Yes, it’s time for another election — this time, the January 26th Special Election. Registered voters have already received their Voters Guide, with ballots due any day now. But we’ve uncovered a statement from a concerned citizen that inexplicably didn’t make it in the Voters Guide. We’re republishing it here in its entirety, well, just because…
Dear “Fellow” Oregonians,
I know it’s very tempting to raise taxes on those who are better, er, better off, than you. You may think it will be no skin off your nose — a nose which, unlike the gallant captains of industry, has never been put to the grindstone. You may be persuaded by arguments that the government “needs” our money, as if we didn’t need it ourselves.
Please consider the consequences of approving Measures 66 and 67. Measure 66 would add a confiscatory 1.8% surtax on individual income above $125,000 (or above $250,000 for a married couple). Do you think that’s pocket change for those of us who have the kind of income and life that you all want? Of course not.
For example, take the poor couple who bring home a mere $500,000 a year. If Measure 66 passes, that extra tax will most likely keep them from hiring an au pair from France to look after their kids during the summer, thus depriving our state of an opportunity to develop friendship between nations.
Or consider the heiress whose annual stipend from the family’s estate comes to a measly $3 million annually. The surtax on the income would cost jobs for ordinary people. Since I find myself in this predicament, I know I would have to lay off the crew that is renovating my stables with imported tile and granite, perhaps forcing these hardy young men to return to whatever country they came from.
We really can’t afford to be losing jobs in this dire economic climate. Who but the wealthy can create jobs by investing their money in important ventures? Those with wealth also have the insight as to which investments will pay off. The stock market is a total mess at the moment, and nobody with any brains would throw money into a start-up small business (the majority of which fail). No, there are superior options, such as “life settlements“.
Yes, by purchasing life insurance policies from elderly people (and betting that they die early so we can cash in), we are not only providing economic stimulus to needy families, but also keeping the deserving bankers at Goldman Sachs employed during these difficult times.
Now as for Measure 67, it’s just criminal to make a corporation pay taxes when it doesn’t show a taxable profit. For example, my father’s corporation has not shown a profit for years. Why should it be gouged by the government to pay taxes? I must assure you, however, this company is a very good investment that has yielded an average 5 per cent annual dividend. How can that happen without a taxable profit? The operative word is taxable. With tax credits and loss carry forward, all of its profits magically disappear! What’s the use of good accountants if you still have to pay taxes?
Remember, what’s good for the big corporations is good for Oregon. And who knows, you just might win the lottery and become rich yourself. Then you will understand how I feel. Please vote “No” on Measures 66 and 67.
Ava Rishus-Lee
Oregonians Against Job-Killing Child-Molesting Baby-Seal-Bashing Vomit-Spewing Flesh-Eating Taxes
(Editor’s Note: Gil is yet another new OurPDX author. Please welcome him to our ranks!)
{ 11 comments }
Measure 66 will eventually affect a great number of taxpayers. It is a permanent tax with no incrementing of the threshold for inflation. Over my 38 years of employment my salary has incremented to more than ten times what it was when I was first hired. I still don’t meet the single taxpayer threshold of $125,000 but those just starting their career could easily surpass this threshold in a decade or two. I am just suggesting each voter look at the long-term effects as well the short-term “take from the rich to give to the poor” attitude of the proponents of Measure 66 because one day you may the “rich” they take from.
That was f___ing hilarious.
I am sick of the propaganda, sarcasm, emotional outbursts, mudslinging and just general BS surrounding the two tax measures. It’s not just Gil’s piece here. Here’s some samples of what happened at the City Club debate on the issue:
http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2010/01/measures_66_67_tax_debate_heat.html
‘”Isn’t your campaign about class warfare?” McCormick asked Steve Novick, a Portland political activist who is working for the proponents of Ballot Measures 66 and 67.’
‘At one point, Novick dumped 17 bags of M&M’s on the floor, then flung a single candy at McCormick. He said it represents the relative size of the tax increases facing profitable corporations.’
‘”If these measures are defeated, I know at least one person who will be responsible for early school closures and the shredding of our social safety net,” Novick said. “His name is Pat McCormick.”‘
Economic forecasting / State budgeting is not an exact science. There are margins of error associated with estimates of both revenues and expenditures. Predictions of doom and gloom from both sides of this debate are over-dramatic and most likely unrealistic. Calling a committee opposing the measures “Oregonians Against Job-Killing Taxes” fills me with anger and disgust. And so does the term “class warfare”. There’s no excuse for that kind of talk. None.
Sarcastic hyperbole of the type in Gil’s piece doesn’t support a Yes vote on the tax measures, if that was indeed its intent. And neither does playing games with M&Ms in the City Club and blaming McCormick for “early school closures” and “shredding of our social safety net” that haven’t even happened yet!
If the tax measures are defeated, the Legislature will be forced to revise the budget and will be able to take into account more recent economic estimates. They’ll do the best they can with the cards they’ve been dealt, and the people of Oregon will hold their feet to the fire.
I haven’t decided how I’m going to vote on these measures yet. The arguments from both sides have been so meaningless and inflammatory that I need to do my own research. But I trust the voters and the Legislature. I’m not sure McCormick, Novick, or even the editors of the Oregonian and Willamette Week do.
Exactly *when* have the people of Oregon *ever* held our legislature’s “feet to the fire”?
The fact that we’re one of the few states with a half-year biennial legislature and a creaky old tax structure bearing all of its weight on one increasingly aging leg demonstrates that we’re apathetic (or uninformed, or deliberately uninvolved) enough to maybe wave a match underneath a toe or two at best.
We still have elections, don’t we? We still have the Oregonian and Willamette Week, don’t we? And for cryin’ out loud, we’ve got Twitter now! I’m too old to be cynical now.
As far as the Oregon fiscal structure is concerned, yes, it’s broken in a number of subtle ways. It’s not going to get fixed by people who have the gall to spew phrases like “job-killing taxes” or “class warfare”, or by people who toss out bags of M&Ms at a City Club meeting. We change the laws one vote at a time, and we change the Legislature the same way.
And no, I’m not running for office. I don’t think either major party would have me now, and I like being middle-of-the-bird.
Ed, as to this:
“blaming McCormick for “early school closures” and “shredding of our social safety net” that haven’t even happened yet!”
Don’t you remember Portland being on the receiving end of an ongoing Doonesbury series about school closures? Or the need for Multnomah County to pass a special levy to supplement state funding for schools?That was just a few years ago; and I believe the budget shortfall that year was far less than what we’re looking at now. It’s true that forecasting is an inexact science, but that doesn’t mean we can’t predict anything about the future.
The two items that take up nearly all of the state budget are education and prisons. With Measures 10 and 11 and Measure 57 on the books, there’s not much the legislature can do to reduce the prison budget, which leaves education.
I share your disgust with much of what we’ve heard, but I can assure you: the lion’s share of dishonesty is on the “no” campaign’s side, with Pat McCormick right in the center of it all.
I can’t imagine Gil would consider his piece persuasive to a voter like yourself who clearly wants to research the facts. I don’t understand what the problem is with this piece. I found it entertaining, and there are bits of good information in there that I haven’t seen elsewhere. If you want to make an informed decision, there are plenty of other resources out there for you to consult.
I vaguely remember the Doonesbury comics – weren’t they about the same time as Tonya Harding’s quest for the Gold? I believe I still had friends outside of Oregon when that happened, wondering why I lived here.
Nope, it was after the drawn-out balancing of the 2003 budget. Tonya was in like 1990.
@Ed I want to be clear — I’m not sticking up for Steve Novick’s approach, I wasn’t there. But I do think there’s a massively important distinction between unpleasant/confrontational rhetoric on the one hand, and outright lying and deception on the other. The “No” campaign is the one that has been spreading lies consistently and intentionally. Here’s one example: http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/steve_duin/index.ssf/2009/10/lobbying_to_overturn_oregon_ta.html
Nope.
Sorry, Pete. You’re wrong.
Here’s the big lie: “If these new taxes are not levied, our schools will suffer.” That’s the lie. Anyone with half an ounce of knowledge about how it works knows that the schools receive the funding granted to them by the framers of the budget (our esteemed legislators) at the time the budget is established. Nay, it is our esteemed legislators who fail to fund our schools, NOT the tax payers. They have plenty of cash, and they spend it in accordance with their priorities. If education were a priority to them, the schools would be funded. End of story.
And you just don’t have to look very deep to see what their real priorities are.
Oh, yeah… BTW:
Ed, why are you so offended by the term, “job-killing taxes?”
You must have employees. You must feel a need to protect them from any feelings of job-insecurity. You must have no problem meeting payroll each month AND putting food on your own children’s table. You must be one of those industry tycoons, those “employers.” Everyone knows how made-in-the-shade you’ve got it, so the idea that another petty little tax imposed by the aristocracy might be injurious to yourself must be simply unbearable…
Trust me: any additional tax is a job-killing tax. If you provide jobs, you know this. If you don’t know this, then you obviously don’t provide jobs.
Comments on this entry are closed.