Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

LovingA2andMI

(7,006 posts)
3. Now, back to this supposed "weird" reply button incident Purveyor claimed existed....
Sun Jul 27, 2014, 05:12 PM
Jul 2014

Originally, line 3 of the bottom text stated "Follow Our Facebook Page Here". The Here was in bold text and contained a link to the Facebook page in it. There is no way what so ever we could change the reply HTML coding of this page as we are not the webmasters.

Moving on, we have changed line 3 of the bottom text to reference the entire FB page link.

Now Purveyor, are you still having your claimed issue?

Also, yes, Proposal 1 is indeed a Tax Shift to Michigan's Middle and Lower Class residents. The Usage tax is problem one as it will not go through any appropriations process where lawmakers can be held accountable by voters. Instead, the Governor in office at the time, will appoint individuals to a committee for deciding HOW the usage tax revenue is split among Michigan municipalities.

Furthermore C and S Corporations did receive a Tax Cut on Business Revenue (income) in 2011. In fact, we (the residents not owning a C or S Corp) in Michigan, pay their taxes now. Remember the tax hike to Seniors, cuts to the charitable givings credit and so forth and so on...

It boggles the mind how after learning the facts, anyone could vote for this "adhock" proposal. Also, why was the Proposal included in a Primary Election (where the turn out is normally less) than a General Election less than four months later, when the voter turnout is historically much larger?

Yes, there are many problems with Proposal 1 of 2014.

Latest Discussions»Region Forums»Michigan»Michigan's Proposal 1 of ...»Reply #3