[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1B9Xs2QTmo&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]
Of course, Tim Eyman is an economic genius who knows better than everybody else, so you can pretty much ignore what the folks from Colorado are saying.
Meanwhile for all of Tim’s complaints about how our out-of-control government is crushing our state economy, it sure is strange how high Washington ranks in terms of business climate, according to even conservative sources such as Forbes (#2) and the Tax Foundation (#9). But then, as a successful novelty watch salesman, Tim knows better about business climate than these folks too.
What’s the over/under on Timmeh’s inevitable copy-and-paste press release comment? Whatever it is, I’ll take the under.
Eyman can’t even do simple math. He promised voters that wide-open slot machine gambling would cut property taxes by $400 million. To get to that figure with a 25% state tax on the house take from a 90% payout ratio, Washingtonians would have to feed $16 billion into slot machines — about $2,600 for every man, woman, and child; over $10,000 for a family of four. Put another way, that family would lose $1,000 playing the slots to save $200 in property taxes. Anyone wanna guess who paid Timmy for that initiative?
No initiative is too stupid or dishonest for Eyman, as long as he gets paid for it.
Here’s Tuesday’s update that was sent to supporters and the media that responds to this:
RE: I-1033 renews Washington’s I-601 – I-1033 is very different than other state’s limits – here’s why
Passed by voters in 1993 during tough economic times, Initiative 601 put a limit on the growth of government (inflation plus populatution growth and required 2/3’s legislative approval for tax increases). I-601 worked very well for many years until the Legislature started putting loopholes in it. Their removal of its fiscal discipline policies led directly to the fiscal roller coaster of Gregoire’s first 4-year term, resulting in a $9 billion deficit.
In 2007, we sponsored and voters approved I-960 which reestablished the two-thirds requirement for tax hikes, closing the loopholes they’d put in it. In 2007, the voters approved a constitutionally-protection rainy day fund, reenacting a I-601 policy that earlier Legislatures had undermined with loopholes in I-601.
I-1033 completes the renewal of I-601 by bringing by the growth limit (inflation and population growth) with the same safety valve: higher increases are OK only with voter approval.
Rather than acknowledge and respond to our state’s 16 years of personal, real-world experience with and without I-601, I-1033’s opponents have tried to divert attention to other states with other limits. None of these comparisons are appropriate because, first off, Washington’s initiative process allows the people to pass laws which are subject to legislative change — other states (California, Colorado, Oregon, etc) allow their state’s voters to approve changes to their state Constitutions which cannot be changed by the Legislature.
Other state’s limits are immovable, unchangeable policies — Washington’s initiatives are the people pointing the politicians in a particular direction with politicians empowered to change that direction if they want to.
When opponents refer to initiatives in Washington as ‘straitjackets’, as they’re doing now with I-1033, I’m reminded of a recent column by the Washington Research Council’s Dick Davis who wrote: “there’s no such thing as a statutory straitjacket.”
Secondly, other state’s limits are different than I-601/I-1033. One of the commonly heard claims is: “I-1033 is just like Colorado’s TABOR amendment.” Not true. Colorado voters approved the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights in 1992 – Washington voters approved I-601 in 1993. They’re very different. TABOR was a constitutional amendment — it couldn’t be amended by the Legislature; I-1033, like I-601, is a law, providing the Legislature with flexibility to change it. TABOR encompassed every government – school districts, library districts, fire districts, etc. I-1033 focuses only on the state, counties and cities. TABOR put a limit on every governmental account and every tax dollar received, including transportation funds, pension funds, capital budgets, workman’s compensation, unemployment insurance funds, federal funds, etc. I-1033, like I-601, only addresses the general fund. TABOR didn’t allow rainy day funds. I-1033, like I-601, gives ‘first bite’ of excess tax revenues to the rainy day fund. TABOR didn’t exclude federal funds; I-1033 explicitly does. TABOR prohibited governments from borrowing money except with voter approval; I-1033 has nothing like that. TABOR required voter approval for any tax and fee increase by any government; I-1033 doesn’t. TABOR was very, very broad and inflexible – I-1033 is very focused with plenty of flexibility.
Governor Gregoire has said “don’t vote for I-1033 or else we’ll turn into California.” Please. The insanity that is California is a perfect storm of rip-tide pressures tearing that state apart at the seams. But once again, even if you buy the argument that all of California’s dysfunction is a result of initiatives (which we don’t agree is their biggest problem), their initiatives are part of their state Constitution and thus cannot be amended by the Legislature. That is not the case in Washington. We accept that it is part of the checks and balances of our state’s initiative process that voter-approved initiatives are subject to legislative change.
But with I-1033, the policy is eminently reasonable — allow government an automatic increase every year with a built-in safety valve, the same one that was in I-601: if government thinks the automatic increase isn’t a big enough increase, they can go to the voters and ask for more. I-1033, just like I-601, allows the people, and not the politicians, to decide how fast government grows and how big a tax burden we can afford.
Remember, I-1033’s opponents can’t/won’t answer this simple question: what’s wrong with going to the voters?
Here’s another question opponents can’t/won’t answer: what’s wrong with bringing back I-601’s fiscal discipline?
Opponents have no alternative to I-1033 to lower property taxes (they actually think taxpayers are UNDERTAXED!??!!). Opponents have no alternative to I-1033 to get government off the fiscal roller coaster. Opponents have no alternative to I-1033 to stop politicians from unilaterally raising taxes and fees. Opponents want us to trust the politicians, despite their insatiable appetite for higher taxes.
http://www.VotersWantMoreChoices.com
I see Timmie’s robot is autoposting here again. The real Tim Eyman apparently doesn’t have the guts to show his face in this blog.
Oh my god Timmy, I say we go back to the initiative that renames you a Horses Ass! At least it is an honest initiative!
I think most people know if the initiative is sponsored by Eyman do the opposite of whatever the hell he wants.
I’m confused TJ…did you want to bet on how quickly, length, relevance (or lack thereof), inanity…or all of the above?
Hey…how ’bout a Little Timmy Eyeman Fantasy League?
Oh yeah…HE’S doing that one.
re Timmeh: “Remember, I-1033’s opponents can’t/won’t answer this simple question: what’s wrong with going to the voters?”
Let’s go to the people for a vote on a state income tax for the rich. Still in favor of putting everything up to a popularity vote for the uninformed? This isn’t American Idol you are talking about.
So, in answer to you, Timmeh, I believe your (honest) answer to my question would reveal to you the weakness of your argument.
@4 “We accept that it is part of the checks and balances of our state’s initiative process that voter-approved initiatives are subject to legislative change.”
If your initiatives need changing why pass them in the first place?
@4 (continued) “Opponents have no alternative to I-1033 to lower property taxes (they actually think taxpayers are UNDERTAXED!??!!). Opponents have no alternative to I-1033 to get government off the fiscal roller coaster. Opponents have no alternative to I-1033 to stop politicians from unilaterally raising taxes and fees. Opponents want us to trust the politicians, despite their insatiable appetite for higher taxes.”
Absolutely false. The Gates Commission laid out several alternatives, any of which would be better than the Rube Goldberg tax system we have now. But if you want a specific alternative, I’ll offer you one: Replace regressive taxes with a state income tax.
Studies show the poorest Washingtonians pay over 5 times as much of their income to state and local taxes as the richest Washingtonians. State revenues are in line with other states; it’s the distribution of tax burdens in this state that’s out of whack.
When are you going to help poor and low-income taxpayers by sponsoring an income tax initiative, Timmy? Until you do, you’re nothing but a vacuous blowhard.
@10 “Studies show the poorest Washingtonians pay over 5 times as much of their income to state and local taxes as the richest Washingtonians.”
Uhhhh, Roger? Methinks Tim’s perfectly fine with that. If not, it’s a safe bet his Woodinville sugar daddy is.
What is wrong with going to the voters? Me thinks alot of people would vote to boil Timmeh in hot oil.I know I would.
@4
Hey Tim, I thought we elected the members of the legislature to represent us? If that is the case shouldn’t they be able to tax and spend all they want as long as they get the bill through the legislature? After all if we don’t like what they are doing we’re free to toss them out on the street every 2 or 4 years.
I don’t understand why we need these silly statutory limits on legislative power as it kind of defeats the purpose of representative democracy in the first place.
Also why do only property owners get the benefits of the tax rebates? That hardly seems fair. I pay a ton in taxes right now and while I don’t support I-1033 I sure as heck would like to get the benefit if it happens to pass.
@12
No we want to stuff him in a box with no air holes then send him on a slow boat to Antarctica.
Ah, yet another fine example of chronically unemployed little worm Davey Goldstein and his continuing obsession and jealousy of good buddy Tim. Perhaps Goldstein can work as a comedian, as this is entertaining, comical, and ultra-hilarious. Good luck Goldy, you sure need it.
More poop from Tim.
Rujax!, I meant time from when Goldy posted the thread to when Timmeh posted his press release. It took all of 21 minutes this time. He’s slipping.
Look, Tim takes on this work on his own time out of his own pocket…scratch that.
starting over
Look, Tim has never had an initiative struck down as unconstitutional…. scratch that.starting over
Look! Tim is not a self serving charlatan . . .
Ah heck!!! Tim,s a Horse’s Ass!!
If Timmy wants to shave state spending he should sponsor an initiative to cut the salaries of the U.W. and W.S.U. football coaches. I’d like to see him collect signatures for that in Seattle and Pullman …
This is the correct answer.
Fair, responsible, and more predictable.
Which is why the trogs oppose it, I suppose.
We have a representative democracy. Why does Timmy hate America?
I’m curious, and this is something I really, sincerely want to know:
What is this “ton of taxes” people pay right now? Tell me what that consists of. I’m a property owner but don’t think my tax is huge compared to other parts of the country. We don’t pay tax on food. I don’t buy much else, so sales tax doesn’t really bother me.
If you live fairly reasonably, just what does that “ton” consist of? Maybe you really don’t need all that stuff? Or if you think you do, you should just stop complaining, because if you can afford to BUY it, then you’re not really poor, are you?
It’s not at all strange that Washington ranks high in business-friendliness given the huge subsidies state taxpayers dole out to companies like Boeing and the way we load tax burdens on the poor and working class so rich executives and big corporations can enjoy a free ride.
Hell, I’d vote to castrate Timmy….if it were possible.
Boeing Boots 43 Employees From Law School
I see in today’s news that Boeing is curtailing its free-tuition benefit for employees, including cutting off 43 Boeing workers attending Seattle University’s evening law school, where the tuition costs $30,000 a year.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....erk25.html
Seems unfair to me.
Boeing doesn’t really pay for this, of course; the tuition subsidies are part of the company’s labor costs, which ultimately get passed through to travelers who fly on Boeing airplanes.
Now, if you’re a frequent flyer, maybe you’ll squawk about paying $30,000 a year to send people who already have high-paying manufacturing jobs to law school. Well, if you fly on commercial airlines, you’re also paying for $70 million runways for playboys to land their private jets on, and nobody’s cutting that off, so what’s the beef?
http://www.usatoday.com/travel.....orts_N.htm
Yep, what it boils down to is, the Boeing workers lose their $30,000 law school tuition because of “tough times,” but rich bastards who fly $30 million private jets as a hobby keep the $70 million that taxpayers built for them. Crony capitalism is alive and well; everything for the rich, while the workers suck eggs.
I agree, property taxes in King County aren’t out of line. And the state sales tax is entirely voluntary so should make those less coservative fairly happy. Those consuming more, and therefore in a position to do so, pay more in taxes. Those simply putting food on the table and clothing the kids for school less.
What most people who complain are worried about is the hidden taxation. The contractor you bring to your house pays about 10% of his employees wages on state taxes, if things haven’t changed in the past couple years. He or she also pays local taxes for a business license and for the permit. That is of course passed on to you. The shoes you buy are taxed at various levels from manufacture to retail. Sure the $4 or $5 in actual labor and materials somewhere in China is heavily profited off of by the time they cost $80 at the store, but a lot of that is state and federal taxation too. Your car is licensed as a tax, as is the driving license itself.
The point is that the obvious sources of tax revenue don’t account for much of the total tax burden passed on to Washington consumers. Whether that total is a ton or not is debatable, but the sales and property tax are far from being the whole story.
Predictably, a spokesperson for private airplane owners wrote a letter to the editor of USA Today bitching about the newspaper’s expose of the cushy deal that private airpline owners (especially owners of multimillion-dollar private jets) get from taxpayers. He said:
“[A]lmost all airline flights go from only 70 major hubs. For the myriad communities not serviced by these hubs, there is no way to get there without business aviation.”
http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped.....rowth.html
Yeah well, the problem with this argument is business aviation only services those who can afford it, which is like .001% of us, and the other 99.9% who pay 100% of the taxes that build $70 million runways for those free riders can only get to those myriad communities via Greyhound, rental car, or walking. Which makes those taxpayer-subsidized airports irrelevant to those who pay for them.
I’ll reconsider my willingness to pay passenger taxes to support business aviation when the owners of business aircraft offer me rides on their planes. Until then, let ’em build their own airports or suck eggs.
A business will sell its product or service for ‘all that the traffic will bear’. With tax added in, we get services from the government that the private sector can’t or won’t provide.
There is this naive assumption on the part of many ‘hardheaded’ conservatives that if you lower taxes, goods and services will be cheaper.
Not so. Corporate profits will just be higher.
If Timmy Eyman was a real populist here are two initiatives he would sponsor:
1. No more tax breaks or subsidies for Boeing.
2. End all state and local tax subsidies for general aviation airports.
#2 doesn’t really address the underlying problem of taxing commercial airline passengers to build $70 million runways for owners of $30 million private jets, but the feds only put up the capital costs and many general aviation airports get operating subsidies from local and state governments.
By the way, if you think you can wander into the hangers or VIP lounges of those airports just because you paid for them, you have rocks in your head. See how far paying taxes for those places gets you when they call security and haul you off in a paddy wagon because you’re an “unauthorized visitor.”
@28 This is a lot like the lamebrained conservatives’ failed gas tax repeal initiative. Those clinkerheads didn’t realize that if they lowered gas taxes by 5 cents, the pump price of gas would stay the same and oil companies would bank another 5 cents a gallon of profit, while our roads went to hell.
You see, the pump price (which includes taxes) is determined by market supply and demand. In recent years, demand has been much more flexible than supply in the oil markets. For practical purposes, supply may be considered as nearly fixed, so there’s a very direct correlation between demand and price.
If demand sets the pump price at $3.25, and you knock a nickel off state gas taxes, conservatives think the pump price will be $3.20. The problem is, that would increase demand for gas, but the supply doesn’t exist to fill that increased demand, so the price would rise back to $3.25 to bring demand down to the available supply. So, voila, the oil companies instead of WSDOT get the nickel, and our roads go to hell for lack of money to maintain them, and pretty soon people are paying $3.25 a gallon to drive on potholed highways that cause hundreds or thousands or dollars of damage to their cars’ suspensions.
That’s how smart, or rather, stupid that conservatives are. Why the hell would anyone vote for these people? Voting Republican is like shooting your own balls off.
13 1 Get a job.
2 Establish some credit.
3 Save your money for a down payment.
4 Buy a house.
5 Enjoy the benefits of I-1033.
@31 I have a better idea. Let’s get rid of Washington’s Rube Goldberg tax structure that coddles the rich and screws the poor, and replace it with an equitable taxation scheme based on a state income tax.
@31 (continued) I don’t see why he should get a job working for a rich guy and borrow money from a rich guy to buy a house built by a rich developer so 3 rich guys can profit from his work. Screw work! Nobody should work under our socialist system. That’s right, socialist. We don’t have capitalism in this country, and anyone who says we do is a liar. We have a socialistic system of taking from the poor and working classes and giving to the rich. See, e.g., the taxing of economy-class passengers packed into Boeing or Airbus cattle cars to build runways for owners of private luxury jets. Why would anyone work under a system like that? I don’t, and no one else should, either.
Like I said, if Eyman was really a populist, and if he really gave a damn about the little guy, he would put some of that energy into cutting off public funding for general aviation airports.
“Get a job” is the absolute worst advice you can give someone. You have to really hate someone to tell them to “get a job.” A job is almost the worst thing that can happen to a person.
When you work for someone else, they’re entitled to what your knowledge, skill, intellect, and hard work produces. They can offer you as little pay for it as they feel like. They can let you go whenever they feel like it, even for a bad reason or no reason at all. When you have a boss, he can treat you as rudely or uncivilly as he likes. He can lie to you about the financial condition of his company, and doesn’t even have to pay the wages he agreed to pay you for your work, if he goes bankrupt. Why the fuck would anyone work for someone else?
It used to be that companies offered workers secure employment with good pay and health, vacation, and retirement benefits. There was a general understanding about the promotional opportunities that existed if you were smart, worked hard, and were productive. All of that is gone now.
I once read an anecdote about Boone Pickens in a business magazine. (I read a lot of business literature because I’m an investor.) Pickens had just acquired a company and a bunch of its employees were being let go. A manager attempted to intercede with Pickens on behalf of an employee who had worked 30 years for the company. The manager argued the company owed the employee something for his loyalty. Pickens snapped, “He was paid, wasn’t he?”
What every worker today needs to understand is that hard work and loyalty gets you nothing more than this week’s paycheck. There is no such thing as company loyalty to employees anymore. It’s foolhardy to think loyalty to the company will improve your job security, because all companies are now run like Pickens ran his companies. Company ownership changes hands frequently, and new sets of managers come and go, who don’t know you or your history with the company and could care less even if they did because they themselves will be out of a job in the next round of mergers or buyouts. In short — especially with benefits like health insurance, pension plans, and free tuition disappearing — today a job is worth nothing more than this week, and only a fool counts on an employer past next payday.
In the future, all workers will have to be entrepreneurs; and, frankly, I think they should charge businesses entrepreneurial fees instead of working for wages.
For example, instead of working as a waitress for $2.13 per hour + tips, you should go into business as a “Hospitality Consultant” and charge restaurants $50 an hour for your services. That’s actually cheap compared to what most business people charge their customers for labor. Try hiring a car mechanic or plumber for $50 an hour, you can’t do it, shop rates everywhere are $100 an hour or more. If you have to pay someone $100 an hour to unclog your drains, why should a restaurant owner expect you to wait tables and serve customers for less than $50 an hour?
After all, like the owner of car repair or plumbing shop, you have capitalization needs, overhead, taxes, and administrative expenses. You have to pay for your own health insurance and retirement. You have to pay the costs of getting yourself to the job site. Instead of being an employee and working for shitty wages, you should go into business for yourself!
A good Hospitality Consultant is easily worth $50 an hour. After all, the job involves more than serving food and wiping off dirty tables after customers spill half of it down their shirts and the other half on the table, seats, and floor. As an independent business person, a Hospitality Consultant can and should insist that her restaurant-owner customers give her the authority to kick out rude customers and their lawyer wives who refuse to control their rowdy kids. When you own your own Hospitality Consulting business, a jerk like Stefan Sharansky can’t get you fired for telling him to clean up his parenting act, because you’re your own boss!
For all the reasons mentioned above, and especially because so many of today’s customers are assholes like Stefan and his lawyer wife, no one should be an employee. Restaurants come and go, but by going into business for yourself, you’ve positioned yourself to maximize your work and profit opportunities. And you, not a greedy boss, will decide whether and when and by how much to raise your hourly fees based on market conditions.
For more information, send for Roger Rabbit’s free informational video, “Take This Job and Shove It!” Please enclose $39.95 for shipping and handling. You too can live like a Republican!
Lenin had the right goal but the wrong method. I’m going to make workers prosperous by gouging capitalists, not shooting them. You can’t get money from a dead capitalist. That’s where Lenin and his protege Stalin went wrong. We don’t want blood, we only want our share of the loot.
их больше было О_о
sarah68@22:
Puddy notices none of Goldy’s NorthWest Division of Lunatic Moonbat! Libtardos answered your question. You should know why sarah68.
1) It makes them think. You’ve seen the outcome when a libtardo thinks. Think exploded heads
2) Tax delineation. Refer to #1
3) Consumption. Libtardos need to keep up with their Joneses. Refer to #1
4) Their need for a state income tax. Refer to #1
5) Pure hatred of Timothy Eyman. Refer to #1. BTW he has a cute family. Puddy met them recently.
Moronic feral dumb bunny@36,
We all know you hate capitalism, something Tim Eyman supports. But you now disagree with “the messiah” now in the whitey house dumb bunny. Yesterday at the G20 summit presser “the messiah” said many of those Dummocraptic protesters (yep your peeps Roger) in da streets oppose capitalism and free markets in general. Then “the messiah” said your moronic protesting friends are free to express their views but he disagrees with them.
“Hey hey, ho ho, capitalism has got to go” (repeat ad nauseum Roger)
So wascally feral dumb bunny, it looks like he opposes you and other HA Libtardos here. At least in theory.
Puddy wonders with “the messiah” in da whitey house why do the protesters now need to cover their faces? Their guy is in charge who they rabidly voted for, unless of course, they are really anti-capitalist anarchists like some who preach their “progressive spiel” here on HA Libtardos.
“Faith in Formulas” – so this is new wingnut mental illness of the day.
Birthers, deathers, tenthers and now “formula freaks”.
Need a better word..
Poor, poor, bitter Rabbit who never accomplished anything of value in his whole life and damn anyone who took a chance and succeeded. I think you should open that restaurant and pay those consultants 50 an hour. Maybe all your rich liberal pals can drive their electric cars to your valet. Let us know how that pay schedule works out for you.
The first “formula freak” was Howard Jarvis the old right wing crank responsible for Proposition 13 in California.
The formula there was to limit state tax assessment to 1 percent of a property’s assessed value. And assessed value could increase only by 2 percent per year as long as the property does not change ownership.
Like the Tabor in Colorado this has resulted in total chaos we see in California today.
This is the world the right wing has brought us – decrepit schools, crumbling roads and bridges, sink holes, economic stagnation.
@22 State and local taxes seem high to people with limited incomes because their socioeconomic group pays a disproportionate share of the total tax burden.
While Washington ranks in the middle of states in terms of total tax burden, studies show that the poorest 20% of Washingtonians pay 17% of their income to state and local taxes, while the richest 20% pay 3% of theirs.
In other words, the overall tax burden is not unusually high, but we have a problem of how the tax burden is distributed. Washington loads taxes onto those least able to pay so the most affluent can skate.
@38 And that’s just fine with Puddy and his ilk.
Voters beware! Tim Eyman’s 1033 is another one of Eyman’s deceptive initiatives that look simple and sound good on the surface but are really proposing radical change when you read the fine print.
INITIATIVE 1033 FREEZES STATE AND LOCAL SPENDING AT THE CURRENT LEVEL. It says that none of the cuts made in public services as a result of the current recession can be restored without a public vote. Public votes take time, cost money and allow politics and special interest money to influence the outcome.
INITIATIVE 1033 IS A RADICAL SHIFT AWAY FROM REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT. It would take away the current power of our elected public representatives to make budget decisions and turns the process over to budgeting by referendum. It does this not just at the state level but also for all 39 counties and all 281 cities in our state. It is a blatant attempt to undercut efficient and deliberative government by Tim Eyman whose goal is to shrink the powers of representative government.
INITIATIVE 1033 IS A COMPLEX WEALTH TRANSFER SCHEME. It would transfer sales tax dollars collected from everyone and use them to only pay property taxes for property owners. The problem is that not everyone owns property. This scheme increases the unfairness of our tax system. Renters will pay the same taxes as before under I-1033 but will both get no tax rebate and see no increased public services for their tax dollars.
I-1033 is special interest legislation designed to hamstring government from operating efficiently. It is a complex wealth transfer scheme that benefits rich property owners. And it is not needed. There is no fiscal crisis demanding radical change of this nature.
Initiative 1033 a dream scheme by anti-government, anti-tax fanatic Tim Eyman and deserves a resounding NO vote this November. We don’t need to make our current recession permanent.
@39 No, I like capitalism. In fact, I love it! I totally embrace capitalism in my post @35 — i.e., I like capitalism so much I believe everyone should be an entrepreneur! My dream is of an America of 300 million entrepreneurs and no workers. What I’m saying is that instead of being workers everyone who is now a worker should become a capitalist! This is the best path to economic egalitarianism, not totalitarianism and mass murder.
You’re just too dumb to realize it, that’s all.
@41 I don’t need a restaurant or other business. I have a stable and secure income I don’t have to work for which isn’t vulnerable to the whims of any boss or customers. Jealous?
@42 Prop. 13 is much worse than you describe. It capped property taxes in such a way that California is full of owners of houses of identical value paying vastly different property taxes.
Prop. 13 favors long-time property owners at the expense of young families trying to get started. When you buy a house, your property taxes are essentially frozen. When you sell the house, the taxes are adjusted upward to reflect current market value.
This means someone who bought a home in 1955 is paying 1955 taxes, while a young family who bought an identical home in 2009 is paying 2009 taxes.
This feature of Prop. 13 has created severe market distortions. It discourages people from moving to new jobs, and it discourages selling real estate. People refuse to accept promotions or transfers because they would lose more from moving than they would gain from a promotion. Houses stay in the same family forever, passed from family member to family member, reducing opportunities for new people to move into established neighborhoods. This, in turn, encourages urban sprawl of construction of unneeded housing.
The general effect of Jarvis-Gann is to freeze population in place and prevent anyone from selling real estate or moving.
@44 I-1033 is government by masses who are asses.
@38: I wasn’t expecting the liberals to answer my question. They generally don’t complain about taxes because they figure taxes are needed to maintain the civilization we depend on. You know, like roads, utilities, public health, things like that.
But you didn’t answer either. What onerous tax load are you suffering under, in the most regressively-taxed state in America? Tell us.
Roger Rabbit @42 Washington State actually ranks below average in terms of state and local tax burden. The conservative Tax Foundation ranked Washington State last year at 35th (with 1 being the highest).see http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/sr163.pdf
Of course “Honest Won’t Try to Deceive the Voters” Tim says once again in the voter’s pamphlet that we are the eighth highest taxed state in the country. That’s only true if you count the fact that we are the 8th highest state in terms of personal income per capita and you count Federal taxes in your tax analysis.
But I-1033 can’t change Federal tax burden and is only dealing with state and local taxes. So to use a figure that included Federal taxes, Eyman repeatedly has been blantantly deceving voters as to the facts of our state and local tax burden.
At 35th in terms of state and local tax burden we are in the bottom 3rd of states as far as state and local tax burden goes. But then we know Tim is not really interested in the facts, because he repeatedly uses the 8th highest figure and misrepresents what it actually was based on.
We’re number 1 in sales tax which I-1033 doesn’t change and 25th in terms of property taxes per capita. Tim continues to demagogue on taxes misrepresentating the actual figures so he can deceive voters as to the facts and hope he can lure them to support his radical change agenda for decreasing public services and putting more burden on the less fortunate in our society.
Spread the word and urge people to oppose I-1033. It’s a radical proposal intended to put our elected officials in a straight jacket, institute budget making by referendum for the state and all 39 counties and 281 cities, and transfer wealth to rich property owners from seniors, renters and working families.
47 – yes, you said it well.
Timmy LIE-man. Hustler, confidence man, fraud,
ASS!
I met Tim Eyman once, a few years ago. I was working at a small business where my boss was a Republican and devoted admirer & supporter of Tim Eyman.
My employer was up in years, and one day suffered a stroke. It happened that there was an Eyman-related event several days later, so I decided to drop by and see if I could get Tim to sign a ‘get well’ card for my employer, knowing it would make his day & cheer him up.
Eyman could not have been nicer. He immediately recognized my employer’s name as a supporter, was very concerned. He wrote a nice note to him on my card, and gave me his personal cell-phone no, urging to call if there was anything he could do.
Eyman really is a super nice guy that does not deserve all the hate that is spewed at him by his political opponents.
Eyman is just holding out the last grasp at the last straw that his superabundance of fame here in the PNW will land him a spot on Dancing With Stars. And, as an aside, & btw, he wants only to dance with Hot Tub Tom Delay, but that’s not important. This pinnacle of American achievement, of course, will then land him a spot Pre-Beck on the Fox. So let’s just hope the call comes soon. The republic needs (no demands) a true patriot like Timmy in these insurgent socialist times.
@53 Gee, the guy has a touch of humanity. Who would’ve guessed? Certainly not from the initiatives he sponsors. He wants to starve public agencies of the funding that educates our children and provides health care to poor kids. He wanted to make our state wide open to casino gambling. He wants to perpetuate a state tax structure that coddles the rich by screwing the poor. But he sends get-well cards to sick Republicans — what a guy!
States rights advocates should certainly concur that states, like the federal government, should be permitted to deport residents. Plainly, if a resident harms a state’s interests, then the state should be permitted to deport that resident. Timmy is harmful to this state’s interests. Moreover, he would be happier in Oklahoma. Personally, I think he should be deported to Oklahoma. Why should our state’s government not be permitted to deport Timmy to Oklahoma?
And yet this spring Forbes said;
“Our 11th annual ranking of the Best Places for Business and Careers features clear winners in North Carolina and Colorado, home to a combined 10 of the 20 top metro areas.”
http://www.forbes.com/2009/03/.....intro.html
As usual, HA forgets to post actual FACTS, and instead posts opinions.
Timmy LIE-man is a miner. He mines a near bottomless pit of right wing resentment. Over the years that has supplemented if not provided the bulk of his income.
Right wingers have seen their wages stagnate over the last 30 years but do they blame right wing trade and tax policies for this? Hell no, it’s easier to knee-jerk “damn gub’mint”.
LIE-man can’t do anything else. He basically found a lucrative enterprise and he’s milking it for all it’s worth. Typical right winger.
@31
1. Have a job, though not as well paying as the one I had two years ago.
2. Have credit, though not as good as it was a couple years ago.
3. Sadly for the 3rd time in my life I’ve had my savings mostly wiped out because of getting laid off due to a recession.
4. Do I look stupid? Why should I buy when I can rent for half the monthly cost? I also don’t have to deal with paying for things like burst pipes, painting, or putting a new roof on every decade or so.
5. Again why should property owners be the only ones to benefit? They aren’t the only ones who pay taxes. What makes them special?
@57
You’ll note Seattle is ranked #17 which is better than Winston-Salem NC at #18, Charlotte NC at #19, or Boulder CO at #20, and compares favorably with Denver CO at #14 and San Antonio TX at #16 which are the only large cities ahead of Seattle on the list. BTW Olympia is #23, Portland/Vancouver is #26, and Spokane is #29, not bad at all. But then it has been an article of conservative faith for 30 years aided by Boeing’s periodic whining that Washington, King County, and especially Seattle are “bad for business”.
Chris,
First off, I showed that the business climate in Colorado actually IMPROVED while under their tabor law.
Second, I get more money back and more tax breaks because I own a house. It’s an incentive to make a purchase. If you choose to rent, your landlord will get the money back and then he may or may not give you a break in rent. either way, you have made a choice. You know you can’t write your rent off on your taxes, like I can write my mortgage interest off. If you don’t want to purchase your own home, then you get benefits (as you described them) that I don’t. Quit your crying!
Oh and talk to me about Boeing in 2 years
http://www.enterprisenewspaper...../ETPZONELT
It’s the same reason why Toyota chose to build an assembly line in Kentucky and not Detriot.
@61 Unfortunately not everyone can afford to own a home. Just a few tried to in this in our last business cycle and we’re now suffering a recession partly because of that as they couldn’t make their mortgage payments.
I-1033 takes sales tax dollars paid by everyone and transfers it to only pay property taxes for people that have property. Renters get screwed twice. First they get no tax rebate and they also see no increase in public services.
Under I-1033 the amount of rebate someone gets is proportional to the property they own, not to the amount of sales taxes and fees they pay. Last year some 57% of state revenue came from sales taxes.
So wealthy property owners get the biggest break. Also 40% of the tax rebate goes to commercial property owners like Boeing, and Bellevue Square and Weyerhauser and other large corporations.
I-1033 is a complex wealth transfer scheme, a reverse Robin Hood Agenda, taxing the less well off to pay property taxes for those that can afford to buy prooperty. Right now according to the US Census Bureau some 35% of households in Washington State are not owner occupied. I-1033 doesn’t help them at all.
Eyman really is a super nice guy that does not deserve all the hate that is spewed at him by his political opponents.
Eyman spends all his waking hours trying to re re-distribute money from the poor & middle class to the rich. But he really is a caring person because he takes five seconds to sign a get well card. For a guy who gives him cash (the only thing Tim cares about).
Wow, what a compelling argument, zdp 189!!
And how’s about this firefighter clown who wants to piss on the tax revenues which his (supposed) profession relies upon.
The one thing Eyman cannot be faulted for: his consistent Libertarian ideology. Wouldn’t the world be a better place if fire protection was privatized?? As in, your house burns, and you get charged full price? As in, if you’re rich, you get a quick response…poor or middle class – you’ll be lucky if this IAFF joker shows up at all.
Eyman and his defenders already have an excellent social / political model: it’s called THIRD WORLD COUNTRY. Low taxes, no regulations, and very little government. Such a wonderful vision to strive for!
It’s no wonder Eyman’s Army is populated by under-educated rural yahoos. Eyman loves Jack Fagan because he can be the smartest guy in the room 24 x 7.
Hey, IAFF FF clown, can you find an IAFF local which hasn’t voted for a NO endorsement on I-1033?
Seriously…are there any smart conservatives left in this state?
@61 IAFF FF
I was simply showing that using the very article you linked to, Washington and especially Seattle don’t do too badly.
And yes, Boeing does periodically whine about the business climate here. As best I can tell their biggest beefs are that they have to pay any taxes at all and that the state doesn’t just cut them a big subsidy check every year. Unfortunately the state constitution makes that illegal. If we lose them to a state that can play such games so be it, I wish them luck.
So called “right to work” laws are only a minor factor. As I recall Boeing hasn’t had such great luck with their South Carolina workforce and only got problems on the line straightened out when they sent workers from Everett to help train the SC workers. Washington could pass a “right to work” law tomorrow and I doubt it would have much effect on Boeing’s decision of where to put the second 787 line.
I will also point out that foreign automakers have located plants in states without “right to work” laws which BTW includes Kentucky. Oh and Colorado isn’t a “right to work” state either.
For someone who seems rather proud of their union membership I find it kind of odd you’d promote anti-union legislation.
@zdp:
Really, one get well card qualifies Lying Timmy as a nice guy?
What about how he took payment (skimmed Money) off the top of his campaigns and lied about it?
Nice guy, huh?
BS! Big fat liar – that is Timmy.
@64… Sure, look at how many IAFF locals have decided to make any endorsement. Including the State’s LARGEST firefighters union (IAFF Local 27). If it’s so bad, why have SOOOOOO many chosen to stay out of the race? Seriously, do you even understand your own logic? Tell you what, provide me a list of IAFF locals who have asked their membership to vote no, and I will provide you a list of at least 3 times the number of locals who have chosen to stay out of the race.
@65, actually, they do get subsidies. In the form of tax breaks to stay here in Washington.
@62, If you can’t afford a house, then you are most likely in one of the lowest tax brackets and the rebate would likely be a moot point anyways. Why is it that the people who pay the least in taxes and use the services the most expect the return to be the highest?
And I support my union when they make the choice that the membership wants them to make, and I don’t support them when they make bad choices.
@67
But the legislature has to be a bit more creative than just cutting a check with the name “Boeing” on it or passing a law exempting Boeing from taxes. As opposed to states that can outright exempt a company from any taxes and/or cut them a subsidy check.
BTW I can’t really afford a house in Seattle and I’m hardly in a low tax bracket as far as the IRS is concerned.
You know businesses that don’t own a lot of property are going to get screwed by I-1033 as well. The only ones who will benefit are property owners and the ones who benefit the most will be those who happen to own a lot of property with a high assessed value. I’m sure the timber companies are really happy.
@68… Then don’t buy a house in Seattle. And I bet you could afford to live in the Rainer valley or Delridge or the Central District. Again, you chose NOT TO. You know how you buy a house? Live well under your means, save and work hard. If you don’t want to own a house though, then don’t come crying to me about not getting the same benefits as someone that does own it. I have a friend who works for the airlines, should I be upset that he can fly for free? Well, no, because that’s part of the package he gets for working there. Likewise, the downside is… well he works for an airline. You don’t get the same benefit because you don’t own property. Either buy property to get the benefit, or quit your whining!
Small businesses will not get screwed. Seriously, how do you come up with your facts? If a small business owns a piece of land, their money refunded to them (as well as the tax that they initially pay) is based on the property they own. Should a small business that owns 1/3 an acre get a portion of Weyerhauser tax benefits? How are the small businesses getting screwed? Small businesses will get back an amount based on the TAXES that they have paid (because remember, we pay taxes based on what the assessed value is worth as well).