In reporting that Sen. Jeanne Kohl-Welles will hold a hearing on the high-earners income tax tomorrow in the Ways and Means Committee, the TNT’s Joe Turner adds…
I’m not sure what the purpose of holding a hearing will be…
Well Joe, um… maybe the purpose is to debate the merits of a high-earners income tax?
This, for me, is what has been most infuriating this session… the absolute refusal of most in the media and political establishment to even consider discussing the issue itself. Here we are in the midst of our state’s worst economic and budgetary crisis since the Great Depression, and Kohl-Welles is being mocked for daring to discuss the highly regressive and inadequate tax structure that is at the heart of Washington’s long term budgetary problems.
Make the argument that it is a sound policy to tax our state’s poorest families at six times the rate we tax our wealthiest. Explain why it is in the best interest of our citizens and our business community to stand by and watch our state government’s spending power gradually and steadily erode as we continue to rely on an ever shrinking portion of our economy to provide the bulk of state revenues. Offer even a little bit of evidence to suggest that if we only ride out this recession, state revenues will ever return to pre-crisis levels, adjusted for population and inflation.
Go ahead… try to make an actual argument as to why the income tax is unfair, unworkable, and unrealistic, for chrisakes. But no… you’d just rather mockingly dismiss it out of hand as an unserious proposal because voters rejected one iteration of it some thirty-five years ago.
My God.. there are two sides to the budget equation—expenditures and revenues—so why is it that the only responsible, reasonable and serious thing to do, is to debate the former while ignoring the latter? Shame on all of you.
The “high income tax?” Fuggedaboutit.
You’ve said you won’t advocate for the sales tax increase that’ll be on the ballot like you did for the Sound Transit sales tax increase because “the legislature didn’t give ST other options, but the state has other options (like income tax).” Those weren’t your exact words, but you said something like that.
Maybe you’ll reconsider once you understand that the ST sales tax increase of .5% is for 35 years, whereas the proposed state sales tax increase would be of .3% for only three years. Does that make this proposed sales tax increase as attractive as the one for ST?
Maybe you just like the idea of other people riding trains in the future so much that you didn’t really care what kind of tax ST wanted to impose, or for how long?
ivan @1,
Like I said, I may yet vote for it, but I can’t imagine working for it. Not just because it is regressive and shortsighted, but because I honestly don’t believe it will pass.
It’s one thing to pass tax increases here in Seattle and the surrounding region, it’s another thing to do it statewide. I just don’t believe a majority of Washington voters are prepared to raise taxes on themselves during these uncertain economic times. Raising taxes on the wealthy… well, that’s another thing entirely.
The sales tax measure is bad politics, pure and simple, and I wouldn’t be surprised to see it fail to get through the legislature.
I don’t want an income tax because I don’t want to be bothered with filling-out yet ANOTHER set of government forms each year. Also, it’s not any business of the State of Washington how much money I make.
I’ll keep the tax system we have now rather than having a state income tax, thank you very much!!
re 3: So — a tax that would not hurt the rich and would go a long way toward solving the state’s budget crisis and would be in line with 43 out of 50 states, is too much trouble to fill out.
I hope I see you in a car wreck. I’d love to stop and help, but I’m on my way to lunch.
Don’t you realize how trivial you are?
Let’s get an initiative campaign going and demand a vote on the income tax . It shouldn’t take long at all to get the signatures to put it on the ballot . Now you see why we need the initiative process ,when the legislature won’t bow to their constituents cry for an income tax .
As part of the “media establishment,” I was at Horizon House on Monday night, arguing for comprehensive tax reform (including an income tax) before an audience of 160 people.
Don’t confuse Fairview Fannie with all media.
Winkydink,
I could give a flyin’ fuck what you think of me. I’m not here to help re-distribute wealth via government edict or otherwise make you fell good about being a liberal. I don’t have any guilt about not having an income tax here. Guilt is for Catholics and white liberals. I don’t want a state income tax because I don’t want the state to be poking its nose into my business, and I’ll bet lots of citizens in those 43 other states would like to see an end to their states’ income taxes.
If you want to send the Department of Revenue a percentage of your income each year, be my guest. Here’s the address:
Department of Revenue
PO box 47450
Olympia, WA 98504-7450
re 7: “I could give a flyin’ fuck what you think of me.”
If you didn’t care, you would not have replied. Myself, since I injured my knee, I haven’t performed any flying fucks either.
I not only don’t give them, but I don’t take them, either.
re 7: Don’t worry, Mr. Incorrect. The state will not poke into your business and tax you on that 1985 K-car you drive.
Libertarians are blockheads.
Well said.
Well, as to the issue of the government and redistribution, that is perhaps the most stupid of all the comments I have read.
The government already picks and chooses winners and has redistributed income steadily upward for over three decades. Class war is a favorite screech of the trolls, but only one side has fought the war and they have won it in a landslide for several decades. Progressives haven’t even engaged.
Look at real estate tax deductions, our business tax structures and incentives, corporate taxes and tax structures, income taxes and changes, the death of anti trust, etc, etc. Read Kevin Phillips, Jonathan Chait, Bill Greider,Paul Krugman, etc, etc.
The problem is progressives have been afraid to engage the argument of privilege in our country, and have refused to take it on since, well, after LBJ. We need to change that discussion.
BTW someone did this recently and engaged voters on it- I think his name was Obama. He did okay.
As you know, democrats are the party of privilege. Something like 8 out of the top ten richest congress critters are democrats. None of those hollywood celebrities that obama likes to hang around with are not from the poor side of town. Oprah? And lets not forget the soros, gates, buffet people that hang with the democrat party. Now that obama is on the fast track to incredible wealth, is he going to anxious to end it for himself.
How can the democrats take on privilege without dismantling their own party?
@13
There’s some logic. My math logic professor would have clicked his false teeth at this one…
As for federal income tax, you can be wealthy and think that a return to the clinton tax table is fair. Mr. Buffet has repeatedly proclaimed that our tax system is unfairly skewed toward people like him. He’s right. I made closer to 7 figures than 5 last year and my effective tax rate was 21.9%. A lot of people who made a lot less than me paid a higher percentage of their income in tax than I did. Now you’d think Republicans would want to remedy this by lowering middle class taxes or raising upper class taxes. or both so there was at least more parity. Instead they’d rather keep all the taxes that favor the rich low (capital gains, dividends, mortgage, estate but don’t really talk about the income tax except keeping the top rate low. Or at the very outside a flat tax which would also favor the rich since fica ran out in february for me this year…. sad.
As for a state income tax, I’m not really in favor of it. Not because it would impact me. Heck I paid 11% state income tax in California. I didn’t leave california because of the tax. I’d rather see some changes to the sales tax to add luxury and remove some staples. In general income taxes don’t curb consumption and encourage savings. I’d rather we found ways to encourage savings & conservation and discourage consumption.
I’m half expecting half the people here to call me a lunatic left nutjob and the other half to call me rich puke trying to avoid taxes.. Perhaps that means I’ve reach middle ground.