quit worrying that someone somewhere is getting something they could live without.
Cool, but you know who isn’t getting a free lunch now? Those millionaires who worked so hard for that money. What have those kids done to earn theirs?
/s, to be clear. I wish these cool places to live (e.g, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Michigan) weren’t so fucking cold. Why can’t there be a nice liberal southern state?
There is. It is California and a 500sqft house cost $1000000000
Uhh, the cold isn’t the problem. It’s too expensive to live here and the real fix for housing (forced upzoning by the State) is a political nonstarter.
But I will gladly shovel snow versus face the heat, humidiity, snakes, bears, tornadoes, severe hurricanes, drought, wild fires, car oriented development, and whatever other nightmares the rest of the country has to offer. Just get a good coat, LL Bean boots, and a snowblower. It’s not that bad.
Removed by mod
I think it’s fair to wonder why policy changes like those are being pushed so late into the presidents term. Seems like primaries and elections drive policy more than anything else.
He’s been pretty busy. The Inflation Reduction Act, the Safer Communities Act, the CHIPS and Science Act, the American Rescue Plan (ARP) and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act is a decent list for the first 2 years in office. A lot isn’t super progressive but it’s unlikely the ideas you’re hearing about now will pass in their most progressive form either. But you have to start pretty far left to get anything even moderately left of center.
And, I know our election cycle makes it seem super late, but we’re like 5/8 of the way into his term. Just a bit over half way. In February it was pretty much half way.
Even smaller stuff like the Respect for Marriage Act. Small thing that got watered down by crazy religious stuff, but hey, it was a start, and bipartisan. We need more people working together.
For what it’s worth, a lot of the stuff the president campaigned on actually got done, which was very impressive.
Also got Justice Jackson through too, who seems to be pretty well grounded.
Yes, you are right!
It is always the go-to for politicians, I see it workong less and less as more people get informed.
But but that’s socialism
Slightly off topic. A lot of public schools already get free meals thanks to federal education dollars. The school lunches are free in my area because of this, even though the (red) state won’t act.
The state has attempted to kill off those dollars in the past.
The GOP is dead set on continuing something called “school lunch debt.” Let that phrase sink in for a moment.
https://www.npr.org/transcripts/1167163106
https://jacobin.com/2023/05/universal-free-school-meals-program-act-lunch-debt-opposition
Let’s fucking goooo!!! I love my home state ❤️. I wish they did this sooner.
Mass is doing so many things right. There’s still a long way to go to get to European standards, but still doing a lot better than most states.
Same! We are lucky to be in one of the best states to live under the current political circumstances.
My home state too! Too bad I can’t afford to live there
Indiana did free meals, then announced kids had to get approved nicknames like Florida…
What are approved nicknames? That’s usually not how nicknames work.
I read an article about it recently. If a student asks to be called by a name other than the one they were registered with (for example, Benjamin asks to be called Ben or William asks to be called Sir Buttface) the school is supposed to inform the parents and get approval. A “side” effect of this is outing trans kids to their parents.
Thanks for explaining. Does sound like the only effect this law has.
Just to clarify for other here. Indiana does not do universal free lunch like Massachusetts. You have to apply for it.
That’s a weird nickname.
Honestly, as a Hoosier, surprised they even went for the free meals.
Good. Now slap a 0 to the end of that 4, and then double it.
Made me curious what the total tax rate would be in Mass. Apparently it has a flat 5% income tax, plus 4% millionaires tax, plus federal rate for income over about 578k is 37%, so altogether it’s 46% for income over a mil in Mass.
Definitely think it should be higher for such wildly high income. Also disappointed to see for being a relatively progressive state Mass has a flat rather than progressive income tax.
Definitely think it should be higher for such wildly high income.
Higher, nothing. There should be a rate above which it’s taxed at 100%. No one needs to be as rich as Musk or Zuckerberg or Bezos.
And no millioneir will keep his money in a state where those are the tax rates. If you make it too high you literally get nothing.
Awww. Too bad for them. What will we do without millionaires hoarding their wealth?!
No, he’s saying they will keep it. Just in a way that mass gets literally nothing
So either they will get a lot of money or things won’t be any different except millionaires won’t be there hoarding wealth?
I’m not seeing a downside yet.
I think they mean the millionaires will find other ways to hoard it to avoid tax levels they won’t stomach. Fair? No. Reality? Probably.
deleted by creator
And yet you guys wonder why millionaires move to Texas. You increase the taxes above a certain number and they’ll take all their wealth, consumption and their taxes to another state.
Taxes should be sustainable. High taxes on rich people aren’t sustainable because they’ll leave taking whatever taxes they pay and whatever consumption they do which contributes to the economy.
As your income increases, your ability to reduce taxable income also increases. The goal of the state is basically to target the lazy.
In other words, “Don’t provide children with free meals.”
I’m pretty sure at an 80% rate the millionaires would just spend the rate moving, out of state or out of country depending on how far reaching it was.
And nothing of value was lost…
Like, oh no, what would a state do without their money hoarding exploiters that alredy contribute less than the bare minimum???
And worse - if everyone decided to make these laws, where will the poor millionaires escape to then???Oh, won’t someone think of the millionaires!!!11
And nothing of value was lost…
Except the taxable income you wanted to tax?
I don’t want to tax, I want to eat.
You mean the money that we already aren’t getting?
That’s exactly how that would go.
why didn’t that happen from 1944 through 1963 when the top marginal tax rate went over 90%?
People found all sorts of loopholes to not pay that. Nobody paid that much taxes.
Nobody paid that much taxes.
Do you have any evidence for that claim, or are you just stating it with certainty because it feels right to you?
Nobody paid 90% of their total income because that’s not how tax brackets work.
So lemmy is just as stupidly socialist communist as reddit… got it…
Because I know how taxes work?
deleted by creator
Then we’d be rid of them at least
[https://www.investmentnews.com/welcome-to-the-millionaires-tax-240997](An overview for those that don’t know anything about this.)
Edit: fixed the link An overview for those that don’t know anything about this.
a 4% surtax on individual earnings above $1 million. This new provision, which comes into effect from Jan. 1, 2023, will be layered over the preexisting 5% state income tax rate.
Heads up, it’s supposed to be text
Thank you, that explains a lot.
It’s like the us is always 20 years behind the rest of the world when it comes to things that actually matter.
I don’t know who said it. But one of my favorite lines about america goes: “America will always do the right thing. After it has tried everything else”
