DETROIT lottery..... competition for dollars from the poor...

[Goose]

WWJ’s Vickie Thomas reports that state Rep. Dr. Jimmy Womack, D-Detroit, is drafting legislation to start a “Detroit only” lottery. He plans to meet with the state lottery commission next week.
The idea is the brainchild of Councilman Kwame Kenyatta.


http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2011/12/...-only-lottery/


every city should run their own lottery!!!!

[313WX]

Interesting, this would bring in more revenue than anything given how many lottery players there are in the city and region. I support it.

However, hopefully the operations are independently managed, not by anyone in city government. My only concern is that crooked individuals from CAYMC will be chosen to run this lottery and rig it something terrible.

[Cincinnati_Kid]

Lotteries are rigged to begin with. It's always some individual who's already well off that wins the majority of the time. Look at those Investment bankers in Conn that won the powerball a few days ago. People that really are down on their luck never win it seems.

[401don]

Why are these articles so poorly written? "Would a City-Run Lottery in Detroit Solve the City's Financial Problems?" They follow with a survey-yes, no, maybe. I don't think Kenyatta is saying it will solve all of the city's problems. We need ideas to contribute additional revenue and this is worth considering.

[Bham1982]

Obviously Detroit is desperate, and needs any quick fix it can get.

But, generally speaking, I think lotteries are regressive taxes on the poor. IMO, there are better ways to raise money.

[313WX]

But, generally speaking, I think lotteries are regressive taxes on the poor. IMO, there are better ways to raise money.

Name one [[for the city of Detroit), without burdening current resident any further forcibly.

A sales tax and a flat income tax is far more regressive than any lottery [[I.E. 6% taxes based on the cost of the goods versus the poor paying more than a few dollars in total on lottery tickets where they can potentially win even more money ot offset the money spent), yet many states don't mind establishing them.

[Scottathew]

Obviously Detroit is desperate, and needs any quick fix it can get.

But, generally speaking, I think lotteries are regressive taxes on the poor. IMO, there are better ways to raise money.

I agree.

For some reason poor people just love buying those lottery tickets. We don't need to tax our poor people any more than we already are.

[Bham1982]

Name one [[for the city of Detroit), without burdening current resident any further forcibly.

If I were Emporer of Michigan, I would institute a progressive statewide income tax. I prefer it over flat taxes and quick fixes like lotteries and casinos. The poor get royally screwed in MI, IMO.

If we're only talking Detroit [[and only the revenue side) I would stop with the subsidized downtown spending and with the rich neighborhood property tax breaks, at least temporarily. I would even consider an income/commuter tax hike, if it came down to city survival.

[Trumpeteer]

Lotteries are rigged to begin with. It's always some individual who's already well off that wins the majority of the time. Look at those Investment bankers in Conn that won the powerball a few days ago. People that really are down on their luck never win it seems.

Actually the facts show it's quite the opposite. Stories abound about a 65 year old retiree wins and goes out to buy a "doublewide" or groups of postal workers form a group to buy tickets and share the possible winnings. IF the well off consistantly won the story of the investment bankers wouldn't have made national news.

I do agree that lotteries take advantage of the poor in that they buy tickets in hope of getting out of their economic situation even thought thats the last thing they should be spending what little money they may have on.

[Scottathew]

I would even consider an income/commuter tax hike, if it came down to city survival.

I would disagree with that intensely, but I'm rather biased.

[313WX]

If I were Emporer of Michigan, I would institute a progressive statewide income tax. I prefer it over flat taxes and quick fixes like lotteries and casinos. The poor get royally screwed in MI, IMO.

If we're only talking Detroit [[and only the revenue side) I would stop with the subsidized downtown spending and with the rich neighborhood property tax breaks, at least temporarily. I would even consider an income/commuter tax hike, if it came down to city survival.

I agree with everytihng in your post as well, except with the income tax hike on residents. It should only be on the commuters. It's a downright travesty that suburbanites can only share the benefits of the big city but with only half the costs while actual residents must pay twice as much to share the benefits AND burden.

That said, I dno't think any of these proposal are realistic [[and will never happen in our lifetime). If anything, our far right legislators in Lansing just made the tax policy in Michigan even more regressive. The lottery proposal is the only one that comes closest to seeing reality.

[SWMAP]

A commuter tax is widely understood to be the payroll tax that someone who works in the city but is not a resident pays to the city in which heshe is employed. You are writing about one and the same tax.

[Johnnny5]

An independent lottery for Detroit would be direct competition to the State run lottery, and getting it though Lansing would be next to impossible.

I think a lottery game that benefits Detroit, but is still run by the State would be a much better idea and honestly that's the only way I see this idea going anywhere. It would also have the benefits of being available to everyone in Michigan, could use the existing lottery infrastructure and reduce the risk of corruption [[Obviously a serious problem in Detroit).

Perhaps a game with much better odds, but lower payouts? Maybe a pick a number 1-100 and get paid 75 to $1?

[GoGrixdale]

Hmm...It would be interesting to see the demographic data for players juxtaposed with state disbursements of the income.

[Scottathew]

It's a downright travesty that suburbanites can only share the benefits of the big city but with only half the costs while actual residents must pay twice as much to share the benefits AND burden.

No other community in metro Detroit charges it residents or workers an income tax. The city of Warren, where I live, doesn't have an income tax. We benefit by taxing businesses via property tax.

I just don't think an income tax is needed.

The main issue with Detroit's budget is spending is out of control. Departments have bad management, are inefficiently structured, technology isn't addressing issues, and also, labor contracts are out of control.

Let's get unions on board with making benefits more comparable to the private sector, or alternatively, if unions don't want to be a part of the process we can explore savings via privatization.


But like I said, I fully acknowledge and advertise that my opinion as a suburbanite working in Detroit, that I am biased.

[Bham1982]

No other community in metro Detroit charges it residents or workers an income tax. The city of Warren, where I live, doesn't have an income tax. We benefit by taxing businesses via property tax.

I'm pretty sure Pontiac has a city income tax. Maybe Hamtramck & Highland Park too. Not really in metro Detroit, but Lansing and Flint have income taxes.

I agree that city income taxes are less than ideal. It isn't my first choice, but when you're desperate, you have to consider whether it will be a net positive.

[cramerro]

An independent lottery for Detroit would be direct competition to the State run lottery, and getting it though Lansing would be next to impossible.

I think a lottery game that benefits Detroit, but is still run by the State would be a much better idea and honestly that's the only way I see this idea going anywhere. It would also have the benefits of being available to everyone in Michigan, could use the existing lottery infrastructure and reduce the risk of corruption [[Obviously a serious problem in Detroit).

Perhaps a game with much better odds, but lower payouts? Maybe a pick a number 1-100 and get paid 75 to $1?

First, the commuter tax is on people who work in the city, not drive through. And, to claim that people who only work in the city are getting a deal by reaping the benefits of the city but only paying half the taxes is rediculous. People who live there pay to live, and pay again to work if they do work in the city. The get the benefits [[so-called) at home, and work. I work in the city, and reap the benefits for 40 hours a week, then I go home and reap the benefits of the community where I live, and pay taxes, for the other 128 hours a week.

Besides, if you raise the work tax it raises it for people who live and work proportionately [[unless you restructure the system). And at the risk of being called conservative, raising the city income tax any higher on commuters is like committing revenue suicide. Rents are lower than ever in the suburbs and the taxes are generally 0. There are only so many CEOs who have an unconditional love for the city and give their employees raises to offset the tax... the rest will say to hell with this place. Businesses will leave or not come, and in a few years the revenue from the higher tax will be back to what it is today and will be on the way down farther.

Second, there are plenty of lotteries that are for a specific purpose, like a sports stadium, in other states. The lottery commission can set up games where the revenue goes to a certain cause/fund without too much hassle. However, I don't know of any examples where it would be for general fund support. I'd much rather see that function used to make a transit game [[where is Trainman when you need him) to support that.

Maybe the city could use the bingo/poker charity rules that so many churches, vfw and little league teams use to raise funds and just have a giant poker tournament in COBO every weekend. Maybe it would boost hotel occupancy, too!

[cramerro]

I'm pretty sure Pontiac has a city income tax. Maybe Hamtramck & Highland Park too. Not really in metro Detroit, but Lansing and Flint have income taxes.

I agree that city income taxes are less than ideal. It isn't my first choice, but when you're desperate, you have to consider whether it will be a net positive.

For some reason I thought Southfield did, but alas, you were spot on:

From State of Michigan website:
For 2010 the following Michigan cities levy an income tax of 1% on residents and 0.5% on nonresidents.

Albion, Battle Creek, Big Rapids, Flint, Grayling, Hamtramck, Hudson, Ionia, Jackson, Lansing, Lapeer, Muskegon, Muskegon Heights, Pontiac, Port Huron, Portland, Springfield and Walker.

The exceptions to the above rates are as follows:

City	Residents	Nonresidents
Detroit	2.5%	1.25%
Grand Rapids	1.3%	0.65%
Highland Park	2%	1%
Saginaw	1.5%	0.75%

[Scottathew]

I'm pretty sure Pontiac has a city income tax. Maybe Hamtramck & Highland Park too. Not really in metro Detroit, but Lansing and Flint have income taxes.

I agree that city income taxes are less than ideal. It isn't my first choice, but when you're desperate, you have to consider whether it will be a net positive.

Thanks sir, you are correct!

[jolla]

I pay the nonresident income tax and I think it's fair. I use the roads, streetlights, etc. My workplace is served by police, EMS, etc.

[Trumpeteer]

and your company pays for those services through property taxes, probable sales taxes, etc. The problem is that what they, and others pay to the city isn't enough to cover the costs for services due to many reasons discussed in this forum.

On the other hand if you think it's "fair" for you to be taxed on your income by the city, bless you but others likely don't feel that way.

You also use the "roads, streetlights, etc." everywhere else you drive so why not pay a tax in those locals as well? The gas tax takes care of the roads.