Thank you for the dollar amounts that I will pass on. In an economy where purchasing a home is a two income plus if you can swing it, this amount of taxes is beyond the straw that breaks the camels back. The federal money came from each of us in Sd besides state taxes. The total upset is what you pointed out are the unnecessary projects and excessive spending without consent of those who are paying for these projects. New all in one building county offices in Sioux Falls and rapid city costing in billions? But the citizens are just leasing this new giant office never owning. Being built by out of state? Very sneaky bad contract that needs to be terminated and those who pushed this fired.
Thank you for showing the dollars. Also, once again, your writing brought up another thought: we got “federal $$”, which is basically from taxpayers is other states. When hearing the debates on the Floors, it’s presented as “this is Federal dollars, so it’s not costing (us) SD.” But yet, which Americans are we taking from for ourselves? Isn’t that just as wrong? And also, what are WE paying for in other states with our tax $$? Are we paying for their overpriced prisons or Soviet looking office buildings?
South Dakota Voices Response: Dan, thank you for joining us.
Email comment from DK: "I ask you what are the educational expenses per pupil in SD? What’s the range per pupil with regard to spending? How much constitutes an extraordinary cost fund measure application?
How much for a 3.99 or less on an ACCCESS 2.0 assessment of ESL skills (Listen, Speak, Read, Write) will be dropped from federal funding to State DOE per student at that or less than that level of ESL? Was $1250 yearly.
I.E. - email Yutzil.Becker at State.SD.US. (Tell Yulie 👋🏼 from Dan) Will FED give $1250 for 3.9 and➖? Like Hutterites?? Is that me now explicitly paying as a SD taxpayer who owes $1250 per ESL (illegal) students spontaneity education?
Should I discriminate against Hutterites, Mennonites, and the Amish because of 1515?
Why my name though? Why my glue stick? Maybe Kari Whipple can tell you more about the “ice effect”, at will, in South Dakota. ♥️
Find my gold standard program and you found all. I still trap mice, moles and all critters and end life with a 🔨 dispatching. No inequities here boys or girls… only.
South Dakota Voices Response: Chris, thank you for the comment. Great points.
Email comment from CP: "I have never seen anyone in government suggest that government workers should endure a wage freeze because revenues are down. Tax revenues decrease because the people's incomes have decreased. It's not just the cost of living has gotten more expensive. Governments need to make do with less just like any small business. They need to lay off workers like any large business does, and then it divides the work done by those laid off among those who are left, requiring the same performance with less."
It is past time for a reset. The government mind set is "if we do not spend what we have this year we will get less next year". That is not just federal it is state bureaucracy thinking also. Make no mistake this contributes to inflation also. The fix is easy. A 100% audit of all agencies that spend all the money they are given. Then for the next ten years a 1% decrease in funds across the board. (Same for minimum wage.) Fewer dollars in the system the more the dollar is worth, the lower the inflation rate, if not deflation. You would not believe the wasteful year end bureaucratic spending that will stop. I have been in the government on and off since 1981 and have seen a lot of this stupid spending just to spend attitude. New furniture because the stuff we have is a year old, new carpets, pictures, electronics, tools, things went really crazy with the ergo craze. But is there money for a vacuum sweeper we could use, or a new file cabinet with drawers that do not fall off the rails, a window shade so the sun is not blinding and glaring off you computer screen to the point you are getting a sun burn? Nope. We need a new door matt with the agency logo for the front door so when the bosses boss stops by they are impressed. What happens is the supervisors with the money hold on to it all year and when you need something now to do your job there is no money, wait for next quarter. The favorite excuse is "that comes out of another fund". But everywhere, in every agency, every year there is all the sudden a rush to spend millions before the next fiscal year starts, and it is always, always the bootlickers that get the toys. All to often those toys, like a case of game controllers that was 'accidentally' ordered, suddenly disappear . . .
Thank you Tom. I am wondering how you feel about making more specific cuts. Many people are saying there are programs that could go without real debate. South Dakota is at full employment so all economic development programs are doing is depressing wages. All the economic development (corporate welfare) at the state, county, and cities could be cut. Cutting those programs would not only reduce taxes, but also improve the quality of life for people in SD. Also, there would be no need for workforce education (which is another taxpayer handout to handpicked corporations) or tax increment financing (increasing taxes for citizens and giving them to corporations) -- hundreds of millions in tax liability for the citizens. Huge problem in Sioux Falls. https://southdakotavoices.substack.com/p/tax-increment-financing-a-freebie Then people are talking about radically reducing the building projects (prisons to office buildings). All this could save billions.
First there is no such thing as corporate welfare. That is just socialist class warfare rhetoric, nothing more than an excuse to dam the very people that make the jobs that the middle class thrives on.
What tax was increased to just hand money to the evil corporation and their heinous job creating ways? By the way writing an article to prove the point you want to prove is not convincing to anyone but the choir.
What on earth is wrong with economic development? What is wrong with having a worker shortage that helps make better wages? Those programs work to increase the tax base. There is an old saying, you cannot make money without spending money is very true here. Give more incentives to bring in more business, they increase the tax base. This is also accountant speak. Accountant's know how to move money in an account and can identify place not to spend. Big deal. All accountants think in one year cycles and none of them understand what it takes to put money in that account.
So lets play your game and cut all the phantom corporate handouts. How long will it be before these evil corporations pack up and move to a state that offers the evil corporations incentives to move to that state, along with those jobs? What is going to happen to the tax base then? What money was saved by pushing away the very institutions that provide jobs and support the tax base?
If there was ever a welfare program that needs to be cut it is the minimum wage.
Corporate welfare - taking money from taxpayers and giving it to corporations. Perhaps you could explain why you believe this is acceptable? If I want a new garage I can't go to the government and ask for a special status that gives me my neighbor's money. Why can corporations do this? For example, in downtown Sioux Falls the taxpayers paid the developer for Cherapa Place tens of millions of dollars to put in a parking garage. The developer got all the benefit and the people around the area got higher taxes. Not sure how this was a win for anyone, but the developer. The same thing is happening wit foreign workers. Companies bring them in and pays them below a living wage and the worker and the families are on subsidizes housing, subsidized food, indigent medical care, etc. Companies pay none of this. Taxpayer does. How is this reasonable or fair?
OK, parking garages, and 'contracts'. First let me emphasize construction contracts are not corporate welfare! OK, giving the benefit of the doubt, perhaps you do not know what a construction contract is. No company is going to come in and just start building you a garage. Nor will they just go in and start build a public parking garage because they wanted to. You see it takes money to build things. No company is going to just build a parking garage for free and then hope to get paid. Still not welfare of any kind. Now, did this developer just decide to build a parking garage or was a contract let out by the city to build one? Since contractors do not have the ability to raise taxes then the contract was let by the city to what ever contractor they wanted. Now for important part, this building costs money, that money comes in the form of a building contract. The money for the contract was raised by the city by what ever means they use. This is simple economics. The contract pays the contractor form materials cost, labor cost money, tools, paint, fuel, electricity, road cones, permits, licenses, site survives, EPA impact studies, engineering, all this cost money. That is part of the construction contract. It is not corporate welfare!! It is a building contract. Yes the construction company makes a profit, they have to to stay in business, and pay insurance, buy equipment, pay taxes and make a profit. they have to make a profit or they are working for free, would you work for free? Even Marxist do not work for free. If this, building contract is what you are calling corporate welfare you are woefully misinformed on the ways of business. Governments go to the people in the form of taxes for construction projects, private citizens go to banks for construction project, simple.
Here is another part of private construction. If you get a loan for a large project on your property, the bank does not just hand you money. They pay the contractors as the building goes. Materials are not paid for until they are delivered. The bank is going to get receipts as construction proceeds, same with materials. The process is not as simple as asking for money. So when the contractor finishes your project and the bank pays the final bill and hands you the loan, did you just give personal corporate welfare?
You keep talking about companies bringing in forgien works. You make it sound like it is by the hundreds of millions, that is not happening. There is also a big divide between illegal and legal worker. Guess what, and I have said this to you before, legal forgien workers have to paid at least minimum wage. The vast majority of illegals live in cities being supported by a lot more welfare than any corporation ever received.
OK, that is three time of explaining that corporate welfare is a construct of Socialism.
Stop with the Marxist evil corporations rhetoric and you will start to understand how corporations make jobs and increase the tax base. As in they pay the money back, if not directly then with an increased tax base.
Increased tax base is also more jobs. What is wrong with that?
Not to mention the fact you never, never, point out that there is difference between a loan and a grant. How much of this evil job creating money is in the form of grants? Why do you hate the very corporations that make this country go?
Perhaps you could explain why having more jobs and a bigger tax base is bad.
There I explained it again.
Then provide a list of the evil mean money grubbing corporations that are getting all this money. Be specific. If you cannot then your point is dogma.
Where is your hate for the welfare that creates the dependence class that produce nothing, provide no jobs and is the same tax payer money hand out?
I don't know anyone at South Dakota Voices that hates businesses. In fact, I believe everyone is very supportive of businesses. The issue is some companies are given taxpayer funded freebees. Perhaps you could explain how what was presented is Marxist (communist). The communist philosophy suggests everyone has the same share regardless of skill, ability, or work ethic. The post is not suggesting that. The post is suggesting that people should not be forced to give their income to a company or to cover expenses that should be fully covered by the company. When citizens are required to do these things their wellbeing decreases and the wellbeing of the corporation increases. Also, sadly, tax increment financing and social programs are grants, not loans.
Now you are trying to back track and change the subject.
What freebees? name them so we can get rid of them or get an explanation as to why they are a benefit. You paint with broad strokes when you say corporate welfare is killing the very people they need to make a profit. What corporations and what benefits?
You used an example of a parking garage as evil corporate welfare just a few lines ago. How terrible it is to just hand out money to corporations for creating a parking ramp out of thin air and expect to be given free money for it and force the poor down trodden tax payers to give them free money. Then did not consider that those projects take money. You said the people were taxed while a corporation got all the benefit without mentioning it was a contract that provided jobs. You made it sound like the evil corporation just installed a parking ramp at no cost to them and then made the surrounding tax payer pay them for nothing. This is the very tenant of Marxist rhetoric and division.
If the citizens do not like the way the current government is doing things then they need to change the people in the government. I have been downtown in Sioux Falls, they desperately needed a parking garage.
Then you hammer all corporations for using unskilled almost unpaid foreigners and make it sound like al businesses are in on it. Again painting with broad strokes that corporations/companies/businesses are all just greed filled monsters that want to kill the very economy that makes them profits and provide jobs sparking class envy. The very tenants of Marxism.
I agree. I have had friends that have worked in government agencies and as it gets towards the end of the fiscal year they are encouraged to spend money otherwise their budget gets cut. Too bad they can't do 5 year budgets and maybe even get incentives to spend less than their budget.
Actually there is usually very little disagreement about the bulk of the money the state, counties and city spend money on. There is, though, a lot of resistance to increasing taxes, and that limits what gets spent. Fees seem to face fewer objections.
For years I attended Appropriations Committee hearings in Pierre. That's where state department heads and the Governor's staff come in and justify to legislators what funds they request in terms of staffing and operational needs. There usually is little public comment regarding these spending figures. Generally, if cuts are proposed, there is lobbying, and the cuts get trimmed down. Legislators may have questions and there may be some minimal adjustments, but mostly the Governor's proposed budget comes through the Legislature pretty much the way it is proposed. Noem, probably the worst Governor in South Dakota history, had a harder time justifying some of her spending priorities. Requests for new spending is looked at more closely, and, since these requests are usually more than can be fulfilled in one fiscal year, some projects get turned down.
Appropiations Commiittees spend a lot of time going over the budget, but at the end of the day, South Dakota government is pretty lean. You may think some things aren't needed or wanted, but I guarantee there are people out there who will come to people and lobby hard if there is too much of a cut to their favorite programs.
I have testified against some water project and solid waste funding when I was a lobbyist. I tell you, most of these funding decisions are baked in far in advance of the legislative session. You have to be on them 52 weeks of the year to have a chance at cutting money from a lot of things you might not want in the budget.
Thanks for sharing your insights again. It is good to know about the long time horizon associated with reducing spending. How specifically do you suggest citizens get involved in that process?
First, government spending doesn't happen for no reason. People see a need or they think life might be better with spending that has been approved. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it has no benefit. So, don't go about it like DOGE, who really don't have a clue about what they are cutting. It costs a lot of money to fire people and then have to rehire them. DOGE is causing massive waste, because whole systems of how government works with business and the public is being messed with. They are cutting positions illegally.That costs everybody more money in the long run. So, become an expert on particular segments of the budget, and look for ways to save money.
I worked in an animal health lab, which had its busy time of year in the late fall through early spring. We sat around a lot during the summer. I suggested that my position be shared with the health lab, which has its busiest time in the summer. Sure, I would have had to be trained for two positions, which might cost a little bit, but I would be kept busy all year. Well, of course, that didn't fly, mostly because of cross department bureaucracy. It wouldn't have saved a lot of money, and I guess it was more hassle to deal with than it was worth. I also suggested combining all the labs into one professional lab. Every department is a fiefdom, and no fiefdom wants to lose a section of its territory.
Thank you for your article. It amazes me how a state such as South Dakota, which is not a state people move to for high paying jobs and a high economy, has SO much tax money. It might be a good idea to consider having a state DOGE. I would like to see ALL the receipts-what organization and what individuals are being paid and for what? For how long?. And why are construction projects being outsourced from out of state such as MN. Are there not reputable and high quality local construction companies that can do the job? Again, SHOW ME THE RECEIPTS IN ALL DEPARTMENTS. They are spending OUR money, not their money and I guarantee that one would uncover fraud, waste, and scandal/corruption.
Good point about transparency. Many people believe we could cut the budget by a huge amount just by cutting the corporate welfare and inefficiencies. Wouldn't it be amazing if we could quickly reduce the budget to 1/4-1/2 of what we are spending now? That means the average family of four would have another $25K per year. Would that do a lot to improve the standard of living in our state?
Exactly. What next HUGE issue is the state education budget? SHOW ME THE RECEIPTS. I believe the state annual education bill was $1.6 billion?. Quality is incredibly low and student performance is no better. So why have costs increased and performance decreased and/or become worse?
That is an excellent point about receipts. It was $1.6 billion/year a few years ago (and only about 30-40% of the kids are at grade level). The amount allocated goes up every year, so I'm sure it is more now. $1.6 billion seems like an unfathomable amount. https://southdakotavoices.substack.com/p/15-billion-a-year-and-kids-still
Yes, I remember that article that you wrote and was shocked and not shocked since nationally kids are doing very poorly, especially in reading, writing and math. It's very sad because I believe it's all been a part of the plan on dumbing down the population in order to exercise more control. If people cannot read, write and solve basic math, they are much easier to control and manipulate. It's very sad. Hopefully, more parents are speaking out and realizing that the family is the engine of education, not the state.
There are more than 4 things in life that I am ok paying taxes on. Education, Police and Fire protection, senior care, help those who are less fortunate. Medical and mental health care, recreation, public lands, the list is abundant. I would like my grandkids to have the same opportunity that my kids and myself had plus some.
We claim to be a Christian community or at least that is what most claim in South Dakota, especially when they do not like those who are not. As Christians we are to share, take care of the needy. The reason that we get taxed for that is if not, very few would.
If all life is about is a road, a drink of water, and place to go to the bathroom, then build outhouses, dig a well, and travel dirt roads. I remember those days as a kid. I am sure some are ok with that again now and do not like paying taxes for those "luxuries" either.
One thing about it, if all we worried about were roads, bridges, water, and out houses, it will certainly keep the population down and probably save Social Security.
Thank you for listing your preferences. I wonder if we could make progress by listing options with a few basic details and letting people voice their funding preferences. Guessing it's likely some items would get very few votes (ie corporate welfare and wage depression, tax incentive financing, large staffs in government offices, etc.)
Some of those NO votes were SD Freedom Caucus members, that are trying to send a message whenever & wherever they can for accountability, transparency, etc...the stimulus monies are coming to an end now, and with DOGE nationally and an emerging different legislative makeup, change is coming. Faster than many thought. Was glad to see the bill for additional monies for prison defeated (by 1 vote!) which put us in the position for a RESET. I attended the prison reset meeting recently, and it was fascinating to see the changes that could be made ( and have been made by volunteers) of recommendations to lower costs for programming, etc..; in fact, at no cost in many cases because of the amazing volunteers and ministerial faith-based involvement testimony of changing hearts and minds for those incarcerated. Yes, a full reset of every area of government is in order to reclaim the banner "under God, the people rule" ( not the Bureaucracy)
Donald Pay made some very good points. Nobody likes to pay tax but we all like the services the government provides, just not the same ones. Try to cut a program and you will find out who that is important for, they will be there to protest. Many years ago I had a boss that told me “no one has ever come to me for a donation for a bad cause. You need to figure out how much you can afford and how you want to divide it up.” That is fine for an individual or business. However, government is different, unfortunately the people that want a government hand and are the least in need have the best lobbyists, so generally they get theirs. It is up to our legislators to see that people’s needs are also met. I don’t like paying tax but we are not overtaxed in SD compared to the rest of the country or the civilized world. The tax people in SD seem to complain the least about is Sales Tax of which when food is included is the most unfair. But we get taxed in small doses unlike property tax that we get hit with a larger number. There is waste in government but no bigger percent wise then our house and probably yours. DOGE is/was a huge mistake for USA!
Why is transparency a mistake? Should people know how their money is being spent? Most people would like to see full disclosure. Not just dirty laundry on one side.
DOGE just chopped, or maybe I should say chainsawed, there was absolutely no transparency what so ever. I certainly agree there should be transparency. Musk’s companies may be the very largest recipient of federal business funds, I would like to see what of those were cut.
Thank you for the dollar amounts that I will pass on. In an economy where purchasing a home is a two income plus if you can swing it, this amount of taxes is beyond the straw that breaks the camels back. The federal money came from each of us in Sd besides state taxes. The total upset is what you pointed out are the unnecessary projects and excessive spending without consent of those who are paying for these projects. New all in one building county offices in Sioux Falls and rapid city costing in billions? But the citizens are just leasing this new giant office never owning. Being built by out of state? Very sneaky bad contract that needs to be terminated and those who pushed this fired.
Thank you for showing the dollars. Also, once again, your writing brought up another thought: we got “federal $$”, which is basically from taxpayers is other states. When hearing the debates on the Floors, it’s presented as “this is Federal dollars, so it’s not costing (us) SD.” But yet, which Americans are we taking from for ourselves? Isn’t that just as wrong? And also, what are WE paying for in other states with our tax $$? Are we paying for their overpriced prisons or Soviet looking office buildings?
South Dakota Voices Response: Dan, thank you for joining us.
Email comment from DK: "I ask you what are the educational expenses per pupil in SD? What’s the range per pupil with regard to spending? How much constitutes an extraordinary cost fund measure application?
How much for a 3.99 or less on an ACCCESS 2.0 assessment of ESL skills (Listen, Speak, Read, Write) will be dropped from federal funding to State DOE per student at that or less than that level of ESL? Was $1250 yearly.
I.E. - email Yutzil.Becker at State.SD.US. (Tell Yulie 👋🏼 from Dan) Will FED give $1250 for 3.9 and➖? Like Hutterites?? Is that me now explicitly paying as a SD taxpayer who owes $1250 per ESL (illegal) students spontaneity education?
Should I discriminate against Hutterites, Mennonites, and the Amish because of 1515?
Why my name though? Why my glue stick? Maybe Kari Whipple can tell you more about the “ice effect”, at will, in South Dakota. ♥️
Find my gold standard program and you found all. I still trap mice, moles and all critters and end life with a 🔨 dispatching. No inequities here boys or girls… only.
South Dakota Voices Response: Chris, thank you for the comment. Great points.
Email comment from CP: "I have never seen anyone in government suggest that government workers should endure a wage freeze because revenues are down. Tax revenues decrease because the people's incomes have decreased. It's not just the cost of living has gotten more expensive. Governments need to make do with less just like any small business. They need to lay off workers like any large business does, and then it divides the work done by those laid off among those who are left, requiring the same performance with less."
It is past time for a reset. The government mind set is "if we do not spend what we have this year we will get less next year". That is not just federal it is state bureaucracy thinking also. Make no mistake this contributes to inflation also. The fix is easy. A 100% audit of all agencies that spend all the money they are given. Then for the next ten years a 1% decrease in funds across the board. (Same for minimum wage.) Fewer dollars in the system the more the dollar is worth, the lower the inflation rate, if not deflation. You would not believe the wasteful year end bureaucratic spending that will stop. I have been in the government on and off since 1981 and have seen a lot of this stupid spending just to spend attitude. New furniture because the stuff we have is a year old, new carpets, pictures, electronics, tools, things went really crazy with the ergo craze. But is there money for a vacuum sweeper we could use, or a new file cabinet with drawers that do not fall off the rails, a window shade so the sun is not blinding and glaring off you computer screen to the point you are getting a sun burn? Nope. We need a new door matt with the agency logo for the front door so when the bosses boss stops by they are impressed. What happens is the supervisors with the money hold on to it all year and when you need something now to do your job there is no money, wait for next quarter. The favorite excuse is "that comes out of another fund". But everywhere, in every agency, every year there is all the sudden a rush to spend millions before the next fiscal year starts, and it is always, always the bootlickers that get the toys. All to often those toys, like a case of game controllers that was 'accidentally' ordered, suddenly disappear . . .
Thank you Tom. I am wondering how you feel about making more specific cuts. Many people are saying there are programs that could go without real debate. South Dakota is at full employment so all economic development programs are doing is depressing wages. All the economic development (corporate welfare) at the state, county, and cities could be cut. Cutting those programs would not only reduce taxes, but also improve the quality of life for people in SD. Also, there would be no need for workforce education (which is another taxpayer handout to handpicked corporations) or tax increment financing (increasing taxes for citizens and giving them to corporations) -- hundreds of millions in tax liability for the citizens. Huge problem in Sioux Falls. https://southdakotavoices.substack.com/p/tax-increment-financing-a-freebie Then people are talking about radically reducing the building projects (prisons to office buildings). All this could save billions.
First there is no such thing as corporate welfare. That is just socialist class warfare rhetoric, nothing more than an excuse to dam the very people that make the jobs that the middle class thrives on.
What tax was increased to just hand money to the evil corporation and their heinous job creating ways? By the way writing an article to prove the point you want to prove is not convincing to anyone but the choir.
What on earth is wrong with economic development? What is wrong with having a worker shortage that helps make better wages? Those programs work to increase the tax base. There is an old saying, you cannot make money without spending money is very true here. Give more incentives to bring in more business, they increase the tax base. This is also accountant speak. Accountant's know how to move money in an account and can identify place not to spend. Big deal. All accountants think in one year cycles and none of them understand what it takes to put money in that account.
So lets play your game and cut all the phantom corporate handouts. How long will it be before these evil corporations pack up and move to a state that offers the evil corporations incentives to move to that state, along with those jobs? What is going to happen to the tax base then? What money was saved by pushing away the very institutions that provide jobs and support the tax base?
If there was ever a welfare program that needs to be cut it is the minimum wage.
Corporate welfare - taking money from taxpayers and giving it to corporations. Perhaps you could explain why you believe this is acceptable? If I want a new garage I can't go to the government and ask for a special status that gives me my neighbor's money. Why can corporations do this? For example, in downtown Sioux Falls the taxpayers paid the developer for Cherapa Place tens of millions of dollars to put in a parking garage. The developer got all the benefit and the people around the area got higher taxes. Not sure how this was a win for anyone, but the developer. The same thing is happening wit foreign workers. Companies bring them in and pays them below a living wage and the worker and the families are on subsidizes housing, subsidized food, indigent medical care, etc. Companies pay none of this. Taxpayer does. How is this reasonable or fair?
OK, parking garages, and 'contracts'. First let me emphasize construction contracts are not corporate welfare! OK, giving the benefit of the doubt, perhaps you do not know what a construction contract is. No company is going to come in and just start building you a garage. Nor will they just go in and start build a public parking garage because they wanted to. You see it takes money to build things. No company is going to just build a parking garage for free and then hope to get paid. Still not welfare of any kind. Now, did this developer just decide to build a parking garage or was a contract let out by the city to build one? Since contractors do not have the ability to raise taxes then the contract was let by the city to what ever contractor they wanted. Now for important part, this building costs money, that money comes in the form of a building contract. The money for the contract was raised by the city by what ever means they use. This is simple economics. The contract pays the contractor form materials cost, labor cost money, tools, paint, fuel, electricity, road cones, permits, licenses, site survives, EPA impact studies, engineering, all this cost money. That is part of the construction contract. It is not corporate welfare!! It is a building contract. Yes the construction company makes a profit, they have to to stay in business, and pay insurance, buy equipment, pay taxes and make a profit. they have to make a profit or they are working for free, would you work for free? Even Marxist do not work for free. If this, building contract is what you are calling corporate welfare you are woefully misinformed on the ways of business. Governments go to the people in the form of taxes for construction projects, private citizens go to banks for construction project, simple.
Here is another part of private construction. If you get a loan for a large project on your property, the bank does not just hand you money. They pay the contractors as the building goes. Materials are not paid for until they are delivered. The bank is going to get receipts as construction proceeds, same with materials. The process is not as simple as asking for money. So when the contractor finishes your project and the bank pays the final bill and hands you the loan, did you just give personal corporate welfare?
You keep talking about companies bringing in forgien works. You make it sound like it is by the hundreds of millions, that is not happening. There is also a big divide between illegal and legal worker. Guess what, and I have said this to you before, legal forgien workers have to paid at least minimum wage. The vast majority of illegals live in cities being supported by a lot more welfare than any corporation ever received.
OK, that is three time of explaining that corporate welfare is a construct of Socialism.
I just did explain it.
Stop with the Marxist evil corporations rhetoric and you will start to understand how corporations make jobs and increase the tax base. As in they pay the money back, if not directly then with an increased tax base.
Increased tax base is also more jobs. What is wrong with that?
Not to mention the fact you never, never, point out that there is difference between a loan and a grant. How much of this evil job creating money is in the form of grants? Why do you hate the very corporations that make this country go?
Perhaps you could explain why having more jobs and a bigger tax base is bad.
There I explained it again.
Then provide a list of the evil mean money grubbing corporations that are getting all this money. Be specific. If you cannot then your point is dogma.
Where is your hate for the welfare that creates the dependence class that produce nothing, provide no jobs and is the same tax payer money hand out?
I don't know anyone at South Dakota Voices that hates businesses. In fact, I believe everyone is very supportive of businesses. The issue is some companies are given taxpayer funded freebees. Perhaps you could explain how what was presented is Marxist (communist). The communist philosophy suggests everyone has the same share regardless of skill, ability, or work ethic. The post is not suggesting that. The post is suggesting that people should not be forced to give their income to a company or to cover expenses that should be fully covered by the company. When citizens are required to do these things their wellbeing decreases and the wellbeing of the corporation increases. Also, sadly, tax increment financing and social programs are grants, not loans.
Now you are trying to back track and change the subject.
What freebees? name them so we can get rid of them or get an explanation as to why they are a benefit. You paint with broad strokes when you say corporate welfare is killing the very people they need to make a profit. What corporations and what benefits?
You used an example of a parking garage as evil corporate welfare just a few lines ago. How terrible it is to just hand out money to corporations for creating a parking ramp out of thin air and expect to be given free money for it and force the poor down trodden tax payers to give them free money. Then did not consider that those projects take money. You said the people were taxed while a corporation got all the benefit without mentioning it was a contract that provided jobs. You made it sound like the evil corporation just installed a parking ramp at no cost to them and then made the surrounding tax payer pay them for nothing. This is the very tenant of Marxist rhetoric and division.
If the citizens do not like the way the current government is doing things then they need to change the people in the government. I have been downtown in Sioux Falls, they desperately needed a parking garage.
Then you hammer all corporations for using unskilled almost unpaid foreigners and make it sound like al businesses are in on it. Again painting with broad strokes that corporations/companies/businesses are all just greed filled monsters that want to kill the very economy that makes them profits and provide jobs sparking class envy. The very tenants of Marxism.
I agree. I have had friends that have worked in government agencies and as it gets towards the end of the fiscal year they are encouraged to spend money otherwise their budget gets cut. Too bad they can't do 5 year budgets and maybe even get incentives to spend less than their budget.
Actually there is usually very little disagreement about the bulk of the money the state, counties and city spend money on. There is, though, a lot of resistance to increasing taxes, and that limits what gets spent. Fees seem to face fewer objections.
For years I attended Appropriations Committee hearings in Pierre. That's where state department heads and the Governor's staff come in and justify to legislators what funds they request in terms of staffing and operational needs. There usually is little public comment regarding these spending figures. Generally, if cuts are proposed, there is lobbying, and the cuts get trimmed down. Legislators may have questions and there may be some minimal adjustments, but mostly the Governor's proposed budget comes through the Legislature pretty much the way it is proposed. Noem, probably the worst Governor in South Dakota history, had a harder time justifying some of her spending priorities. Requests for new spending is looked at more closely, and, since these requests are usually more than can be fulfilled in one fiscal year, some projects get turned down.
Appropiations Commiittees spend a lot of time going over the budget, but at the end of the day, South Dakota government is pretty lean. You may think some things aren't needed or wanted, but I guarantee there are people out there who will come to people and lobby hard if there is too much of a cut to their favorite programs.
I have testified against some water project and solid waste funding when I was a lobbyist. I tell you, most of these funding decisions are baked in far in advance of the legislative session. You have to be on them 52 weeks of the year to have a chance at cutting money from a lot of things you might not want in the budget.
Thanks for sharing your insights again. It is good to know about the long time horizon associated with reducing spending. How specifically do you suggest citizens get involved in that process?
First, government spending doesn't happen for no reason. People see a need or they think life might be better with spending that has been approved. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it has no benefit. So, don't go about it like DOGE, who really don't have a clue about what they are cutting. It costs a lot of money to fire people and then have to rehire them. DOGE is causing massive waste, because whole systems of how government works with business and the public is being messed with. They are cutting positions illegally.That costs everybody more money in the long run. So, become an expert on particular segments of the budget, and look for ways to save money.
I worked in an animal health lab, which had its busy time of year in the late fall through early spring. We sat around a lot during the summer. I suggested that my position be shared with the health lab, which has its busiest time in the summer. Sure, I would have had to be trained for two positions, which might cost a little bit, but I would be kept busy all year. Well, of course, that didn't fly, mostly because of cross department bureaucracy. It wouldn't have saved a lot of money, and I guess it was more hassle to deal with than it was worth. I also suggested combining all the labs into one professional lab. Every department is a fiefdom, and no fiefdom wants to lose a section of its territory.
Thank you for your article. It amazes me how a state such as South Dakota, which is not a state people move to for high paying jobs and a high economy, has SO much tax money. It might be a good idea to consider having a state DOGE. I would like to see ALL the receipts-what organization and what individuals are being paid and for what? For how long?. And why are construction projects being outsourced from out of state such as MN. Are there not reputable and high quality local construction companies that can do the job? Again, SHOW ME THE RECEIPTS IN ALL DEPARTMENTS. They are spending OUR money, not their money and I guarantee that one would uncover fraud, waste, and scandal/corruption.
Good point about transparency. Many people believe we could cut the budget by a huge amount just by cutting the corporate welfare and inefficiencies. Wouldn't it be amazing if we could quickly reduce the budget to 1/4-1/2 of what we are spending now? That means the average family of four would have another $25K per year. Would that do a lot to improve the standard of living in our state?
Exactly. What next HUGE issue is the state education budget? SHOW ME THE RECEIPTS. I believe the state annual education bill was $1.6 billion?. Quality is incredibly low and student performance is no better. So why have costs increased and performance decreased and/or become worse?
That is an excellent point about receipts. It was $1.6 billion/year a few years ago (and only about 30-40% of the kids are at grade level). The amount allocated goes up every year, so I'm sure it is more now. $1.6 billion seems like an unfathomable amount. https://southdakotavoices.substack.com/p/15-billion-a-year-and-kids-still
Yes, I remember that article that you wrote and was shocked and not shocked since nationally kids are doing very poorly, especially in reading, writing and math. It's very sad because I believe it's all been a part of the plan on dumbing down the population in order to exercise more control. If people cannot read, write and solve basic math, they are much easier to control and manipulate. It's very sad. Hopefully, more parents are speaking out and realizing that the family is the engine of education, not the state.
There are more than 4 things in life that I am ok paying taxes on. Education, Police and Fire protection, senior care, help those who are less fortunate. Medical and mental health care, recreation, public lands, the list is abundant. I would like my grandkids to have the same opportunity that my kids and myself had plus some.
We claim to be a Christian community or at least that is what most claim in South Dakota, especially when they do not like those who are not. As Christians we are to share, take care of the needy. The reason that we get taxed for that is if not, very few would.
If all life is about is a road, a drink of water, and place to go to the bathroom, then build outhouses, dig a well, and travel dirt roads. I remember those days as a kid. I am sure some are ok with that again now and do not like paying taxes for those "luxuries" either.
One thing about it, if all we worried about were roads, bridges, water, and out houses, it will certainly keep the population down and probably save Social Security.
Thank you for listing your preferences. I wonder if we could make progress by listing options with a few basic details and letting people voice their funding preferences. Guessing it's likely some items would get very few votes (ie corporate welfare and wage depression, tax incentive financing, large staffs in government offices, etc.)
Some of those NO votes were SD Freedom Caucus members, that are trying to send a message whenever & wherever they can for accountability, transparency, etc...the stimulus monies are coming to an end now, and with DOGE nationally and an emerging different legislative makeup, change is coming. Faster than many thought. Was glad to see the bill for additional monies for prison defeated (by 1 vote!) which put us in the position for a RESET. I attended the prison reset meeting recently, and it was fascinating to see the changes that could be made ( and have been made by volunteers) of recommendations to lower costs for programming, etc..; in fact, at no cost in many cases because of the amazing volunteers and ministerial faith-based involvement testimony of changing hearts and minds for those incarcerated. Yes, a full reset of every area of government is in order to reclaim the banner "under God, the people rule" ( not the Bureaucracy)
Thank you for bringing up solving the problem rather than just spending more and more money.
Thanks, here's another overdue idea that maybe will come to reality someday ! 🤞
https://open.substack.com/pub/patriotrippleeffectsd/p/end-property-taxes?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=slto0
Thank you for sharing the link.
Donald Pay made some very good points. Nobody likes to pay tax but we all like the services the government provides, just not the same ones. Try to cut a program and you will find out who that is important for, they will be there to protest. Many years ago I had a boss that told me “no one has ever come to me for a donation for a bad cause. You need to figure out how much you can afford and how you want to divide it up.” That is fine for an individual or business. However, government is different, unfortunately the people that want a government hand and are the least in need have the best lobbyists, so generally they get theirs. It is up to our legislators to see that people’s needs are also met. I don’t like paying tax but we are not overtaxed in SD compared to the rest of the country or the civilized world. The tax people in SD seem to complain the least about is Sales Tax of which when food is included is the most unfair. But we get taxed in small doses unlike property tax that we get hit with a larger number. There is waste in government but no bigger percent wise then our house and probably yours. DOGE is/was a huge mistake for USA!
Why is transparency a mistake? Should people know how their money is being spent? Most people would like to see full disclosure. Not just dirty laundry on one side.
DOGE just chopped, or maybe I should say chainsawed, there was absolutely no transparency what so ever. I certainly agree there should be transparency. Musk’s companies may be the very largest recipient of federal business funds, I would like to see what of those were cut.