The invisible libertardian hand has its finger up your ass again. And you thought you could send your kids to college on that money. Sucker.
It’ll be that bankster’s kid going to the Ivy League school, not your kid, who will be lucky to pay $10,000 per to attend a de-funded land grant school.
So who’s waging class warfare in this country anyhow? And why are we supporting a party that is in on it?
If the video Goldy posted last night was the perfect example of why marijuana prohibition needs to end from a civil liberties standpoint, this may be the perfect example of why it needs to end from an economic standpoint:
The Brooks County Sheriff’s Department has a marijuana problem. They’ve got 200,000 pounds of pot, and they’re complaining that it would be too expensive to destroy it.
Even if you assume that this is all cheap Mexican weed, that’s still easily over $100 million worth of marijuana. Yet this Texas police department is worried about blowing their budget trying to destroy it. If they turned around and sold 1% of their looted stash, they could easily destroy the other 99% and probably upgrade their whole fleet of vehicles. Why we can’t do this math as a society (for a drug that makes people giggle and eat junk food) is why we arguably deserve the economic mess we’re living through.
That half-hour, thousand-point, momentary drop in the Dow Jones Industrial Average today? Oops…
In one of the most dizzying half-hours in stock market history, the Dow plunged nearly 1,000 points before paring those losses—all apparently due to a trader error.
According to multiple sources, a trader entered a “b” for billion instead of an “m” for million in a trade possibly involving Procter & Gamble.
During this afternoon’s half-hour ride, P&G fell from $60 to $39.37, then back again, eventually closing at $60.75. But that was nothing compared to Accenture, which over the course of a single minute plunged from $40 a share to one penny. Accenture shot back up to close at $41.09, down 2.6% for the day.
How fucked up is this? Both NASDAQ and the NYSE have announced that they would cancel all trades were a stock moved more 60% from it’s price at 2:40 PM, but there are sure to be parties who will have made or lost fortunes on today’s market… um… “glitch.”
So yeah, I guess the Republicans are right… Wall Street doesn’t just doesn’t need government regulators getting in the way of its smooth operations.
Day four, and I still don’t have my DSL restored.
After several unfulfilled assurances by phone and email, I called Qwest this morning fairly resigned, and the tech support rep I reached wasn’t much more enthusiastic. He didn’t even try to reset my line or reprogram my modem. He just insisted that it was too old and slow to deliver the 7 Mbps service it had delivered reliably up until the moment Qwest fucked with my line Monday morning, and rather than wasting anymore time for either of us, he offered to send me a new one, free of cost.
That means I won’t be back up until tomorrow, or possibly Monday. Assuming the new modem works. But at least that’s better than the status quo, so I accepted.
The main reason I refused to upgrade to 12 Mbps was that I didn’t feel like dealing with the support hassle, and potentially being left without service for a day or more. I guess Qwest showed me.
My trolls like to disparage me as a Darcy Burner fanboy, but I’m much more pragmatic than most folks imagine, for while other local bloggers had quickly lined up behind Darcy by the early fall of 2005, I insisted on waiting until after I saw who else might jump into the race.
In fact, I didn’t merely wait, but rather proactively reached out to then Republican state Rep. Fred Jarrett, urging him to challenge incumbent Dave Reichert… as a Democrat. And Fred’s thoughtful response not only deepened my respect for him, but ultimately convinced me that Darcy’s relative youth was an asset, not a liability:
I’m honored you’d make such a suggestion. Thanks. The truth is that I’m too old to run for Congress. It would be a waste of the state’s time. We need someone at the oldest in their early 40s (early-to-mid-30s would be best) to be Norm Dicks’ replacement. Notice what his seniority has done for the state, or better still, look at how the South has been able to dominate national legislative policy through their “seniority strategy.” All of Robert Caro’s books on LBJ demonstrate this in spades.
I hope that Fred doesn’t mind me publishing our private correspondence these years later, but his words of advice came back to me on news of Rep. David Obey’s retirement, and the likely elevation of Washington’s own Rep. Norm Dicks to the chairmanship of the powerful House Appropriations Committee.
Like it or not, a substantial segment of our state’s economy has long been dependent on our national military-industrial complex. Turn up your nose at such “pork barrel politics,” but that Air Force tanker contract for example, it’s gonna create jobs — either here in blue Washington, or to a lesser extent in red Alabama — and whatever the technical merits of Boeing’s bid, our aerospace workers would be at a severe competitive disadvantage without a powerful congressional delegation to back them up.
Likewise Washington is constantly competing with other states for billions of dollars of federal grants for education, health care, transportation, and other critical services and infrastructure projects. Again, it’d be nice to be more high-minded about it, but that wouldn’t get us very far in such an adversarial appropriations process.
So while Dicks might not be my favorite member of our state’s House delegation, he’s by far its most powerful, and thus we all have a selfish stake in his ascension to the Appropriations chair, and in assuring that Democrats maintain control of Congress. That’s something voters in WA-03 might want to consider as they fill the open seat down in that swing district; if Democrats lose control of the House, Dicks will lose much of his ability to help his colleagues bring home the bacon. And we all love bacon.
The same, by the way, holds true for Sen. Patty Murray. As a senior member of the Senate Appropriations Committee and the chair of its subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies, Murray has played a key role in securing federal dollars for vital local projects. Billions of dollars for Hanford cleanup? Thank Sen. Murray. $813 million to finish the Link Light Rail tunnel from Westlake to the UW? Sen. Murray has been Sound Transit’s “chief patron.” The federal dollars needed to fix the failing Howard Hanson dam? It’s Sen. Murray who is leading the charge in the other Washington.
It takes years to build up that kind of seniority and power. Decades. Sen. Murray is one of the most powerful Democrats in the U.S. Senate. It’s not beyond the realm of possibility that she could even be Majority Leader come January, 2011. So lose Sen. Murray and Washington state stands to lose billions of dollars in desperately needed federal money. That’s just the way the system works.
And that’s why, for example, I expect the Seattle Times to endorse Sen. Murray this November, regardless of her opponent. And I’ve proven pretty uncanny in predicting Seattle Times endorsements.
Yeah, sure, the economy sucks, and it’s always cathartic to send politicians a message. But Washington state simply does not have that luxury when it comes to senior congressional leaders like Rep. Dicks and Sen. Murray, and the Democratic majority that grants them their power. Thus wherever you stand ideologically, it is hard to argue that a Republican wave this November would be in the interest of Washington state.
Just to be clear, the police only found a small amount of marijuana, enough for a misdemeanor, but prosecutors tacked on a charge of child endangerment just to be assholes. Of course, what isn’t child endangerment apparently, is having a SWAT team kick down a front door in the middle of the night and shoot a kid’s dogs in front of him.
This is crazy. Absolutely crazy. How can anybody defend a national drug policy that leads to this?
The latest Elway Poll shows Sen. Patty Murray with a comfortable lead over all rivals.
Last week KING-5/SurveyUSA had Dino Rossi leading incumbent Democratic Sen. Patty Murray by a stunning 52-42 percent, a margin both camps dismissed as an outlier. Well, now that the latest Elway Poll has Murray leading Rossi by an even more impressive 51-34 percent margin, it’s easy to understand the insiders’ reluctance to accept SurveyUSA numbers at face value.
SurveyUSA had Murray only garnering 73% of both self-identified Democrats and Liberals, and a paltry 46% of metro Seattle voters… unimaginably low numbers come November. By comparison, Elway found Murray enjoying the support of 92% of Democrats, and 73% of Seattleites.
Further, Elway examines Murray’s job performance ratings, a number often looked to as an indicator of electoral strength, and while incumbents never want to come in under 50%, Elway points out that “Murray’s ratings have historically been mediocre,” and that her current 48% rating falls only slightly below her 17-year average. So Republicans shouldn’t take much encouragement from that either.
What does this all mean for Rossi, who was widely expected to announce his candidacy by the end of April, and who we know to have had lengthy meetings and conversations with consultants and fundraisers in recent weeks? Well, there’s simply no strong evidence that Murray is quite as vulnerable as Republicans would wish her to be. Sure, this is just one poll amongst many, and the election is still a long ways off, but as Elway concludes:
The world is going to turn a few times before voters actually cast ballots, and campaigns make a difference. But no matter how these findings are sliced, Patty Murray appears to be in a formidable position.
No doubt Rossi is still getting a lot of encouragement to enter the race from the NRSC and the Republican consultancy class, even in the face of these daunting numbers, so I hope he takes seriously a bit of free advice from someone with nothing to gain from his decision one way or the other. Nobody has ever profited from underestimating Patty Murray… except, you know, the dozens of pollsters, fundraisers, consultants, media buyers and other political professionals who have made millions off previous failed attempts to unseat her, and who would make millions more off of your campaign.
Remember, politics is just as much a business as real estate, so don’t trust their salesmanship any more than you would trust your own.
Update: [Darryl] I’ve done some further analyses here, including a combined analysis of the two polls today and last week’s SurveyUSA poll.
Dan Savage has been bringing us the latest anti-gay zealot to be exposed as having a secret gay lifestyle.
I’ve always wondered (and may have even asked this question before at HA), is there an equivalent to this when it comes to being fervently anti-drugs? Have any hardcore drug warriors ever been exposed as secret drug users? Off the top of my head, I can only think of this one, but that guy was neither a politician, nor all that zealous a drug warrior. What’s the difference, then? Obviously, the major difference between homosexuality and drug use is that homosexuality is in-born, while drug use is a choice, but I’m not sure that difference alone explains why the phenomenon of self-loathing only happens with homosexuality.
UPDATE: In the comments, Troutski points out that Elvis was made an honorary narcotics enforcement official by Nixon. That also made me think of an obvious example of this, Rush Limbaugh, whose love of Oxycontin and frequent railing against druggies certainly qualifies.
I’ve now gone over 48-hours without DSL at my house, and seem nowhere closer to getting this fixed. The good news is that Qwest’s automated tech support line reports that I actually have an open ticket. The bad news is that it reports that I’m scheduled to have it resolved by January 1. After 45 minutes on hold, I gave up waiting for a live representative.
Technical breakdowns happen, but the most annoying thing about this outage is that there is nothing technical about it. My line and my modem were fine until somebody at Qwest reprovisioned me to faster, more expensive service without my permission. And despite support’s promises, they’ve been unable to reset my line to the where it was prior to 9:30 am Monday.
I’ve probably wasted five hours over the past two days attempting to deal with this, and many more hours traveling about in search of open WiFi networks. This sort of customer service is inexcusable.
State Rep. Chris Hurst (?-31) has started identifying himself on his campaign website as an “Independent Democrat,” which I suppose as far as bullshit, swing-district, campaign rhetoric goes, isn’t so remarkable. (Cowardly, disloyal and whiny, yes… but remarkable, no). But word is he’s planning to take his pouting subterfuge to the next level by identifying himself on the ballot as “Prefers Independent Democrat Party”… and he’s reportedly urging several colleagues he presumes to be equally cowardly, disloyal and whiny, to join him in pissing on their own caucus.
Yeah, well, that sorta transparent gamesmanship may be acceptable from the lying bastards in the Prefers Grand Old Party Party, but if Hurst and his cohorts want to deny the Democrats, then I say turnabout is fair play. Any candidate who refuses to identify himself as a Democrat to voters simply can’t be trusted to uphold Democratic values and unity, and thus should be denied any party support during the election. Furthermore, should Hurst or others follow through with their petty little game, I wouldn’t mind seeing them stripped of their caucus rank and committee chairmanships.
After all, it would be unfair to voters to allow Hurst to run as an “Independent,” yet serve as a Democrat.
Playing games like this with the ballot is both a disservice to voters and an insult to the rest of the caucus, so if Hurst and others are so disgusted with their fellow Democrats that they can’t bear to identify themselves as one, then I suggest they man up and start their own party.
UDPATE [Lee]: Hurst also happens to be the biggest roadblock to getting even basic drug law reform passed through the House. If being an “independent Democrat” means putting law enforcement union special interests over fiscally responsible and morally sound progressive policy, then it might be worthwhile for the voters of the 31st District to send someone else to Olympia.
Please join us tonight for an evening of politics under the influence at the Seattle chapter of Drinking Liberally. We meet at the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E. beginning at about 8:00 pm. Stop by even earlier and enjoy some dinner.
Not in Seattle? There is a good chance you live near one of the 352 other chapters of Drinking Liberally.
The grand entry is served by a roundabout driveway. The 5 car garage is located to the right.
Reagan Dunn has a really nice house. Big. Expensive. Showy. (Though judging from the gaudy interior design, not all that gay.) So it’s little wonder a big spender like him opposes a high earners income tax…
LOCAL attorney and income-tax advocate William Gates Sr. is at it again. A few years ago, he led a task force to look into creating an income tax in Washington state. Now he is proposing an initiative to the people to create an income tax this November.
Oh that naughty Gates Sr., he’s “at it again.” Him and his income tax fetish.
Actually, the state Legislature created the bipartisan Washington State Tax Structure Committee back in 2001, composed largely of academics specializing in public finance, tax economics, accounting, and tax law, of which Gates Sr. was elected chair. The committee was charged with reporting back on how well our current tax system worked, and with recommending changes that might better serve the citizens of Washington state in the twenty-first century. The committee was not instructed to look into an income tax, in fact, it was specifically encouraged not to.
The committee determined that our tax structure is “fundamentally inequitable to low- and middle-income people, unfair to many businesses, and subject to sharp fluctuations in revenue.” It further concluded that it was inadequate for the realities of our modern economy, and proposed several major and minor alternatives for addressing these problems, one of which was a flat, broad based income tax.
The Legislature typically did nothing.
That proposal is wrong for Washington because it opens the door to expansion of the tax to all of us in the future, it will kill our economic recovery and it makes our state less competitive to new businesses.
And of course by “all of us,” Dunn is referring to himself, his family and the wealthy in-laws who presumably paid for the “grand entry way” and the rest of Dunn’s shockingly ostentatious McMonstrosity:
Grand entry way features elegant chandelier and custom millwork.
Dunn makes two economic assertions, and one bullshit, rhetorical red herring. Whether a high earners income tax would kill our recovery and make our state less competitive, as Dunn asserts, well, neither he nor I are economists, but many of the members of the Tax Structure Committee were, so I urge you to read their findings on such issues. As to the bullshit slippery slope argument that has become a mainstay of the anti-1077 camp, even Dunn can’t manage to keep that one straight:
The Legislature recently went through a long, torturous special session to debate increased taxes and to pass a state budget. Their final budget proposal made modest cuts and made up the difference with increased taxes. Legislators in Olympia didn’t have the guts to raise general taxes. They realized the people of this state have limits on what they are willing to pay to government.
So, um, the fact that the Legislature didn’t “have the guts” to raise general taxes… doesn’t that somewhat rebut Dunn’s argument that the slope to taxing “all of us” is as slippery as the granite countertops in his gourmet kitchen?
Kitchen features heated floor, and two Islands, as well as breakfast bar and pass thru to informal dining area.
Last year, when I spent the session endlessly editorializing on the virtues of a high earners income tax, I heard from several legislators who lectured me on my arrogance. The “people” rejected an income tax by a two to one margin back in 1973, I was told, so who was I to think I know better than the people?
The result of such forward thinking in 2009, Dunn fails to remind you, was an all-cuts budget.
Since the Legislature has maxed out every other tax source, those who want to endlessly increase the size of government need a new one. Gates has now stepped in with his proposal to “tax the rich.” Proponents will argue that it’s just a few thousand rich people. They hope you won’t notice that they have opened the door to a general income tax in the future.
Once Pandora’s box has been opened, how long will it take the Legislature to expand the income tax to you? With the Legislature’s proven appetite for taxes and spending, I would say not very long.
I’ll agree with Dunn that our current tax sources are pretty damn close to being “maxed out,” yet ironically, state and local government spending has been steadily shrinking as a percentage of the state economy for the past couple decades, as has per capita state spending adjusted for inflation according to the IPD for State and Local Governments. In other words, demand for government services is growing faster than the government itself.
Oh, and speaking of appetites:
Formal dining room has coved ceilings and wainscoting will enhance any dining experience.
The fact is, the experience of the past two Legislative sessions, in which budgets have been slashed, is that our elected officials have little appetite for tax hikes, even when that would be the economically responsible policy. Again, as Dunn himself points out, our legislators don’t “have the guts” to impose a general tax increase, and I hardly see how a high earners income tax changes that.
There has never been a tax that legislators have voluntarily cut. The only things we see year after year are incremental increases in the sales tax, property tax, sin taxes and a multitude of fees. Is there any doubt that the $200,000 income-tax cap will slowly creep down to the middle class?
Patently untrue. When Tim Eyman’s I-695 and its massive tax cut was thrown out as unconstitutional, state lawmakers quickly reenacted it legislatively. And when Eyman’s I-747 was recently thrown out after years of starving local budgets, Gov. Chris Gregoire called a special session to reenact that.
Dunn says that “we see year after year” of incremental tax increases, yet the state sales tax rate was last raised in 1983, and the state property tax levy rate has shrunk by a third over the past decade due largely to the limits imposed by the legislatively approved I-747. Meanwhile the state B&O tax on manufacturing has actually been cut twice over the past 15 years.
Yes, sin taxes routinely go up, but that is the nature of volume based excise taxes if they’re to keep up with inflation, and the same holds true for the gas tax, which despite recent (voter approved) increases now sits well below the historical average as a percentage of the cost of a gallon of gas. As for recent local sales and property tax hikes, these have all been approved by voters, often by overwhelming margins, to pay for services and public infrastructure investments we obviously want.
Informal dining area with fireplace and access to patio.
So there’s as little to support Dunn’s fears of middle class tax creep as there is to support his need for a second dining room.
The people passed Initiative 601, limiting state spending to the rate of inflation. When the Legislature found that inconvenient, they changed it. The people passed Initiative 960 requiring a two-thirds vote by the Legislature on new taxes. This past session, the Legislature found that inconvenient and changed it.
And the people elected the legislators who suspended I-601 and I-960, so what exactly is Dunn’s point? That’s how a democratic republic works, and if the people are unhappy with their lawmakers’ actions, they can always vote them out of office. Which perhaps explains why, as Dunn points out, our legislators lack “the guts” to pass a general tax increase like, you know, this one:
Is there any reason to believe state lawmakers will honor the $200,000 income-tax threshold in future sessions?
Yes! Because they don’t “have the guts to raise general taxes!” Those are Dunn’s words, not mine, though I agree with him 100%. And because, as they have proven with I-695 and I-747, our lawmakers don’t just tend to honor the will of the people, they fear it.
Whether the Legislature will be all that quick to adjust the income thresholds upwards with inflation, well that might be a stronger line of attack from critics like Dunn, although regardless, it would take an awfully long time for personal income to rise to the level where the proposed tax would fall on folks without “butler pantries.”
Butler's pantry features dual wine refrigerators and sink. It connects with formal dining room on right.
I guess even Dunn understands that defending the middle class against a high earners income tax is a bit of a challenge, so now it’s time to defend the virtues of the butler pantry crowd:
Gates will mask this income tax in the class-warfare mantra of “tax the rich” that we have heard far too much of in recent years.
Yes, in advocating for a slightly less regressive tax structure, Gates, the billionaire father of America’s richest man is engaging in “class warfare.” Gimme fucking break.
What he doesn’t tell you is that most small-business owners report their business income on their personal tax returns. They include money that they plan to put back into their business.
And what Dunn doesn’t tell you is that I-1077 eliminates the B&O tax on 80% of businesses, and lowers it on another 10%. This will be a particularly welcome relief to startups that have yet to turn a profit, but must now pay taxes on their gross revenue.
The income tax will prevent businesses from hiring new workers and expanding their operations. It will effectively stymie our economic recovery and continue the misery of the Great Recession.
He says it, but he provides no evidence to back it up, unlike 300-page Tax Structure Committee report that he so glibly dismisses. What is this… some sort of game?
Game room with wet bar, TV, and entry to home theater. Note the box beam ceiling!
People must ask themselves how this initiative will attract business to this state and put people back to work?
Um, by making it easier and more affordable to start up a small business because you’ll only have to start paying taxes on it once you’re drawing big profits out of it?
Clearly it will be a drag on our economy and add one more reason why businesses will not relocate here.
Clearly, Dunn doesn’t know what the fuck he’s talking about, as Washington consistently ranks as having one of the best business climates in the nation. And clearly, Dunn would make a lousy spokesman for our region’s economic development efforts.
We have already seen Boeing move its headquarters to Chicago and open a new assembly line in South Carolina. Will creating an income tax attract the jobs that we have already lost to other states?
I dunno. Both Illinois and South Carolina have income taxes, yet Boeing had no qualms about moving there. So will creating a high earners income tax drive jobs away from Washington when we’ll still have one of the most wealthy-friendly tax structures in the nation? Huh? Will it, Reagan? Do you have any answers, or just rhetorical questions? Or is this all just political theater to you?
The theater has sound proofing construction, 10 barcolounger theater seats, HD receiver and surround sound. In fact, the whole house is wired with hidden speakers.
The citizens of Washington state have repeatedly told our elected state leaders that they don’t want an income tax.
True, voters rejected a broad based income tax by a two to one margin the last time it was on the ballot… way back in 1973. But they approved an income tax with 70% of the vote back in 1932. And if you find that 78 year-old vote unconvincing, well, it’s instructive to point out that 1932 was about as far removed from 1973, as 1973 is removed from today.
Our state leaders don’t have the guts to pass an income tax through the legislative process.
So let’s see… “our state leaders don’t have the guts to pass an income tax” on rich people who live in 6,900 SQFT houses, but they would have the guts to extend the tax to the rest of us. I still don’t get Dunn’s logic.
They hope that you will take the class-warfare bait and pass it for them. Let’s tell them once again that we don’t want an income tax — now or ever.
I think what Dunn and his fellow travelers are really afraid of is that voters will tell legislators the opposite, and that even if I-1077 loses, it will lose by such a small margin that it will forever reshape the debate on tax structure in Washington state. I think what Dunn is really afraid of is that a strong vote in favor of I-1077 will finally give our state leaders some guts to see to it that people like him finally pay their fair share.
David Frum tries to fill the pair of clown shoes that have been sitting around the CNN offices since Lou Dobbs left:
Many Americans carry in their minds a family memory of upward mobility, from great-grandpa stepping off the boat at Ellis Island to a present generation of professionals and technology workers. This story no longer holds true for the largest single U.S. immigrant group, Mexican-Americans.
Stephen Trejo and Jeffrey Groger studied the intergenerational progress of Mexican-American immigrants in their scholarly work, “Falling Behind or Moving Up?”
They discovered that third-generation Mexican-Americans were no more likely to finish high school than second-generation Mexican-Americans. Fourth-generation Mexican-Americans did no better than third.
If these results continue to hold, the low skills of yesterday’s illegal immigrant will negatively shape the U.S. work force into the 22nd century.
Ignoring for a second the obvious flaws in this argument – that the poor educational results aren’t necessarily a result of ability, but of circumstance and environment, both which can be improved upon – you can click through to the report to see that Mexican-Americans do about as well as African-Americans. In other words, David Frum is arguing that African-Americans and Mexican-Americans negatively shape the U.S. work force. The overall argument he’s making regarding immigration is no different than if he was arguing that we need to save the U.S. economy by keeping black people from having children.
Of course, this sentiment among conservatives shouldn’t be surprising to hear. Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina specifically pointed to his state’s large African-American population as a “problem” facing his state. Conservatives often like to claim that the racism of the 1960s is dead. And in a way, they’re right. But a different racism has taken its place. What was once a more individualized contempt for any and all people of a different color has just transformed into a more subtle belief that people of a different ethnicity are collectively a burden on greater society.
Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!