Takeaways from the Beacon Poll

 

Top Stories

Former Trump-appointed Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Mark Milley says Donald Trump is “a fascist to the core!”

 The Atlantic, Oct. 16, 2024- In March 2023, when Mark Milley was six months away from retirement as a four-star general and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, he met Bob Woodward at a reception and said, “We gotta talk.”

Milley went on to describe the grave degree to which former President Donald Trump, under whom Milley had served, was a danger to the nation. Woodward recounts the episode with Milley—who almost certainly believed that he was speaking to Woodward off the record—in his new book, War:

“We have got to stop him!” Milley said. “You have got to stop him!” By “you” he meant the press broadly. “He is the most dangerous person ever. I had suspicions when I talked to you about his mental decline and so forth, but now I realize he’s a total fascist. He is the most dangerous person to this country.”  ...

Milley knows well the risks of criticizing Trump. The former president has reportedly expressed a desire to recall and court-martial retired senior officers who have criticized him, and he has even suggested that Milley should be executed. (read more)

Rod's Comment: As anyone who reads my blog knows, I am a critic of former President Trump but would personally be hesitant to use the word "fascist" to describe him. The term is imprecise. Not every authoritarian dictator is a fascist. The term has almost lost any meaning it once had and was always hard to define. Nevertheless, I find it informative that Gen. Miley had such strong feeling that Donald Trump was a danger to the country that he described Trump as a fascist. And, maybe Trump is a fascist. 

Top Stories

Party Label cannot be a Guide to how to Vote this Election, the Parties have Switched Positions, and Trump is not a Normal Republican.

by Rod Williams, Oct. 17, 2024 - Early voting started here in Tennessee yesterday and has started in some other states or will start soon.  While almost everyone knows for whom they will vote, there are probably a very few who are still undecided and a few who are deciding whether or not to vote at all.

I am unusual in that I follow politics and current events very closely all the time. A lot of people have other things to consume their thoughts and time and may not even give serious thought to an election until right before it is time to cast their ballot. 

I am sure there are a lot of people who identified as Democrat or Republican and always vote for their party's nominee. Normally that might be all you need to know, and you are safe in voting your values if you let the party label guide your voting. I don't think that can be a good guide in this election. Donald Trump has redefined the Republican Party. 

Even if you are a casual consumer of news, you no doubt are aware how controversial Donald Trump is and that he has been called a threat to democracy and a fascist an all of that. You may reason that he didn't do all of the bad things they say he will do when he was president last time, so you see no reason to fear a second Trump term. After all, things were pretty good under Trump. Please consider that Trump has gotten worse and that he won't have the same kind of people around him to guide him and curtail his worst instincts in a second term and he has taken some very non-Republican positions. 

Back to my point that party label cannot be a guide to how to vote this time, the parties have actually switched positions on two key issues. All of my life I have identified as a Republican. One of the issues that make me a Republican was that I believe in a strong national defense and America's leadership role in the world. In short, I am a "defense hawk." I have always seen the Republicans as defense hawks and Democrats as the party of isolationism and appeasement. Well, that is no longer reflects today's parties. It is unbelievable that that switch could take place so rapidly, but it has. Now, the Republican Party has become the party of isolationism and appeasement, and the Democrats are the party advocating strong alliances, resisting aggressors, and America's leadership role in the world. Neither I think are strong enough on things like rebuilding our navy, but where there is a difference, the Democratic party is the party of defense hawks.

The other issue where the parties have switched sides in on the issue of economic policy. I know inflation has been worse under the last four years of a Democrat then they were under Trump, but in this case the past cannot be a guide to the future. Trump has proposed a lot of new disastrous economic policies. Neither party is doing what needs to be done to address the looming debt crisis. However, Democrat policy proposals are better that Trump's proposals. Smart economists have analyzed the policies of both candidates and concluded that Trump policies will increase the national debt twice what those of Harris would do. This is serious. We are rapidly heading toward a cliff and neither candidate is hitting the breaks, but Trump is hitting the accelerator.

In addition to increasing the debt more than the Democrat, Trump has proposed another dangerous policy that is a reversal of previous Republican policies and that is to impose an across the board 10% to 20% tariff on all imports. In the past the Democrats tended to be more protectionist, and the Republican Party more likely to favor free trade. Overtime, a consensus favoring tariff reduction emerged. Now Trump wants to make protectionism a major feature of Republican economic policy.

Of course, tariffs are like a sales tax. It is not the exporting country that pays them but the American consumer.  Trump's tariff proposal would raise prices, hurt the economy, and spark economic feuds with much of the world. Other countries will retaliate. Trump's tariff proposal could cause a worldwide depression. The Smoot-Hawley tariffs of 1930 is considered one of the major contributing factors leading to the Great Depression. We do not want to repeat that mistake. 

When one says that in Trump's first term, he did not do anything too radical it is worth noting that in his first term his administration was filled with long-time normal Republicans and they kind of kept Trump within the guard rails. Trump will not have those kinds of people around him this time. They won't serve in his administration, and he won't seek them to serve. Dozens of former Trump cabinet members, military leaders, and staff have said Trump is unfit to serve. In his second term he will surround himself with loyalist and yes men. 

If you are one who has not paid close attention and simply doubt that Trump is as dangerous as his critics say he is here are some key words links that will shed more light on Trumps authoritarian mindset: retribution, vermin, enemies from within, jail Supreme Court critics, and suspending the Constitution.

Top Stories

Council Member Courtney Johnston Explains Why She Opposes the Mayor's Transit Plan

Courtney Johnston

by Council Member Courtney Johnston, From and email dated Oct. 8, 2024 -Recently, I hosted a community meeting to discuss the transit referendum that will appear on our November ballots.  I invited both the mayor’s office and the opposing group to allow both sides to be heard.  I wanted everyone to have the opportunity to hear the plan being presented, ask their questions, and then hear from the opposing side and ask questions of them so they could make an informed decision when they go to the polls.  In this situation, I believe my responsibility is to facilitate discussion and educate.  I remained neutral in this meeting.  However, I do have some concerns.  

Anytime a tax increase is mentioned, my ears perk up and eyebrows raise.  And certainly, a tax increase to finance a 30-year obligation should have us all looking deeply into what our goals are with this investment and what we realistically believe the results will be.

First, I believe the goal of any transit improvement plan should have two very basic objectives:  1) to manage existing cars on the road more efficiently and effectively and 2) to reduce the number of vehicles on the roads.  Any aspect of any proposal should seek to address one or both of these objectives with the ultimate goal of reducing congestion and commute times.

Second, this proposal will be on your ballot to ask for your approval of a half cent increase in sales tax in Davidson County.  Currently, items purchased here have a 9.25% sales tax.  If approved, this will increase to 9.75%.  The duration of this tax increase has been misunderstood.  This is a 30-year time frame.  Why?  Because metro will issue 30-year revenue bonds in the amount of $3.1 Billion dollars – the principal amount.  When the bonds are paid off in 30 years, the tax increase ends – that’s State law.  This proposed sales tax increase is the dedicated revenue source identified to pay the debt service on these revenue bonds.  “Debt service” means principal plus interest.  There’s been some discrepancy in the total cost of this proposal.  The total cost of this plan is $6.9 billion.  $6.9 billion equals the principal amount ($3.1 billion) plus the interest over the course of the 30 years.  So why is it being marketed as only $3.1 billion?  Good question.  

In 2018, when then Mayor Barry proposed her plan, she was forced to put the entire debt service amount on the ballot which was $8.95 billion.  Her plan’s principal amount was $5.4 billion.  I’m not sure why this current proposal is allowed to show only the principal amount and not the entire cost of debt service like the 2018 Barry proposal had to.  I’d like to also explain the difference quickly between a revenue bond and a general obligation (GO) bond.  

A revenue bond has a dedicated source of funds to pay the debt service that’s written into the bond document.  A GO Bond is paid for through the general fund (where your property taxes go) from our operating budget which we pass each year.  GO bonds are limited in amount by what we can afford as our operating budget has to balance (income equals expenses).  We also have acceptable debt limits to adhere to.  Revenue bonds are outside of that because the revenue dedicated is outside the operating budget.  BUT – if that revenue source is minimized or goes away for whatever reason, metro has to pick up the tab.  The only way to do that is to raise property taxes.

Third, it’s incredibly important to note that this proposal has absolutely nothing to do with our interstate system.  If you are tired of sitting in stand still traffic on I-40, I-24 or I-24, this plan cannot and will not do anything to alleviate this.  I’ve seen some groups trying to conflate this and that is misleading and false.

So, what does the Choose How You Move proposal include and how did it come about? 

It includes Sidewalks, Signals, Service and Safety.  Let’s look at each of these through the lens of our goals and our expected return on investment (ROI):

SIDEWALKS - This plan includes the building of 86 miles of sidewalks over a 15-year period.  Here are my concerns.  While most everyone agrees that sidewalks are good and people want them (including me), do we believe that this will encourage people ditch their car and walk to work, the grocery, etc.?  Certainly, people will use them recreationally.  And they’ll likely use them to walk to nearby retail establishments, schools and/or churches – probably within a 1-mile radius of their home.  But do we really believe that this will have a major impact on lessening vehicular traffic on our roads?  Also, these 86 miles proposed is based on today’s pricing of the construction of sidewalks.  Next year’s pricing will be different – likely higher – and certainly 5 and 10 years from now it will be higher.  My concern is that, since the principal amount of the bonds are finite, the increase in cost associated with building sidewalks over the course of 15 years will lessen the miles of sidewalks we can actually build.  Sidewalks are a need, to be sure.  They are missing in most places and need improvements in others.  But, in my opinion as it relates to ROI, these sidewalks will do little if anything to meet the goals of the proposal which is to reduce the number of vehicles on our streets.  Also, last year metro built 8 miles of sidewalk.  This proposal promises 86 miles in 15 years.  That math is 5.73 miles per year…

SIGNALS - Nearly 600 traffic signals will be updated with smart synchronization.  This is something Metro Nashville has been talking about for years if not decades.  And, yes, it’s needed.  Not fun fact - Most people are probably not aware that metro purchased software back in 2012 to synchronize our signals.  So, what happened to that?  Well, turns out that the software we purchased wasn’t compatible with our hardware.  Liken it to trying to use an iPhone software update on a flip phone.  Pretty maddening…  Anyway, while I do believe this is something that is necessary to help manage traffic on our streets, I’m wondering how much of an impact this will have in reality.  So, I asked the presenter and was told that we can expect to see a 10% reduction in commute times as a direct correlation to the modernized signals.  So, let’s say I need to get downtown to the courthouse from my south Nashville home.  I’m close to the Williamson County border.  Taking ONLY local streets and not the interstate as this plan doesn’t address interstate traffic, let’s say that takes me 45 minutes to take Franklin Rd to 8th Ave S and meander my way to downtown.  This will shave off less than 5 minutes of my commute which I think is a small almost negligible ROI.  Again, I agree with the need for modernized signalization and I’m glad we’ve opened the command center.  But we aren’t going to see much of a difference in commute times and this is actually a relatively small investment as it relates to the $3.1 billion overall cost.  I believe we can, and should, do that separately.

SERVICE – By far the most expensive piece of the proposal includes:

WeGo bus service expansion to 24/7/365 with more frequent stops. 

12 new transit centers and 17 park and ride facilities.  

54 miles of all-access corridors.  (All Access Corridor is defined as streets that provide a safe transportation system that accommodates all users whether they walk, bike, ride transit, or drive.) 

39 miles of complete streets (Complete Streets projects include elements like sidewalks, bikeways, lighting and enhanced crossings) 

Again, my concern is the return on investment.  The goal of the bus system is to reduce the number of individual vehicles on our streets and provide safe, reliable transportation to those who need it.  When I asked what the Mayor’s Office projected as far as increased ridership as a result of this proposed expansion, the answer was disappointing, albeit truthful.  They could not project or guarantee any amount of increase in ridership.  Wouldn’t it be terrible if we spend billions on expanding our bus system only to see more empty buses driving around the county?  Another thing we learned is that only 4 of the 12 proposed transit centers have specific locations identified.  The other 8 have general areas where they would like to have them.  So, what will the cost of land acquisition be for these centers?  Where exactly will they be and do these areas want a 24/7 transit center in their neighborhood?  In this plan literature, it states the “map and project list depict conceptual implementation at the time of the TIP (Transportation Improvement Program) development”, which means all of these projects listed are just concepts.  What’s not just a concept is the tax increase and the 30-year debt service obligation for metro.  That’s a sure thing.

Another concern was brought up about the safety of these centers which are to be heated and cooled, equipped with restrooms and wi-fi, and operating 24 hours a day.  The Mayor’s Office acknowledged the concern around our homeless population utilizing these spaces and offered the idea of creating “Transit Police”.  In reality, a separate police force has proven to not be very effective.  Look at our Park’s Police.  Those officers are trained and equipped just like MNPD officers so it’s not a question of competence.  We have never been fully staffed at Park’s Police - routinely having over 75% of the positions remaining unfilled.  There are jurisdiction issues as well as daily responsibility and compensation issues that create a difficult environment for recruiting and retaining for Parks Police.  In my opinion, a separate police force is not wise and MNPD doesn’t have the capacity to create another division.  A transit security team is likely a more feasible and effective way to handle 24/7 security of these transit centers.  Same for Parks – but I digress. 

Back to ROI - will this expansion actually move us in the right direction as far as our transit goals to reduce congestion and the number of individual cars on the road?  Will a meaningful number of people choose to ride the bus instead of taking their own vehicle?  Do we think out of county commuters will pull off at a park and ride at or near the county line to take the bus the rest of the way in?  Is the high cost of operating 24/7 justified by demand from a meaningful number of people needing transportation between the hours of midnight and 4:45am?   And I use the term “meaningful” purposefully.  Surely there will be some folks that utilize the bus system at all hours of the night and take advantage of the expansion.  But is it enough to justify this price tag?  Certainly, our bus system needs some improvements.  Cross county connections would be helpful as opposed to the hub and spoke model we currently have as an example.  Safety absolutely is a concern even at regular bus shelters that exist today.  But I’m concerned, regardless of any expansion, that a meaningful number of people will actually start utilizing the bus regularly giving us any significant ROI.

I consider myself to be fiscally responsible and thoughtful.  This proposal makes me a bit uncomfortable and as a leader in my community I feel a sense of duty to express my concern over such a large and expensive proposal.  While someone from the Choose How You Move campaign at my community meeting said that opposing this plan is equivalent to “sticking your head in the sand”, I strongly disagree.  Questioning the ability of this proposal to actually solve, or at least meaningfully reduce congestion and commute times for this large of a long-term investment is the responsible, thoughtful thing to do.  Being opposed to this plan doesn’t mean you don’t think we have a problem and prefer to do nothing.  It means you believe this particular plan isn’t going to give us the ROI we’re expecting and deserve and that it could use a little more work. 

The Mayor’s Office says this plan was created using 70 previous plans created over decades and 66,000 pieces of input from those plans.  I assume that stating this is to imply comprehensiveness.  However, I think given the growth of Nashville and Davidson County, especially in the last decade, that plans older than that are likely antiquated and mostly useless.

Some people are arguing that sales tax is a regressive tax – meaning, in large part, it doesn’t take in to account the taxpayers’ ability to pay, thereby negatively impacting those with lower income levels more than those with higher income levels.  Regressive taxation isn’t all bad and can be necessary for many things including public infrastructure and the balancing of progressive taxation.  My problem is not necessarily with the regressive nature of this tax.  Yes, some will be impacted more than others – but a half cent increase in sales tax that matches surrounding counties is likely not that burdensome.  My problem is the long-term obligation metro is entering in to and the sustainability of this tax – all for very little if any return on investment.  Yes, sales tax has proven to be incredibly lucrative in recent years as a direct result of our economic growth and our tourism industry.  20 years ago, however, I’m not sure projections would be as strong as metro did not foresee this explosion of economic growth.  Can we sustain that for 30 years?  

This year, revenue is projected to be flat, and actuals have even come in lower than conservative projections in some models. The mayor’s office says that 60% of this tax is paid for by folks that live outside Davidson County.  Correct!  Most of that is from tourism!  What happens if tourism declines?  Why are we not being more pro-active with public safety to protect our citizens and our economy, including tourism?  Why did the mayor fail to fund license plate readers (LPRs) in this year’s budget for MNPD and why is he slow walking those contracts to be approved by council?  (PS – the ordinance allowing full implementation of LPRs passed well over a year ago…)  What are we doing to address homelessness in this county?  Why is the mayor pandering to groups that don’t want to close homeless encampments (even though we house and provide services for every single person in those encampments when we close them)?  

With our lack of focus on public safety, increases in crime rates and the homeless population can and will negatively impact our tourism industry which will, first and foremost, reduce our sales tax receipts.  Once the bonds are issued, though, it doesn’t matter.  The obligation remains – and $6.9 billion is nothing to scoff at.  As I explained earlier, if sales tax revenue falls short, our general fund must make up the difference.  That means a property tax increase.

Some folks asked, why now?   I, too, question the timing of this – especially as rates are not so great as we all know.  Metro has an incredible bond rating, but bond rates in general are just high right now.  I’ve heard people say they feel this plan is rushed.  Granted we’ve been talking about this for quite some time – this isn’t a new problem.  But this particular plan, they say, seems rushed.  I tend to agree.  I believe they are chasing increased voter turnout from the presidential election.  Additionally, I believe we will be faced with a property tax increase in FY26 or FY27 making a sales tax increase a no go after that.  Maybe they think it’s now or never, but I disagree. 

So, you say, if not this plan what would you do, Courtney?  There are aspects of this plan I think are good and necessary.  The benefit of having a dedicated source of revenue for transit does help us in rankings for federal grants – but not having it doesn’t preclude us from receiving federal grants.  I’d prefer a phased approach with a smaller fiscal note, or cost, that we can build out more quickly and gauge success.  Since this plan is just a “concept” we really don’t know what we’re actually going to get.  I personally don’t feel comfortable giving the government that amount of money without a very prescriptive plan and known, or at least projected, return on investment that’s meaningful.

So, do the benefits outweigh the high cost?  Are we really getting anything meaningful out of this plan in terms of mitigating congestion?  Is this the right plan?  That’s for you, the voter, to decide.  I’ll be voting no.

Top Stories

Happy Columbus Day!

Columbus was Awesome 

Let's be honest, few would do what he did. 

Oh, and the indigenous peoples were guilty of the same stuff. 

by David Foley, reposted from Intellectual Takeout, Oct. 2022 - Yes, it’s in vogue to forsake our Western heritage, to see dead, white men as evil barbarians. But let’s be honest, the reason they’ve been celebrated is because what they did, despite their sins, was incredible. Columbus is certainly one of those men. 

In an age when many teenage Americans are too terrified to even state their opinion in a high school class for fear of getting a bad grade and not getting into college, Columbus was already sailing the ocean blue, with reports that he went as far as the coast of Guinea in West Africa – that’s several thousand nautical miles from his home port! 

Dirt poor and already denied twice, Columbus finally won over Queen Isabella of Spain who then infuenced her husband, King Ferdinand, to support the expedition across the Atlantic. And so it was on August 3, 1492, that Admiral Columbus set sail into the great unknown with a squadron of tiny ships, the Nina, the Pinta, and the Santa Maria. 

Now, put yourself into the expedition. In looking back, modern man seems tempted to harshly judge every sin of a man whom the current culture has chosen to be against, while failing to judge the whole man and what he accomplished. How many today would have the courage of not just Columbus, but of the other 120 men aboard those little ships (at most, 60 feet long) to sail into the unknown, likely to fail and even to die? 

Here’s the famous poem (forgotten by today’s educators) by Joaquin Miller that captures what it must have been like on that long voyage across the Atlantic: 

Columbus 

by Joaquin Miller 

Behind him lay the gray Azores, 

Behind the Gates of Hercules; 

Before him not the ghost of shores, 

Before him only shoreless seas.

The good mate said: “Now must we pray, 

For lo! The very stars are gone. 

Brave Adm’r’l, speak, what shall I say?” 

“Why, say: ‘Sail on! Sail on! And on!’” 

“My men grow mutinous day by day; 

My men grow ghastly wan and weak.” 

Be stout mate thought of home; a spray 

Of salt wave washed his swarthy cheek. 

“What shall I say, brave Adm’r’l, say, 

If we sight naught but seas at dawn?” 

“Why, you shall say, at break of day: 

‘Sail on! Sail on! Sail on! And on!’” 

They sailed and sailed, as winds might blow, 

Until at last the blanched mate said: 

“Why, now not even God would know 

Should I and all my men fall dead. 

These very winds forget their way, 

For God from these dread seas is gone. 

Now speak, brave Adm’r’l; speak and say” 

He said: “Sail on! Sail on! And on!” 

They sailed. They sailed. Then spake the mate: 

“This mad sea shows his teeth to-night; 

He curls his lips, he lies in wait, 

With lifted teeth, as if to bite: 

Brave Adm’r’l, say but one good word; 

What shall we do when hope is gone?” 

The words leapt like a leaping sword: 

“Sail on! Sail on! Sail on! And on!” 

Then pale and worn, he kept his deck, 

And peered through darkness. Ah, that night 

Of all dark nights! And then a speck-

A light! A Light! A light! A light! 

It grew, a starlit flag unfurled! 

It grew to be Time’s burst of dawn. 

He gained a world; he gave that world

Its grandest lesson: “On! Sail on!” 

And so it was on October 12 that Columbus and his men landed in what is now called the West Indies. Such a story should be remembered and celebrated. 

As for Columbus and the native populations, the story is mixed. It would appear from the historical record that Columbus was quite kind and protective of the Arawak tribe at the location of his first landing. On his second voyage, he came in contact with the Carib tribe, which had been attacking and plundering the Arawak tribe, driving it into isolation and stealing its women and children, as well as initiating acts of cannibalism. Columbus saw the Caribs as natural enemies. But it was the Arawaks and other tribes that massacred his men that he left behind. After that, the violence kicked up and there were certainly terrible abuses by both the native populations and the Europeans.

Without a doubt, Columbus did some horrible things, including sending natives back to Spain as slaves who ironically were not treated as such initially. Should he be celebrated for some of his later deeds? Probably not. And so the complexities of history and the imperfections of men reveal themselves to us. But that is also the case of the native populations. 

Today, any number of classrooms and cities celebrate “Indigenous People’s Day” or some such thing as a way to repent of Columbus’ and the West’s sins of conquest. And yet, when we look at the historical record of indigenous peoples, they were no less blood thirsty (often more so) than the Europeans. Indeed, they conquered and enslaved each other with great frequency. 

If it is the case that the Europeans and Columbus are to be reviled for conquering and enslaving, then should we not hold the indigenous peoples to the same standard? If it was fair for them to conquer each other, then what was wrong with the Europeans conquering and spreading their civilization? Since the Europeans and the indigenous peoples shared in their sins against their fellow men, on this day feel no guilt in celebrating Columbus and his intrepid voyage across the Atlantic. He wasn’t perfect, but he was a giant among men.

Devin Foley is the co-founder and Chief Executive Officer of Charlemagne Institute, which operates Intellectual Takeout, Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture, and the Alcuin Internship.

Top Stories

Sense And Nonsense About Taxes

by Rod Williams, Oct. 13, 2024- Liberals will never think the rich pay their fair share until they tax them out of existence and then will all be poorer. Transferring money from the rich to the federal government harms the economy. It is not as if the rich have the money stuffed in their mattresses. It is invested and builds houses and businesses and makes loans available making it possible for people who cannot pay cash to buy a home among other things, and it makes the economy grow. Economic growth lifts people out of poverty. 

The following article by John C. Goodman explains away some lies and myths about taxation. Goodman is an award-winning economist, author of seventeen books and a senior fellow at the Independent Institute. 

I have excerpted some major points of the article. To read the whole article, follow the link. The highlighting in the below excerpts is mine. 

Sense And Nonsense About Taxes

by John C. Goodman, Forbes, Oct 9, 2024- As we draw closer to the November elections, there is an inordinate amount of attention being paid to “disinformation,” and a great deal of fact-checking of candidates’ statements. So this seems to be an ideal time to fact-check some statements being made about “taxes.”

Who benefits from income tax cuts?

Consider these two statements

Most of the benefits of the 2017 (Trump) tax cuts went to the rich.

The tax code today is just as progressive (if not more so) than it was before the tax cuts went into effect.

Surprisingly, both these statements are true. The first statement is true but misleading. The second statement is simply true.

What is rarely said in policy debates is that for the most part, half the population isn’t paying income taxes at all. According to the Tax Foundation, the top one-half of taxpayers are paying 97.7% of all income taxes, while the bottom half pays a paltry 2.3%. So, it’s hard to think of a tax cut that wouldn’t confer most of the benefits on the top half of the income distribution.

Progressivity is a different matter. Suppose we cut everyone’s taxes by 1%. For someone with a million dollars in income, that would be $10,000. For a $30,000-a-year worker, that would be $300. That’s a big difference in raw numbers. But from an equality standpoint, everyone’s share of the country’s after-tax income would be the same both before and after the tax cut.

Do the rich pay their fair share?

When Joe Biden says “the rich aren’t paying their fair share,” what is he talking about? ... If we define the rich broadly (to refer to the upper half), their share is already approaching 100% and that is as high as it can go. But even if we are talking about the really rich, their share is quite high. 

The top 1% (people who earned more than $682,577 in 2021) paid 45% of all income taxes collected that year. The top 10% (earning more than $169,800) paid three-fourths of all income taxes.

This reflects the fact that the United States has the most progressive tax system in the world. We tax the rich proportionally more than any other country.

Why is our income tax system so progressive?

... Republicans are the main reason. Going all the way back to Ronald Reagan, every Republican tax bill threw more and more people off the income tax rolls. ... Republicans have been shifting the tax burden to the rich every time they have legislated on taxes, according to a study by the National Center for Policy Analysis.

What about corporate taxes?

... The Tax Policy Center (TPC) estimates that 20% of the corporate income tax is paid by labor in the form of lower wages and 80% is paid by capital (lower dividends and interest payments, for example). ... workers are also shareholders through their pension plans, 401(k) plans and IRA accounts. ... workers bear part of that burden as well.

Taxing capital gains

... gain does not reflect any increase in income .... It merely reflects a change in the market’s expectations. ...Taxing unrealized capital gains is ... like taxing the gambler —not at the end an evening of gaming, but after each time a roll of the dice produces a win, while ignoring each time there is a loss.

What is wrong with taxing investment to pay for consumption?

... almost all progressive ideas for new revenue involve confiscating funds that are now in the capital market and using those funds to pay for current consumption. But less investment means slower economic growth. And that means our children and grandchildren will have a lower standard of living. (read it all)

Top Stories

Council Member Bob Nash Explains Why He Supports the Mayor's Transit Plan

From Dist. 27 Council Member Bob Nash, Sept 30th Newsletter -

The Metropolitan Council voted unanimously to put Mayor O’Connell’s transportation plan on the November ballot. I did so because I believed, and still do, that improving our transportation infrastructure is a very important issue funded by an increase in the sales tax. District 27 voters deserve to have a voice. As I have seen the Choose How You Move referendum discussed on Facebook and Nextdoor, many are focusing solely on the issue of bus transportation. This transportation plan is multi-faceted. It has a lot of moving parts. (pun intended) I hope as you decide how you will vote you will also take into consideration all the other parts of this plan. To help you do a deeper dive, I share the following from the Mayor’s press release of April 19th,2024:

From The Mayor’s Office

Sidewalks

Choose How You Move will add 86 linear miles of sidewalk, which is about the same distance as Nashville is from Cookeville. One out of every three Nashville residents will have direct, walkable access to a transit stop. We’ll have a 50 percent increase in walkable neighborhoods. This is how we supercharge Nashville’s entire priority sidewalk network.

Signals

The transportation improvement plan will deliver smarter traffic signals that use technology to manage traffic flows and communicate wirelessly with our transit vehicles to keep them evenly spaced and moving quickly. There will be 592 new or upgraded traffic signals concentrated in some of our highest traffic areas. The signals tie into a new Traffic Management Center opening later this year. At that center, NDOT can see where traffic is heaviest and adjust our system in real-time to keep Nashvillians moving.  

Service

Nashvillians will benefit from the Choose How You Move plan, whether we take the bus or not. But we’re going to make riding the bus easy, reliable, safe, frequent, and an all-hours option – a good fit for a 24/7 workforce.  

This initiative will establish 54 miles of high-capacity All-Access Corridors, where the entire route is designed to move people faster and safer with transit vehicles arriving every 15 minutes for better round-the-clock service. These All-Access Corridors include 10 of Nashville’s most heavily used roadways, and they carry 80% of Nashville’s transit ridership (such as Murfreesboro Pike, Gallatin Pike, Nolensville Pike, Dickerson Road, West End, Charlotte Pike, Bordeaux/Clarksville Pike and more). They’ll have dedicated transit-only lanes in strategic locations. Nashvillians will be able to travel the length of Murfreesboro Pike 12 minutes faster than you can today.

Choose How You Move aims to build 12 modern transit centers at key locations in the city, so that riders can travel from neighborhood to neighborhood without having to go downtown.  

The plan calls for building 17 Park & Ride facilities located near high-capacity transit routes, so that more Nashvillians (My addition: and those of surrounding communities that add to the congestion on our main roads) can access transit even if they don’t live near a bus route.  

Choose How You Move is going to double the hours of our high-frequency daily service and increase total bus service by almost80%. That includes more express service and regional service while also expanding WeGo Star service and the WeGo Access program to 24/7 availability. The plan offers extended service hours for the local routes serving Nashville’s prime entertainment district and expands WeGo Link for curb-to-curb service.

If the referendum is approved by voters, low-income residents of Davidson County will qualify for fully subsidized transit passes. A Nashville couple earning $48,000 a year could qualify for unlimited rides on the WeGo Public Transit system.

About two-thirds of the new transit centers and bus stop improvements will be in historically underrepresented communities. This is how we bring the cost of living down for our residents and meet the needs of our 24/7 workforce.  

Safety

Choose How You Move upgrades 285 bus stops to improve lighting, weather cover, and real-time location tracking. Twenty-five intersections will be redesigned as Vision Zero intersections to reduce the risk of injury, a major improvement as 59 percent of Nashville’s fatal and serious injuries occur on six percent of the city’s roads. Thirty-nine miles of Complete Street projects along our high-injury network will make Nashvillians safer, and there will be 35 miles of new or upgraded bicycle facilities.

The program makes safety improvements on 78 miles of the Vision Zero High Injury Network, places where a high number of traffic deaths and serious injuries are occurring, creating safer streets for pedestrians, bicyclists, drivers, and transit users alike.  

Funding

In Tennessee, the IMPROVE Act allows local governments to levy a surcharge to generate new revenue specifically for public transportation. A sales tax surcharge of a half penny would make Davidson County’s sales tax rate equal to almost all of our neighboring counties. Nashville would be one of the last of its neighboring counties to choose to increase its local sales tax from 2.25% to the most common effective rate of 2.75%.

For every $50 you spend, you’ll see an extra 25 cents in sales tax on your receipt. For most Nashvillians, the cost will be at or under $70 per year. For comparison, the cost of owning a car is more than $1,000 per month for new vehicles according to AAA. That includes loan interest, depreciation, fuel, insurance, maintenance, and fees.

Nashville is one of only four cities in the top 50 U.S. Metros that does not have dedicated funding for transportation. Sales tax is the single most common local funding source used for public transportation nationally. Most of the top 50 cities (85%) use some form of dedicated sales tax to fund local transit.

The sales tax surcharge presents an opportunity to share the cost of transportation improvements between people who live here and those who don’t. Nashville is unique because about 60% of our sales tax is paid by people who live somewhere else. That means visitors to the city will pickup the biggest share of the costs of this new transportation improvement program.

On the federal level, Nashville has a finite and unprecedented opportunity to bring more federal tax dollars back to Music City if we act now. Dedicated funding would provide the matching funds needed to leverage over $1.4 billion in future federal dollars to invest in transportation and improve access over the next 15 years.

The financial elements of the plan are undergoing a third-party audit and will be reviewed by the Tennessee Comptroller and are subject to change.  (Added note: The Tennessee Comptroller’s audit approved Choose How You Move plan as submitted.)

Timeline

If the sales tax surcharge is approved by voters on November5, 2024, revenue collections could begin on February 1, 2025. The sales tax surcharge would end when all outstanding debt has been repaid.  

The program has been designed so residents see improvements starting right away. Early projects include a WeGo Link microtransit pilot program, WeGo service enhancements, safety and lighting improvements, initial sidewalk improvements, and the introduction of traffic and signal improvements.

Within two years residents will see substantial bus service improvements such as expanded hours and frequency, continued sidewalk and signal installations, and the development of the first Complete Street project.

Within five years: More than 150 signals upgraded and modernized, along with upgrades to the Traffic Management Center to support these changes, and the first All-Access Corridors will begin high frequency service on West End, Charlotte Pike, and in downtown between Elizabeth Duff Transit Center and SoBro via James Robertson Pkwy, Rosa L Parks Blvd, and Lafayette St.

Within 10 years: 60 miles of new and upgraded sidewalks will be built, above and beyond NDOT’s regular sidewalk program; more All-Access Corridors will begin high frequency service including Murfreesboro Pike, Gallatin Pike and Clarksville Pike, in downtown on James Robertson Parkway from Elizabeth Duff Transit Center to the East Bank, and service to the East Bank from SoBro via the Gateway Bridge.

At 15 years: Metro will have upgraded nearly all 600 traffic signals, will have secured 78 miles of the Vision Zero high-injury network with safety improvements, will have completed all 86 miles of new sidewalk, and will have implemented high-capacity transit on 10 of Nashville’s busiest corridors with Dickerson Pike and Nolensville Pike improvements coming online.”

How Will I Vote

Let me start off by saying that I have never ridden on a Nashville bus. (My wife did for a short time in the late 70’s when we were newly married and only had one vehicle.) We do not live on a transit route, but we do drive downtown occasionally. The new transportation plan provides for nearly 600 synchronized, smart traffic signals. This will reduce much of our stop and go traffic and lower fuel costs that can help offset the sales tax increase. For non-bus ridership, there will be some 17 Park and Ride locations that will offer commuters alternatives to driving downtown thereby decreasing traffic on our main corridors for those who choose to drive.

For these reasons, although I am not a bus rider, I will be voting for the plan. With the Nashville Metropolitan Statistical Area growing as fast as it is, I believe we must look to the future and start making improvements in our transportation infrastructure and how we get around.

Also, and maybe most importantly, I do represent a number of lower income constituents that do need to use public transportation to get to work, doctor’s appointments, shopping and other life needs. They deserve enhanced bus stops and transit centers that improve the efficiency of our transit system and protect riders from inclement weather.

Top Stories