Liberal Woman Can’t Understand Why Her Vote Raises Her Taxes

Austin, Texas is the most liberal section of the Lone Star State. It is the state capital and a college town, so you know it is jammed full of half-witted liberals. And if you need a perfect example of that liberal mental disorder the Austin American-Statesman had a great one with an interview with a liberal voter who just couldn’t understand why her vote for every liberal plan on the ballot ended up making her taxes go up every year.

On May 31, the Statesman published a story on how Austiners are looking for ways to stop the city from constantly raising taxes. Within that story was a very stupid woman named Gretchen Gardner who calls herself an “artist.”

Good ol’ self-identified lefty Gretchen said that her tax bill was just killing her and she just couldn’t understand why.

Now, catch this logical disconnect:

“I’m at the breaking point,” said Gretchen Gardner, an Austin artist who bought a 1930s bungalow in the Bouldin neighborhood just south of downtown in 1991 and has watched her property tax bill soar to $8,500 this year.

“It’s not because I don’t like paying taxes,” said Gardner, who attended both meetings. “I have voted for every park, every library, all the school improvements, for light rail, for anything that will make this city better. But now I can’t afford to live here anymore. I’ll protest my appraisal notice, but that’s not enough. Someone needs to step in and address the big picture.”

The arrival of this year’s appraisal notices — which in Travis County showed homes’ average market values jumped 12.6 percent and average taxable values rose 8 percent for 2014 — is sparking a push for reform. Similar jumps have occurred in Williamson and Hays counties.

Wow. Talk about abject stupidity. This nitwit proudly says she has voted for every referendum, every new expenditure, and every big government program on the ballot, yet she doesn’t understand how her taxes keep going up?


How is it that a person with a brain can’t connect her constant votes for new, big spending programs and her rising tax bill?

Where does this ninny think all the money for all this spending is going to come from? A magical money tree in the mayor’s back yard?

This is more proof that liberals simply have no capability to employ logic. But worse, this is further proof that our school system is an utter joke.

Wizbang Weekend Caption Contest™
White House now accuses fellow Afghan vets of "swiftboating" Bergdahl
  • Hank_M

    The feel-good story of the week, in my opinion.
    Soon she’ll move to a neighboring state with low taxes and start the process all over again.

  • alanstorm

    What’s the problem? Sounds like a standard-issue liberal to me. Probably a cousin of the CA person who last year said (paraphrase):

    “I wanted everybody to have health insurance, I just didn’t think I would be the one paying for it!”

  • Texas_Accountant

    It’s not just residents of our state. I worked with a guy from New Jersey who said that he was thinking about moving because his property taxes were so high. He then said that we needed “progressive” government. The irony was lost on him.

  • Walter_Cronanty

    It’s not just liberals. Parents don’t teach their children basic economic truths anymore – and forget about public schools.
    One of my sons used to work as a legislative aide in the State House and then the Senate. High Speed Rail [well, it wasn’t actually high speed – proposed times between major cities were slower than a railroad schedule published in the 40’s] was all the rage. So the legislature did a poll. About 80% of respondents said: “Yes, state government should fund High Speed Rail.” About 80% of respondents also said: “No, my state tax money should not be used to fund High Speed Rail.” My son just shook his head.

    • JWH

      I like the idea of high-speed rail, actually. But such a rail service doesn’t make sense unless you can identify riders who will pay high enough fares to both pay back the bonds floated to build the darn thing and to cover its operating costs.

      • The idea is a nice one – it’s just that darn practicality shit gets in the way every time!

        • JWH

          Tangentially related: I heard a story a few years ago about a city in Oklahoma that raised its sales tax via referendum. The population was notoriously against tax increases, but city officials were able to get a yes vote at referendum. They succeeded because they laid out, in incredibly detailed terms, exactly why the city wanted the tax increase and what the tax increase was going to pay for.
          The end result was a tax hike that turned out to be negligible and affordable for most citizens, but also led the city to do some rather substantial downtown revitalization.
          I find myself thinking similarly. As a voter, I don’t reflexively oppose tax increases. But if I’m asked to vote on a tax increase, I want to know what the money’s paying for and how it’s going to benefit the community.

          • And we need to watch and make sure the money’s going THERE, and not for some other project that didn’t get approved and isn’t wanted… but IS being funded because the City Comissioner’s second cousin’s wife thought it’d be great to have the city spend a lot of money on some boondoggle.

        • JWH

          I really wish high-speed rail were feasible. But as nearly as I can tell, it would only be useful to connect high density urban areas (e.g., New York, Washington, Atlanta, Chicago, Boston, Los Angeles) and only if it didn’t stop at towns in between. I don’t see that happening w/ affordable tickets in the United States. Our population centers are just too spread out.

          • That’s the big problem – we’re really spread out. You look at the HSR attempt in California – and if you start thinking of the economics of it the tickets would have to be triple or more than that of current jet fares to approach break-even.
            So you’re paying three times as much to… get there slower even if you were non-stop.

            (Best just to ignore all that pesky economic stuff…)

            Of course, there’s talk about how we’ll have to go to rail when the oil that can be transformed to jet fuel runs out – but if THAT happens you can be pretty sure HSR isn’t going to be in the cards any more.

            Technically, HSR is really attractive. But we don’t live in a world where neat ideas in the private sector that can’t pay for themselves get to endure indefinitely. That’s only for government programs. 😉

    • warnertoddhuston

      High speed rail works better in smaller areas. The USA is too big for it.

  • LiberalNightmare

    You guys don’t understand. She wasn’t voting to spend ‘her’ money. She was voting to spend ‘your’ money.

    • We understand just fine, the bint in the article, rather less so..

  • yetanotherjohn

    Cut her some slack, someone does need to step in and address the big picture. Obviously, she’s not the one, but someone does.
    One of the classic symptoms of liberalism is to not understand unintended consequences. The federal government overrides the health insurance market in order to reduce health insurance costs and cover everyone. Who could possibly have foreseen that health insurance costs would have risen, not everyone would get covered and most people would end up paying more while getting less? It is obviously an unintended consequence and could only have been foreseen by a twelve year old of average intelligence.

  • Commander_Chico

    Haven’t been there, but I’ve heard that Austin is a great place to live.

    • alanstorm

      No doubt – if you can afford it.

      Which is sorta the point here.

  • Par4Course

    “The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money [to spend].” Margaret Thatcher. Of course, I doubt Ms. Gardner or her low-information liberal friends, ever heard of Lady Thatcher.

  • JWH

    There’s quite a bit at work here, actually, even if you assume tax rates don’t go up. All of those city services — light rail, libraries, etc. — drive up property values as having a house in the area becomes more attractive. So even if you’re not raising tax rates to pay for things, the city is still doing things that improve property values — and thus raise the tax amounts.

    • jim_m

      Those services don’t drive up the property values as much as the ability of people to pay for housing. The state government is seated there and you get a lot of political money being distributed locally.

      Property values are tied more to what people can pay than to what they are willing to pay. When you are able to pay a lot your drive to negotiate a bargain declines. Also, when people can pay more, builders build more expensive housing to cater to them. More expensive housing tends to pull less expensive housing up the cost ladder.

      Housing in Chicago can cost millions, it isn’t about city services, it’s about where the money is.

  • GarandFan

    Another liberal idiot who evidently believes that “taxes are paid by someone else”.

  • mikegiles

    So she’s an “artist”. If she’d ever had a real job , she would have figured it out when she looked at the pay stub of her first pay check.