Oregon passes tax increases on corporations and the wealthy..

[Popeye]

That's the way to go Oregon!! Some of these other states in financial trouble should look to a similar solution..

I wonder why we don't see more coverage of this in the national media? Maybe because this vote doesn't fit in with the teabagger philosophy that the MSM has been romanticizing?

Oregon voters bucked decades of anti-tax and anti-Salem sentiment Tuesday, raising taxes on corporations and the wealthy to prevent further erosion of public schools and other state services.

The tax measures passed easily, with late returns showing a 54 percent to 46 percent ratio. Measure 66 raises taxes on households with taxable income above $250,000, and Measure 67 sets higher minimum taxes on corporations and increases the tax rate on upper-level profits.

The results triggered waves of relief from educators and legislative leaders, who were facing an estimated $727 million shortfall in the current two-year budget if the measures failed.

"We're absolutely ecstatic," said Hanna Vandering, a physical education teacher from Beaverton and vice president of the statewide teachers union. "What Oregonians said today is they believe in public education and vital services."

http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2010/01/voters_pass_tax_measures_by_bi.html

 

[PLC1]

Oh, yes, more taxes will fix everything. Just look how well your neighbor to the south is doing with its 5% sales tax that has gradually gone to 8-10% depending on where you live. Once we increased the income tax to an 8% marginal rate, the coffers immediately filled and the state was fiscally sound. Sure.

Say, Oregon doesn't have a sales tax, does it? What is the income tax rate, I wonder?

 

[Little-Acorn]

These are the people and companies that are already paying the vast bulk of income taxes, right? And now Oregonians (somewhere) are getting "revenge" by forcing them to pay more. That sounds fair, doesn't it?

Course, higher taxes always make a few companies pack up and leave for less-expensive business environments. And they'll take some of their income-earning, taxpaying employees with them. If they can make more money (after taxes) somewhere else, why shouldn't they go there? In fact, wouldn't their stockholders (who get those profits) ream the Board of Directors good, if they DIDN'T move?

And the more tax increases they get, the more companies will find it advantageous to move.

So the government of the state, which last year got 20% of "this much profit", will shortly find itself getting 25% of "a lot less profit", since some companies have left, and the rest are making less money since they are competing with less-taxed companies in another state.

Yep, GREAT plan for "preventing further erosion of [funds for] public schools and other state services".

It does identify one problem: The legislators (and fanatic leftists like little popeye) who came out of Oregon's public education system, clearly got an inferior education. They think this idea "works"!

 

[Sihouette]

My brother and his wife bring in just over that bracket for families. They have personal habits like eating enormous amounts of red meat, smoking, drinking and tons of expensive hobbies. If they cut out just the red meat every night, that alone would pay for the extra taxes and this they would cry bloody murder about.

You just have to wonder how "poor" these poor unfortunate rich taxpayers are.

Their garage sits full of equipment, vehicles and you name it of expensive toys they though they wanted, used for two weeks and then grew tired of. Kinda like when my kids were three years old.

 

[Little-Acorn]

You just have to wonder how "poor" these poor unfortunate rich taxpayers are.

Their garage sits full of equipment, vehicles and you name it of expensive toys

Do you hear the sound of thieves slavering over the sight of a full bank vault? And they are already preparing their excuses in advance, why it's OK to rob it. After all, with so much money, who will miss it, eh? And the people who managed to accumulate wealth, must unquestionably be eeevil.

If the thieves can get enough voters jealous enough, then it becomes OK to take away people's property rights.

With the results I described in my earlier post in this thread.

 

[Sihouette]

Yes, I'm so very jealous of my brother's blocked arteries, his wife's impending lung cancer and their three kids who grew up believing "love" was a shiny new motorcycle.

You nailed me!


It isn't jealousy, it's an abhorrence to absurd gluttony. If they start a small business with that money and employ people, give 'em a tax break. Sure, I'm all for that. Give small businesses good incentive. Just not those households that do nothing with their money but party down in personal gluttony.

For example, I bring in a fraction, a tiny fraction of what they do and yet I still manage to pay all my bills and have just a little bit left over to donate 10% of to charity that supports homeless families trying to get jobs and get back on their feet. My brother and his wife of over 10 times my income give nothing back. Nothing. It might cut into her cartons of smokes or his ribroast budget and well...that's not gonna happen..lol..

 

[Little-Acorn]

Yes, I'm so very jealous of my brother's blocked arteries, his wife's impending lung cancer and their three kids who grew up believing "love" was a shiny new motorcycle.

Oh, sorry. I guess that DOES make it OK to take away people's property rights.

Or does it?

.

 

[Sihouette]

Wow, I didn't know that Oregon voted to take away people's personal property? Weird? I imagine that with whatever my brother and his wife have left over after paying the new tax, they can buy whatever they like. They'll still have ooodles of money to do that with even with the tax. And hence why it was applied to an income bracket so high.

 

[always]

That's the way to go Oregon!! Some of these other states in financial trouble should look to a similar solution..

I wonder why we don't see more coverage of this in the national media? Maybe because this vote doesn't fit in with the teabagger philosophy that the MSM has been romanticizing?



http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2010/01/voters_pass_tax_measures_by_bi.html

SOON to give NEW meaning to the term "OREGON TRAILS" PAY UP!! SUCKERS!

 

[Little-Acorn]

Wow, I didn't know that Oregon voted to take away people's personal property?

The list of things you don't know, is long and distinguished.

Back to the subject:
Well? Are the problems you listed, sufficient to justify taking away people's property rights?

 

[Sihouette]

Oh, your argument is that no money should be taken away from anyone.

How do you propose covering our costs? Ever blacktopped a road by yourself? It's quite a messy and difficult job with only shovels and a mop. And those potholes that will spring up will be quite the bugger for your aching back.

 

[Little-Acorn]

I see that sihouette is failing to answer the question. Let's give him another chance, shall we?

Once again: Are the problems you listed, sufficient to justify taking away people's property rights?

 

[ktucan1]

I don't see what the problem is here. The people of Oregon voted for this so if some of you are not happy about it then move on to something else. The voters of Oregon made their decision so I say respect it. I often hear about States rights and the lot and when a state makes a decision some of us don't like we complain about it. I've heard the same thing about Proposition 8 in California and how it was stupid for the state to pass it. Well The voters of California made that decision just like the voters in Oregon made theirs. Move on...

 

[Little-Acorn]

I don't see what the problem is here. The people of Oregon voted for this so if some of you are not happy about it then move on to something else. The voters of Oregon made their decision so I say respect it. I often hear about States rights and the lot and when a state makes a decision some of us don't like we complain about it. I've heard the same thing about Proposition 8 in California and how it was stupid for the state to pass it. Well The voters of California made that decision just like the voters in Oregon made theirs. Move on...

ktucan1, is it all right with you if we just talk about it? This being a debate forum and all, you know....

 

[ktucan1]

ktucan1, is it all right with you if we just talk about it? This being a debate forum and all, you know....

I don't have no problem with anyone talking about it. However, my problem with topics like this is that you make it sound like it's the worse thing to ever happen and honesty I'm just happy that people practice their constitutional right to vote. We can debate this topic along with a great many others. This to me should be about states rights and less about tax increases because if you get to the nuts and bolts of it. This is a state rights issue. Not so much about tax increases. The state of Oregon like many of the other states has a right to decide on the issues just like you have a right to your opinion. You may not like what happened in Oregon but is it effecting you per say where you live? We can go back and forth about this but what it boils down is that the voters in Oregon made a decision. You don't like it and think its stupid. I agree with you 100%. However. They voted for it. Buts lets continue the discussion because I'm sure someone will read this and disagree with me and I hope they do. I won't lose any sleep over it