What disturbs me is that we’re even considering cutting funding at all and troubled over how we got here in the first place.

With regard to education, which would suffer greatly, some in our state would argue that education in Boston is Boston’s problem. This statement is very often offered without much mention to the many issues we face here in the city. As the adage goes: educating Boston’s children is Boston’s problem, so let Boston tax payers foot the bill.

As a tax payer, with no children, I don’t mind paying the bill. I’d also gladly pay it as a pooled resource for all schools in the state of Massachusetts, which is really what we do now.

Here in Boston, what gives me great cause for concern is that we continue to provide fuel to those who would have this funding cut by failing to provide a quality public education to our children.

When it comes to education in Boston, the message sent with a “YES” vote is more about what we’re failing to provide our kids. Opposition to the state income tax feeds on, lack of performance, underachievement, and high drop-out rates to name a few.

I honestly believe our elected officials recognize this interplay, but have somehow not been able to deliver the kind of value in education that would abate much of the momentum that always seems to bring the state income tax question up again.

We are cynical about government’s ability to spend our tax money wisely. Given recent Wall Street bombshells and bailouts, our trust is shot as well. What we haven’t heard yet is who will be accountable and what is the value proposition? If we keep the state income tax: it will insure the drop-out rate will drop by half; or achievement will double. And for that value proposition, someone is accountable.

To many, that’s what we need to hear and would allow folks to see the value in the state income tax. We need to step up and get it done! Will our elected officials make that commitment and be held accountable?

You will be hearing and reading fearful stories about the terrible things that will happen if Question 1 passes. Massachusetts has over $40 Billion in revenue from other sources besides the income tax (like the MTA, Massport and the other agencies which do not report their finances.) Passage of Question 1 will cause our legislators to fully evaluate revenue from all state agencies and utilize the funds for projects to meet citizens’ priorities in education and public safety! Isn’t it time for our legislators to evaluate the spending performance of the various agencies which have had public reports of mismanagement of their funds and take action to stop the corruption?

Many organizations receiving state funds are spending millions trying to defeat Question 1. When you see their advertisements, ask yourself about the source of their funds and the priority they place on serving your family’s needs! By the way, ACORN is one of the contributors to opponents fund raisers.

Mass Sales Taxes are only for items besides food and clothing. Many countries in the world have moved to Sales or VAT taxes as a more fair approach to funding their governments. As far as local property taxes increasing, I believe that it would be far better to gather revenue and spend it locally where we are far more likely to eliminate the corruption we have watched throughout State management.

Don’t be misled by the current Beacon Hill budget cutting games, they are not really trying to control the mis-spending!

I will certainly vote in favor of Question 1!

With the current financial breakdown, think of Question 1 as your personal bailout!

Save the Tea – Dump the Income Tax!!

Question one, as has been pointed out isn’t tightening the legislature’s belt, it’s tightening the noose around our own neck.

Christy Whitman did it in New Jersey where Property taxes for a 2 bedroom condominium are now $6,000-$8,0000.

What migh be a better idea is to exctlude these theives from using our roads, schools, ans public buildings and let Carla have the run of her estate.

Ending state taxes has to be the most selfish and short-sighted idea to emerge this election cycle.

There are two ways society can agree to handle the cost of these services: 1) tax ourselves to pay; or 2) hope that people who can afford it pay for these services.

I choose option 1, because I see this as the fairest way to handle these costs, by spreading them across society.

Property and Sales Taxes are very regressive, costing more for those least able to pay. The income tax, even in Massachusetts, where the rate is constant, is far more progressive, shielding those less able to pay.

Eliminating the Income Tax will cost the less fortunate more, the wealthy less and will reduce the Commonwealth’s (and doesn’t this name say it all about sharing the wealth?) ability to protect us and serve the less fortunate.