Sims's tax proposal/platform

[chucK]

Agreeing with Greg's desire that we leave the fed's hands off our money, and attempting to heed Peter's plea to stop drifting his thread, I thought I'd post a new one here about Ron Sims' campaign platform centerpiece;

 

New tax system for WA state:

 

1. Remove sales tax

2. Remove B & O tax

3. Institute State income tax

 

I'm thinking this idea has something for everyone:

shifting tax from sales to income taxes the poor proportionally less (makes us lefties happy).

 

Removing business and occupation tax makes the righties happy.

 

And finallly, here's the kicker, by shifting tax to income tax, we get to write off our state tax on our federal returns (can't do that with sales tax, or at least not easily) and GIVE LESS MONEY TO THE GODDAMNED FEDERAL GOVERNMENT!!!

 

Pretty cool huh?

 

Discuss.

[Greg_W]

A sales tax is the only fair tax - it's based on consumption, or involvement in the marketplace. The B&O could be adjusted to be more fair, or simply abolished.

 

Ron Sims is scary.

[foraker]

The feds could simply stop taking so much of my money by ceasing to spend so much of it.....

[chucK]

Stop drifing my thread!

 

You already have a current thread for federal taxation stuff!

 

By the way, primary is today, where if you choose to vote on democrats you can choose between Sims and that dumbass AG who lost the state (Us!) millions of dollars because she was late filing an appeal.

Edited September 14, 2004 by chucK

[slothrop]

I don't see how sales tax "the only fair tax", or why consumption is the only thing that is reasonable to tax. I don't think you'll find that idea in any Constitution. It would make more sense to me that involvement in the marketplace *not* be taxed, in order to encourage trade.

 

Income tax, on the other hand, is simple and fair. Those who can afford to pay more, should. Paying a percentage of income is fair to everyone and is a very old idea (tithing). Sims' plan sounds like a good compromise.

 

Can you elaborate on why Ron Sims gives you the heebie-jeebies, Greg?

[Greg_W]

A sales tax is a use tax, plain and simple. An income tax is subjective and arbitrary. It is your opinion that people who make more should pay more, not a universal economic truth.

 

Sims rammed Brightwater down the throats of the people of Bothell. Sims is holding onto Lightrail despite all the opinion against it and the lack of practicality/benefit. He's in love with money...other people's money. And he wants to spend as much of it as he can get his hands on. King County wasn't necessarily running like a well-oiled machine on his watch, if I recall. Weren't they shutting down parks and shit?

[fenderfour]

Don't forget that the new income tax will be the highest in the country.

 

Didn't Sims give us two xstadiums that we (as a county) didn't want?

[chucK]

I seriously doubt it would be the highest total tax burden. For example, CA has a high income tax and a high sales tax, as does NY. I'm not familiar with other states.

 

And I think it was more Locke (and to use a frequent Greg W dodge) the state legislature that foisted the Mariner's stadium on us, and didn't "we" vote overwhelmingly in favor of that stupid Seahawk's stadium.

 

I think you're using deceptive marketing practices there FF. Was Sims responsible for the design of the EMP too?

 

As for Greg's Sims objections: Fuck "homeless people are scary" Bothell. Though I don't know much about it, I share your distaste for the lightrail thing. Sims' disregard for a sizeable minority of the populace reeks of GWB in that case. Don't know anything about King County parks. I thought it was Seattle City Parks that got shut down, but like I said, I don't know about it.

[fenderfour]

You know me, always out to misinform the masses.

 

BTW - Sim's proposed income tax was quoted on NPR to be the highest in the nation. Maybe the overall tax burden of other states is higher, but I did specifically say INCOME TAX.

 

And beyond that - Where are your facts? Thinking is good, but knowing is better.

[Peter_Puget]

Per your link there ChucK Sims new structure will cost me over $5k in aditional taxes! I do not need to research any further! I'm voting Republican!

[chucK]

Link?

 

But you would get to deduct that $5,000 for purposes of Taxable income at the Federal Level

 

You are indeed voting in your own fiscal best interest, with which there is nothing wrong I say!

 

It amazes me though how many lower to middle-income people vote Republican even though it's going to cost them a ton of money (in order to fund the high income people). True believers I guess!

[Peter_Puget]

Oops sorry it was a link off the Sims website!

 

link

 

Before a lower income oerson thinks they will automatically benefit from this proosed change they should consider the economic impact of the changes and the certain return of the sales tax

[Mal_Con]

It is all talk anyway. You can only get an Income Tax as a Constructional Amendment (requires vote) Dan Evans ® tried several times in the 70's and it got nowhere even less chance now.

[cj001f]

A sales tax is a use tax, plain and simple. An income tax is subjective and arbitrary. It is your opinion that people who make more should pay more, not a universal economic truth.

So you want to reduce consumption at the consumer level. The bedrock of our economy that's kept us motoring through the past 3 years? Bright idea!

[Alex]

A sales tax is the only fair tax

 

all I have to say is,....wow

[catbirdseat]

People are figuring out more and more ways to dodge sales taxes, such as going to Canada and Mexico. The wealthy are more able to do this, by the way.

 

The other thing that needs to be clarified is that all sales tax would not be eliminated under the Sims proposal. Only the state portion would go. Local and county portions would remain. I do not recall what is the breakdown.

[JoshK]

I used to think a sales tax is good, but the simple fact is it hurts the people who have the hardest time even more.

 

The right likes to look at it as "the people who make more have to pay more." The other way to look at it is those who have it the worst off get a break. The economy is built on the factory workers, laborors, mechanics, etc.etc. etc. These aren't people who make a great deal of money, but they are the people who make the rich richer. Giving them a break is not only the right thing to do, but it's good for all of us, rich or poor.

[slothrop]

The huge majority of the current sales tax you pay in Seattle is the state portion and groceries are not taxed (good policy for the poverty-stricken).

[cj001f]

People are figuring out more and more ways to dodge sales taxes, such as going to Canada and Mexico.

 

Don't forget Oregon We love Washington $$$$$$!

[JoshK]

Yes, not taxing groceries makes since but there is a wide range of things that lower income people need that are taxed. The fact is the sales tax system is completely regressive. The less money you make, the greater % you pay in taxes. The bottom ranks of the income scale don't contribute a great portion of the tax base as it is and changing their % of income spent on essentials from 95% to 75% (I have no clue what real numbers would be) makes a huge difference to them.

[Off_White]

I'm voting Republican!

 

But then again, we knew that!

[JayB]

Under the current structure the poor get hit the hardest relative to their income, and commerce is discouraged in a manner that is directly proportional to the tax.

 

I would support the plan, but only if the state sales tax goes and can never be reimposed. As an additional sweetener, I would also like to see a permanent, irrevocable ceiling put on city and county taxes to insure that they do not simply fill the sales-tax void by increasing their taxe rates, thus restoring the regressive effects of the sales tax, discouraging commerce, and increasing the tax burden still more.

[minx]

sadly, the whole concept of a state income tax may make a republican voter. that and the fact i think christine gregoire is even scary than simms.

 

i'd just like to point out that if tim eyman had not run amuk with his initiatives, we would not be having a serious discussion of an income tax. the high cost of car tabs really blew when it came to paying for them. however, it was one shot per year that would cost me far less than an income tax. if the price really rubbed you the wrong way you could by a cheaper car. i won't even address the property tax initiative.

 

the idea that the income tax is any less painful b/c it helps with my federal tax burden is such a crock. so it reduces my taxable income by a few thousand bucks? that certainly doesn't save me as much as the income tax will cost.

[Greg_W]

Minx, people chose to vote for those initiatives. Don't blame Eyman. Sure, he brought it up, but in the end it was voter choice. I would say that if the band of idiots down in Olympia was more fiscally responsible, we wouldn't be discussing an income tax.

[minx]

Minx, people chose to vote for those initiatives. Don't blame Eyman. Sure, he brought it up, but in the end it was voter choice. I would say that if the band of idiots down in Olympia was more fiscally responsible, we wouldn't be discussing an income tax.

 

greg that's crap and you know it. plain and simple crap. time eyman knows that many voters doesn't have the foresight to realize the long term implications of that inititative. there shooting for short term wallet relief. it's one thing to discuss government waste and fiscal responsibility. it's another to take away a significant portion of the budget and then expect them to make it work.