This is bad any way you slice it:
Retail sales plunged far more than expected in December, a record sixth straight monthly decline as consumers were battered by a recession, a severe credit crisis and soaring job losses, none of which are likely to ease anytime soon.
The Commerce Department reported Wednesday that retail sales dropped 2.7 percent last month, more than double the 1.2 percent decline that Wall Street expected.
And it’s especially bad for a border county.
Retail sales in Clark County experienced a sharp decline in last year’s third quarter as the effect of the housing slowdown continued to seep into the local economy.
According to a report Tuesday from the Washington Department of Revenue, the county’s store-only sales totalled $499.9 million in the three months ending in September. That was down 7.9 percent from $542.6 million spent at retail stores in the third quarter in 2007, and weaker than statewide trend.
Store-only taxable retail sales throughout Washington declined by 6.2 percent to $12.4 billion.
State lawmakers and local governments are chasing a constantly moving revenue target, and the target is going down, down, down.
That’s what happens when your system of taxation relies far too heavily on a regressive sales tax. By the time new revenue estimates are available, they’re most likely already outdated.
People are understandably worried about their own personal pocketbooks. I’m not so sure the wider public truly understands the huge impact on things we all take for granted, like schools, roads, police, parks and other basic services.
Our system of taxation never made much sense, and now it is just going to make things worse. And down here where a short drive over the river takes one to sales tax free Oregon, the trend is likely to accelerate.
Deep thought: usually recessions are relatively short and the state’s coffers are replenished. Is anyone talking much about what will happen in an extended downturn of say, two to four years?
I’m sorry, but what am I supposed to be taking away from John’s post? That a progressive tax will make our recession go away? That the state needs to tax us even more? It seems to me he’s living in la la land if he thinks recessions aren’t supposed to have any negative consequences. I guess his mother told him everything will always be okay, and now he’s in shock that life can be a bumpy road.
Do more taxes state taxes mean lower unemployment? Let’s take a look. Rhode Island has a higher sales tax than Washington, and also a much higher unemployment rate. R.I.’s state sales tax is 7.0. Washington’s is 6.5. R.I.’s unemployment rate is 9.3. Washington’s is 6.4.
Sorry John, more taxes won’t make bad things disappear like your mommy told you.
I must spend less to pay increases in regressive taxes. For example, I’m already cutting back in anticipation of higher utility taxes for a tunnel. This belt-tightening reduces my monthly consumption from $1.19 to $1.14. That’s a 4% drop in consumption! The stock market is already down 300 points today and it’s not even 9 AM yet.
@1 Of course an idiot like you doesn’t get that we have to pay for schools, police, and jails even in bad times, and loading taxes on those least able to pay hampers both government revenues and economic recovery, because taking money from people who don’t have discretionary income has an immediate impact on consumer spending. It also means forcing people to go hungry, you stupid shit. How many more people will get electricity shutoffs if the city raises utility taxes to pay for an optional waterfront tunnel?
People are understandably worried about their own personal pocketbooks. I’m not so sure the wider public truly understands the huge impact on things we all take for granted, like schools, roads, police, parks and other basic services.
————
When people are worried about their jobs – and many are – the items above are down the list in priority. In our neighborhood near Greenlake we have at least three homeowners out of 26 homes on the block who have lost their jobs in the last six months (they are still without jobs).
The deteriorating revenue picture is certain to bump up the projected budget shortfall in the months ahead, and a revised figure of at least 7 billion has been floated.
@1 (continued) I haven’t seen a list of government services you’re willing to cut, although I can guess what it is. No public schools …
Let me interpret what Roger Rabbit is saying for everyone. Let me explain exactly what he believes. He believes poor people should pay little to no taxes. He believes only middle class people and up should pay taxes. Furthermore, he believe that during a recession, government functions should never have to tighten their belt or have to slow their rate of growth.
@5
I can do that. Are you talking state, county, or city?
“John Matsusaka, vice dean and professor at the University of Southern California Marshall School of Business, says the state’s fiscal woes are attributable to overspending, not revenue shortfalls.
“Revenue is up almost 40 percent from four years ago. This should have been more than enough to fund an orderly growth in state services. The problem is clearly overspending,” Matsusaka said. He noted many people doubt they are benefiting from the additional spending, so it is difficult to justify higher taxes on them.
Only a Handful Benefit
Much of California’s spending has been channeled into projects benefiting a few narrow interest groups, such as higher salaries for teachers and prison guards, instead of the public at large, Matsusaka said. This kind of exclusionary spending “seems especially pronounced in times of huge revenue windfalls, such as we had in the last four years,” he noted.
Matsusaka, Williams, Laffer, and Moore all agree strict tax and expenditure limitations are a good way to keep states from going overboard during economic expansions.
“The most advisable path to avoid future fiscal crises is to keep spending and tax receipts at a manageable and justifiable rate, usually population growth plus inflation,” Laffer and Moore wrote.
They caution against tax hikes as a response to an economic downturn: “If history is any guide, states that try to respond to slow revenue growth and budget deficits with tax hikes will not gain tax revenues; they will lose businesses, jobs, and families,” Laffer and Moore note.”
http://blogs.thenewstribune.co.....s_budget_p
http://www.effwa.org/main/arti.....number=564
I encourage everyone to go the Evergreen Freedom Foundation’s website and look at 105 days/105 ways to balance the state budget.
Uhhhh, Troll…if you needed some wood, would you take your chainsaw and go wandering around the desert?
The process of taxation is to raise money to pay for things and stuff the government does. Let’s for just a moment put aside what those things are, and ask whether if we need to obtain some money, should we try to get it from people who have some, or from people who don’t?
I could go on, about how people with more money tend to make a bigger “footprint” on the landscape, use more resources, make for more wear and tear on the infrastructure, and how maybe they aren’t paying their fair share as it is, but I wouldn’t want to put too much of a strain on your tiny little brainy-poo.
If I were dealing with someone in possession of anything resembling a social conscience, I could talk about society’s collective moral obligation to help those in need, but I know with you that would be a completely lost cause. Beating a dead horse, as it were. Almost as dumb as proposing to obtain money from people who don’t have any.
@10
Art, Washington State increased spending by 34 percent in the last four years. Do you think that was too much?
The issue is the particular taxes we choose to use to fund government services. Even if we cut government spending by 50% at all levels we would have the structural problems caused by the particular tax mix we choose to use.
Sales taxes and utility taxes hit the poor and those on fixed incomes harder than those who have high income. As we’ve seen sales tax revenue drops very fast in a recession.
Property taxes tend to hit those on fixed income very hard and people tend to be a bit sensitive to general property tax increases (as opposed to specific levies for specific uses like schools, parks, libraries, or fire protection).
The B&O tax system is a mess and has all sorts of special exeptions or rate reductions for specific industries. As it is gross receipts based tax it tends to be as cyclical as the sales tax.
Many people who have studied the issue believe having an income tax fully or partially replace some of the above taxes in this state would cause revenue to swing less wildly with boom/bust cycles. It addresses some of the structural deficit issues as well.
Due to the structural deficit the state tends to race during good times to make up for inflation and population growth during the bad times. I’m willing to bet if state spending increases over the past 25 years were annualized and compared to the annualized inflation and population growth rate the “growth in government” would track inflation and population growth fairly closely.
@11: Troll doesn’t understand how to use or understand statistics. Picking a single state example (@1) and then trying to extrapolate some kind of across the board answer is not just dumb – it is something that would flunk someone out of both logic 101 and statistics 101.
Picking a single point in time (4 years ago) and saying that spending went up is also stupid – in 2003 we had an economic downturn and CUT spending – so of course, in 2004-2008 spending would go up more.
Spending also goes up when the population increases. Spending goes up when there are catch ups, spending goes down when revenue decreases – does troll mention the rainy day fund – nope, troll is too simplistic to understand economics, taxes or any thing more complicated than 1 + 1.
Washington State’s population in 2000: 5.9 million.
Washington State’s population in 2009: 6.5 million.
Only a 600,000 increase in 9 years.
How much did the budge go up in that time?
And with that, I believe I just won this argument.
@13
I noticed you declined to answer my question in @11.
I don’t blame you.
15 He didn’t answer it, because your question wasn’t directed at him.
I didn’t answer it, because you were trying to change the subject. Seems wingers do that a lot when when anyone ask them a question they can’t easily answer, or (as I did) points out that they aren’t making sense.
@16
Earlier you said there is not “one penny” that can be cut from the budget. That “all of the money the state spends is vital to the welfare of the citizens.” To that, I say tens of millions of dollars is going to spent on art for the tunnel that will replace the viaduct. Why not start by cutting that?
@6 “He believes poor people should pay little to no taxes. He believes only middle class people and up should pay taxes.”
That’s right. You ever been hungry, bub? Do you know what a growling stomach feels like? No, of course you don’t, and being a Republican you have no scruples about pulling a milk bottle out of a baby’s mouth.
“Furthermore, he believe that during a recession, government functions should never have to tighten their belt or have to slow their rate of growth.”
That’s right, too. In hard times, you have more desperate people, so it stands to reason you’ll have more thefts and property crimes. A recession is not the time to be laying off cops. When the economy is weak, do you think we should tell, say, 15% of the kids they can’t go to school because there’s not enough money to educate everyone — so this state’s affluent households can continue to skate along lightly taxed and prosperous businesses can continue to enjoy their tax loopholes and tax subsidies? Of course you think that — you’re a Republican.
@7 Your choice.
@8 We’re not California. Btw, how is your Republican governor there doing with getting California’s budget under control? That’s what he promised voters, isn’t it?
@9 OK, fair enough — that’s something specific to work with. I’ll take you up on it.
Item #1 on EFF’s cut list: The state can save $500 million by downgrading their cable TV subscription from premium to basic. Frankly, I think this suggestion lacks plausibility, but let’s move on to #2.
#2: Give prisons higher priority than certifying animal masseuses. Fine, but prisons costs billions and the certification program costs thousands, plus if it’s run like most state licensing programs, certifying animal masseuses costs taxpayers nothing because it’s paid for by fees imposed on the regulated profession. That’s 0-for-2.
And that’s it. There is no item #3 because EFF hasn’t posted it yet. Apparently we have to wait until tomorrow to see what #3 is. So far, on Days 1 and 2 of their 105-day cost-cutting plan, EFF is batting .000.
Of course, you probably didn’t vet EFF’s plan before linking to it, Troll, because even you wouldn’t intentionally link to something that makes you look like a fucking fool.
The fact is, we have a large pool of untaxed money in this state, and it’s fair to tax it. The poorest 20% of our citizens pay 17% of their income in state/local taxes but the richest 20% pay only 4%. Pretty obvious here who isn’t paying their fair share, and who we should go to for the money to keep our schools, prisons, and courts running.
This may be freakeconomics mentality, but Tom Hartman keeps having segments with people who run the numbers and find that with high progressive taxes, the economy does well for the middle classes and is very even, and with low progressive taxes, the ultra rich do very well and there wild boom and bust cycles.
It doesnt’ make obvious sense,but the numbers don’t lie.
It’s worth a try. Lets go back to an 80% tax on the highest wage bracket.
If it doesn’t work, the economy was already in trouble, so no harm done.
#17.
I see your point, that 1% for art will rack up a great amount of art, that bound to offend someone, usually republican.
But neither do I want some graceless bleak structure with all the charm of soviet style architecture. (That’s called the viaduct)
24 The only point “Troll” has is covered by his hat.
He appears to be attempting to conduct an argument about several things, with several of us at the same time. Must be completely off his meds.
And here is a source or two.
http://www.alternet.org/workplace/106979
http://www.alternet.org/workpl.....the_facts/
There. Facts. Now you conservatives, logically explain how it’s wrong.
@1 No one in Washington pays 6.5% sales tax.
Troll, once you present the facts, incorrectneverbright moves on.
Hey blue john,
So me real data. Alternet.org is a libtard koolaid site.
I think they should cut state pension payments and make them pay for their medical insurance and cut the pharmacy completely and then the ungrateful state employees can be just like the rest of us who have to pay our own. They have had it too good for too long. Although this is going to happen one way or another, the sooner the better.
@Stupid Troll – I see you missed the main point in my argument – I guess reading is NOT your strong point. 2002/2003 were down budget years – so your 34% increase is skewed compared to – say going further back.
Guess I won the argument again – but it ain’t too hard against the likes of you.
@29: I guess Puddy doesn’t understand that data is data – but then again, the facts have liberal bias.
@28: Troll has no facts – like you he is too stupid to analyze data in a coherent way.
Incorrectnottobright: How about them Henry Paulsen facts? Yeah…
But California has a sales tax AND an income tax. How’s that workin’ for them???
I was in Phoenix Dec 10-18. My Sis works in Sam’s Club there @ the Cafe selling hotdogs & pizza slices. The rest of the store was not that busy the several times I was there.
Seems that in her store, the Cafe and the Bakery are the BIG sellers who appear to be ‘carrying’ the store the last couple of months, sales were down so badly. Many companies, instead of going for fancy catered affairs for Christmas luncheons, were going for orders of 50plus pizzas.
Pretty sad sign of the times, but I think it’s going to get worse.
ETA: No, I don’t think Sis was spoofing to make her job sound better. They get lists each month so each department knows how well they did/didn’t do. People need to eat, so those depts are probably doing better.
1. Cut off all the welfare bums – let em starve/freeze whatever I don’t give a fuck about those fucking paraistes.
2. Cut off the government unions – see #1.
3. Cut off social security – see #1.
BTW, I’m a very proud right wing troll. HA always brings out the trollific best in me! Thanks Goldy/RR/Molestor!
That’s right we’re all paying 8.25% sales tax thanks to you fucking socialists!