October 9, 2014

"What’s eleven dollars buy you in Wisconsin? Well, Scott Walker thinks eleven dollars buys your vote."

"Because under his tax plan the average Wisconsin taxpayer got just eleven dollars a month."

The new Mary Burke ad:



Here's the memo — PDF — from the Legislative Fiscal Bureau that's identified as the source of the figures.

Ads, of course, have mostly a subliminal, emotional effect, but let's pick at the facts. If it's $11 a month, and we're electing Scott Walker to a 4-year term, he's trying to buy the average voter's vote with $528. In pizza terms, that's 48 pizzas. But what is Burke's counter offer? Is Burke suggesting that "buying" votes by providing economic benefits is wrong, or is she saying that she'd get more money to us? If so, how?

If the argument is that she's offering the average voters more, the ad's suggestion seems to be the old soak the rich. Immediately after the convenience-store-shopping mom with the weary face we see a man in a suit with his back toward us. Make him pay! (Can we reach him over there in Chicago, the city upon which he casts his presumably gluttonous gaze?) Note that the numbers about the rich are not presented in the per-month, per-individual form that makes them as small as possible. We get a lump sum for all corporations, $610 million. And a per-year number for "millionaires."

49 comments:

carrie said...

I never understood why the rich democrats who complain about the rich not paying their fair share are still rich--why haven't they given all of their money away to the government or to charity? There should not be any rich democrats.

Mingus Jerry said...

Huh? Somehow I don't think those people would have gotten ANY tax cut under a Democratic administration. My taxes keep going up in Illinois. I'd be happy to get an $11 break!

TosaGuy said...

It' better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick....Did Mary run Trek's sharp stick division?

MadisonMan said...

Not going to watch this. I can't think how it could be a good ad. Maybe I've a limited imagination.

(I don't think my taxes -- and fees -- have gone down lately)

Henry said...

So the message is:

"Scott Walker cut your taxes. Vote for me!"

TosaGuy said...

When combined with the $1300/year cut to my property taxes, it starts adding up to some real money.

RecChief said...

"Mingus Jerry said...
Huh? Somehow I don't think those people would have gotten ANY tax cut under a Democratic administration. My taxes keep going up in Illinois. I'd be happy to get an $11 break!"


YOu beat me to it.

Brando said...

Wait a minute--isn't $11 too much to have to pay for your own birth control? If so, then why is it such a paltry sum when you get that back in tax cuts?

RecChief said...

"carrie said...
I never understood why the rich democrats who complain about the rich not paying their fair share are still rich--why haven't they given all of their money away to the government or to charity? There should not be any rich democrats."

I made this point to an anesthesiologist who was railing about continued opposition to Obamacare and the high cost of medical CARE. I made the suggestion that $125,000 was more than fair compensation for a gas passer, and he should reduce his fees to help lower costs for patients and set an example. I've never heard a doctor speak to anyone the way he spoke to me after that. hahahaha. Fen's law in action.

RecChief said...

she should spend that $11 on a financial management class. convenience stores are jsut about the highest cost place to buy groceries.

B said...

Wouldn't Burke adopt the federal Medicaid expansion in a heartbeat?

How's that any different?

rhhardin said...

What's the value of an $11 a month income stream?

At 1% interest it's like having $13,200 in the bank.

A corporate guy would know that but apparently not a corporate woman.

Brando said...

"I never understood why the rich democrats who complain about the rich not paying their fair share are still rich--why haven't they given all of their money away to the government or to charity? There should not be any rich democrats."

I think the question to ask rich leftists (or even non-rich leftists) is "do you think you give exactly your fair share?" If the answer is no (like when Clinton went on about how he's rich and doesn't need the tax cut) then the necessary followup is "well, what's stopping you from giving away the balance? Why does the government have to make you pay it--do you not have the ability to pay it if you're not being forced?"

And of course when they say "yes I pay exactly my fair share" then you can point out that someone poorer than them might think otherwise, because no one truly needs a cell phone, computer, or even electricity. Not while others are starving!

And if they try to quibble after that, ask them who granted them the power and wisdom to know what everyone else should pay.

It's one thing to say we need to spend more on social safety nets, and we need to raise more in taxes to pay for that--that's a longstanding argument on the Left, and even most Rightists will agree to a lesser extent. But when the talk gets to "fair share" and "inequality" and junk like that, well, that's when the full stupid comes out.

Fen said...

Really telling that her objection is not over buying votes, but at such a low cost.

Also, I thought she was a business woman? Is she arguing to the shareholders that she would pay *more* for votes than they are apparently worth?

And she wants us to trust her with a budget?

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Pizza for You! isn't an awful political slogan, really.

But yeah, make that faceless man pay for you and your kids, that's basically the Democrat platform in a nutshell, right?

Question: wehre was her husband, there, when she's buying those groceries? Answer: You're sexist for asking.

Millionaires get a larger $ cut becuase they pay a much larger tax bill (in $ and %), sort of like comparing a same degree wedge of an extra large and a small pizza; that's just math. But "math is hard" as Barbie taught us. Also sexist.

gerry said...

Why would a weary mom with meager income be in a convenience store paying convenience-store prices for whatever it is she is purchasing? And the excess profit probably goes to JOOOOOOOZ!

Hagar said...

The Republican Party is the party of millionaires, and the Democratic Party of today is the party of the billionaires, especially the "easy come, easy go" kind.

Curious George said...

So who is stupid enough to buy into a comparison on one hand of the average individual tax-break divided by 12, and the total annual tax break of all corporations?

We know who.

traditionalguy said...

Dissatisfaction is the only theme in elections against an incumbent.

It works because we are always dissatisfied with merely good things that the young pretty faced new candidates contrast with visions of them promising better.

Unknown said...

Letting you keep your money = buying votes. Ack. Good to see it spelled out so clearly.

Rusty said...

The debates have a good chance of being very entertaining.

phantommut said...

That money? You didn't earn that.

tim in vermont said...

Every dollar not going to a govt employees union member, and therefore taxed by the Democrat Party is clearly wasted, so she does have a point.

garage mahal said...

This is a much better ad in my opinion. "Walker's Dirty Deal. Enjoy!

Rumpletweezer said...

In a semi-related way, I've just listened to Anthony Brown, who's running for governor in Maryland. He's currently the Lt. Governor. His job, under the current administration, was to oversee the development of the state's healthcare website. It cost $200 million dollars before it was scrapped. Now, if that was me, I'd move out of the state and change my name. But that's just me.

tim in vermont said...

"Take Home Pay" = "Lost Revenue Opportunity"

Ask any Democrat.

tim in vermont said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
rehajm said...

You'd save more than $1,402 a year if you'd stop shopping for all your groceries in convenience stores and drag your sorry butt out to the Middleton Costco once in a while.

Brando said...

"In a semi-related way, I've just listened to Anthony Brown, who's running for governor in Maryland. He's currently the Lt. Governor. His job, under the current administration, was to oversee the development of the state's healthcare website. It cost $200 million dollars before it was scrapped. Now, if that was me, I'd move out of the state and change my name. But that's just me."

Unfortunately, that incompetent is set to be our next Governor, because party identification trumps all.

Anonymous said...

It's not the $11, it's the money that Burke is going to take from you for the "public" good that you should concern about, since Burke will be the "public".

Joe said...

The other message:

Come to Wisconsin, work hard, make it big and we'll take all your money. Suckers.

David said...

The most interesting part is that Burke is advertising to her base. Your lefty Madison elite will respond to this ad. Your lefty Madison elite developed and approved it. But your average middle of the road voter may see it differently. If Burke is saying that $11 tax cuts are meaningless, she is also saying that new taxes in "small" amounts are meaningless. So tax 'em. The average Joe and Jolene know that gov't will nickel and dime them to death. They know this because they have experienced it.

garage mahal said...

The most interesting part is that Burke is advertising to her base. Your lefty Madison elite will respond to this ad

Not me. I like the environmental ads. See above. I've been hearing some low-level grumbling from rural areas about CAFOs, manure spills, hi-cap wells, schools, and now energy rate hikes. Burke should be speaking up about that, but the Democratic Party in this state is criminally inept.

PackerBronco said...

If it's only $11 Mary, why are you so anxious to have it back?

Curious George said...

"garage mahal said...
The most interesting part is that Burke is advertising to her base. Your lefty Madison elite will respond to this ad

Not me. I like the environmental ads. See above. I've been hearing some low-level grumbling from rural areas about CAFOs, manure spills, hi-cap wells, schools, and now energy rate hikes. Burke should be speaking up about that, but the Democratic Party in this state is criminally inept."

Manure spills. LOL. You left off the big one Corky, the huge discharges of raw sewage the City of Milwaukee makes whenever we have a big rain. Were talking millions of gallon of human shit and other waste. Millions of gallons. Righht into ole Lake Michigan.

From the left? Not a peep.

Wonder why that ain't making the list.

garage mahal said...

Probably because Milwaukee isn't a rural area? You know, what I was talking about. I would rather see shit sprayed on Waukesha county instead of pumped into Lake Michigan though.

Marty Keller said...

Garage (and Polly Wanna Cracker): they never disappoint.

hombre said...

Obviously, Democrats would feel $11 is peanuts when it comes to buying votes. And they'd be right.

cubanbob said...

David said...
The most interesting part is that Burke is advertising to her base. Your lefty Madison elite will respond to this ad. Your lefty Madison elite developed and approved it. But your average middle of the road voter may see it differently. If Burke is saying that $11 tax cuts are meaningless, she is also saying that new taxes in "small" amounts are meaningless. So tax 'em. The average Joe and Jolene know that gov't will nickel and dime them to death. They know this because they have experienced it.

10/9/14, 4:27 PM"

Walker ought to propose reducing all local and state employee salaries along with state and local pensions $11 dollars just to show how little and insignificant the sum is. Then lets hear the pigs squeal. I never found $11 bucks lying on the street and neither have most folks.

furious_a said...

At 1% interest it's like having $13,200 in the bank.

BANG! Multiply the $11.00 by the x-million people in Wisconsin who'd receive the tax cut (actual cut as opposed to the Liberal meaning of "cut") and multiply again by the number of years the tax cut would apply.

That's alot of pizzas.

furious_a said...

Well, Scott Walker thinks eleven dollars buys your vote.""

The guy's p*ssin' away money. Back in 2000 some Blue-fisted matron in a fur coat was running a Smokes-for-Votes racket on Milwaukee's street people.

Cheeseheads are whackdoodle.

Eric said...

I love Althouse.

Meade said...

Me too.

Drago said...

garage: "I would rather see shit sprayed on Waukesha county instead of pumped into Lake Michigan though."

Well, just get a few of your Occupy Whereever-ville pals to show up.

We all know how much they enjoy public defecation on others property.

Class acts, every one of 'em.

Drago said...

Eric said...
I love Althouse.

10/9/14, 7:23 PM

Meade said...
Me too.

10/9/14, 8:10 PM

See!? This is why, in the wake of SSM, we have to address the polygamy issue honestly and forthrightly.

damikesc said...

I love that voters will vote to give Progressives MORE power to get a little of their money back temporarily but to pay MORE of it permanently.

Voters, clearly, are fucking idiots.

April Apple said...

See. It's only 11 dollars. Instead you should be on board for tax hikes.

The ones that destroy the economy. No matter, because the pro-democrat media will simply report good economic numbers.

The Crack Emcee said...

They don't mention "the rich" are white either:

And neither does anyone else here.

Seems to me to be a major oversight,...

DisgruntledCentrist Left-Winged Tea Party Conservative Liberaltarian said...

Interesting that we celebrate $11 per month average tax savings, when the current administration can't support $10 per hour minimum wage. You can take my $0.37 per day savings, give the extra .09 per hour (over 4 hours) to someone who is struggling, and I will applaud the fact that a person is getting at least a small bump in earnings. Now that that person, working a part-time job earns $7.62 per hour the world is their oyster!