j_b

Moral victories at best. Pols still aren't doing diddly squat about climate change (and aren't likely to do anything anytime soon), they got what they wanted in Iraq (control the oil resource), and a few states have gay marriage, and the dumbasses will never acknowledge here they still believe in that garbage.

Forget about expanding/bettering port capacity and fuck the environment and you'll save $70 million/yr through 2015: this is what poses for serious economic analysis among libertarians (i.e. the looting party) and don't forget, selling toasters has the same economic purpose as providing port infrastructure for economic activity

In the middle ages there were toll roads, toll bridges, private fire department, only the rich went to school, etc .. I think you have perfectly captured JayB's political agenda: neo-feudalism.

Yes. Dig up the data and we can take a look at things like taxpayer input for unit volume, etc, etc, etc. What a snake oil salesman you make. In other words, you are again telling us you have no fucking idea whether your libertarian privatization scheme has been successfully applied anywhere in the US. Yet here you are talking as if it were in the bag without providing any substantiating data for your wet dream.

Car companies don't mitigate the environmental damage caused by their product. Car companies also don't enable billions in business activities other than their own. Infrastructure isn't a consumer item. Clearly apples and oranges. Are you seriously suggesting that port infrastructure should only be updated according to net revenue? Ludicrous. no, it wouldn't. It would suggest that increased/better port capacity is part of the infrastructure that enables more business and it doesn't have to pay directly/immediately for itself.

so, Jay, what is your exact familiarity with port operations and budgeting so that you can decide it doesn't need infrastructure improvements or environmental mitigation?

I haven't decided anything since elected port officials did. Do you have any particular competence in that domain, jackass?

I heard kittens taste like rabbit. YUM!

JayB decided that port infrastructure improvement and environmental mitigation were a rip-off and weren't necessary. More drivel from Wingnutia.

That's great news. Then they can stop assessing taxes on property owners and give all of this money back, or turn it over to the city to use on other priorities! who are you to decide what is a priority? WHat makes you think the public wouldn't have to pay for these priorities if a private entity ran the show? You are clearly spewing about somehting you know nothing about. "the Port uses the levy to fund capital investments in critical Seaport infrastructure and other expenditures providing community benefits such as environmental mitigation in the Seattle Harbor and the Port’s regional freight mobility initiative. The Port also uses the levy to fund a small annual contribution to PortJobs, a non-profit organization that helps develop Port and Airport-related career opportunities. The levy has not traditionally been used to fund improvements at Sea-Tac International Airport, which is exclusively supported by user fees; however, the Commission approved the use of levy funds for a noise mitigation project for the Highline School District and an environmental review of the potential expansion of State Route 518, just north of SeaTac Airport."

I posted the budget numbers above. Nowhere does it show the port is losing money. It appears that you don't know what you are talking about.

Spare us the sanctimonious drivel. Educating myself to answer reducive soundbites about an issue that JayB is very likely little informed about is just not a priority. BUt you can start learning about the port budget, and let us know in comprehensive term whether or not there is any substance to what JayB is saying (not likely at first sight): "The 2010 budget proposes operating revenues at $479.0 million and operating expenses at $282.8 million. Net Operating Income is $196.2million. Depreciation Expense is budgeted at $158.6 million. Net Operating Income after Depreciation is $37.6 million. The total capital budget for 2010 is $410.0 million and the five year capital improvement program is $1.4 billion, which reflects the Port's continuing commitment to promoting regional economic activity through the investment in the development, expansion, and renewal of Port facilities that supports the Port’s Business Plan and Green Initiative." http://www.portseattle.org/about/organization/2010budget.shtml

B&O tax rates (probably averages around .5%): http://dor.wa.gov/Content/FindTaxesAndRates/BAndOTax/BandOrates.aspx

P5 the way ElDiente did it is a lot harder (spanked me the 1st time I tried it) and less well protected than the pressure chamber, but again I am kind of stubby so that may explain my perspective.

Wealthy contribute to defeat income tax Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer and Amazon.com founder and CEO Jeff Bezos, have lined up against an initiative that would create an income tax on the state's wealthiest earners. By Andrew Garber Seattle Times Olympia bureau Related Top I-1098 contributors FOR Bill Gates Sr.: $500,000 Venture capitalist Nick Hanauer: $250,000 Paccar heir Ann Wyckoff: $200,000 Service Employees International Union: $1.2 million AGAINST Steve Ballmer: $100,000 Jeff Bezos: $100,000 Former Sonics owner Barry Ackerley: $100,000 Bartell Drugs and owner George Bartell: $110,000 Sources: Yes on 1098; Defeat 1098 OLYMPIA — Two of the state's richest men, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer and Amazon.com founder and CEO Jeff Bezos, have lined up against an initiative that would create a state income tax on the wealthiest earners. Ballmer and Bezos each have contributed $100,000 to the Defeat 1098 campaign, the campaign announced Monday. The initiative on the Nov. 2 ballot would create a 5 percent tax rate on annual income exceeding $200,000 for individuals and $400,000 for couples, and a 9 percent tax rate on income that tops $500,000 for individuals and $1 million for couples. Initiative 1098 also would cut state property taxes by 20 percent and newly exempt 118,000 businesses from the state business and occupation (B&O) tax. more: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2012952482_1098money21m.html

Spare us the hypocrisy. You speak out systematically against any attempts at taxing business or the wealthy.

Has Fred adopted lightweight technologies or does he still swear by the tried and true method of army surplus equipment disposal?

I certainly can't be blamed for your silly ideology claiming that state control of everything is the only alternative to unfettered capitalism. You'd think that red-baiting the critics of your "free market" religion had become a little too obvious 20 years after the end of the cold war, but again what would you expect from libertarian extremists who happen to be knuckle-dragging John Birchers still in the closet.

An economic model has to account for sources and sinks of wealth and welfare. The "free market" mantra denies resource limits, environmental destruction, and human welfare not conveyed through consumerism. It's just not a workable system whoever runs it.

is that Chicago or Newark? Shitty housing projects are the result of your kind of politics, not mine. Jackass.

Get your head out of Hayek ass, fucking libertarian extremist. There exist other models beside Laissez Faire and state capitalism. As a matter fact, the entire western world wasn't either for much of the 20th century.

The efficiency of the "free" market:

I bivouacked below the Canaleta on Aconcagua with Invernos and it was barely enough (tingly toes for a few weeks). Plan for less than optimum conditions.

No Jay. What makes you a regressive is your wanting the taxpayer to pay for infrastructure and its maintenance in order to turn it over to the private sector so that someone can make a profit and the taxpayer cannot recover its expenditure. What makes you a regressive is your willful ignorance of natural monopolies that demand considerations other than profit in order to provide necessary and efficient services to the entire public (not only that part that is profitable). What makes you a regressive is your making the unreasonable assumption that privatized entities are always (notwithstanding a handful of exceptions that you concede) more efficient than public management. What makes you a regressive is your neoliberal religion that leads you to think that greed is the only valid motive for economic activity.

Unreal. Considering the standard of behavior (demonization, scapegoating, etc ..) of right wing goons toward their critics on the inter-tubes, I think it is an excellent idea to be anonymous. Unfortunately there is a mountain of evidence showing that right wingers aren't normal people. Remember that poll, which shows that way over 50% of GOPers currently believe that Obama favors the interest of Muslims over those of Americans? One has clearly to be a nutjob to believe that, yet there it is. The right wing has used these demonization techniques forever, and to great effect, which explains why the political left is almost nonexistent in the US.