Why not tax cuts or breaks too?

greenspun.com : LUSENET : I-695 Thirty Dollar License Tab Initiative : One Thread

You know, I was dead-set against this initiative when I first read about it. I even wrote several responses in the forum against it. But now I've changed my mind. I think the initiative is actually a step in the right direction, a more direct form of government. By the people for the people. But it doesn't go far enough. The only thing missing is a requirement for voter approval for all tax cuts and deductions. You're already going to the people for a reduction of the MVET, why not all the others? There can be no more exemptions for businesses, no more incentives for companies without voter approval. If Gorton fisheries wants a deduction for its environmental cleanup of waste it caused, it has to approve it through the voters. If schools want to cut lunch prices, they have to go through the people. If all tax matters are settled by popular vote, no one can complain about the unfairness of it all, and there can be no more loopholes for corporations to get around their taxes because the people will remove them all. If that is added or promised by the supporters of I-695, I will support it. Representative democracy is okay, but there is something to be said for direct democracy in a state such as ours.

-- Nick Glatzer (nglatze@tcs.tulane.edu), August 29, 1999

Answers

I believe that your position is unnecessary...

The reason I see that is, historically, tax "cuts" are such a rare thing... like finding a diamond in a compost heap, that there are so few; and their impact so minimal compared to tax increases which are so pervasive that requiring a vote for something most would support truly does seem to me to be a waste.

Has business in this state received tax cuts? Yup... they sure have. But when our esteemed governor ran Appropriations (or was it Ways and Means? Forgive me, I'm pre-coffee.) he was in overwatch of tremendous tax INCREASES on business... due to the Legislature's desire to spend 1 billion dollars more then they had. Those increases, he and other democrats there assured us, would ONLY last as long as the "economic emergency" that caused them to raise the taxes in the first place.

Well, the emergency is long over... and it has long since been time for the Legislature to keep their word.

But then... I guess that's why we have 601, isn't it?

Nevertheless, fair's fair. If someone were to start an initiative to address your concerns (it is far too late to amend this one in any event) I would support it.

Westin

-- Westin (86se4sp@my-deja.com), August 29, 1999.


Nick-

We got you on the way to becoming a populist. See, I told you you could reassure your parents.

In fact, the more valid of your complaints against business CAN be answered by increased populism. You are right when you point out ridiculous give-aways like to the Mariners and Seahawks, the parking garage for Nordstroms, the sweetheart deal for the proposed new narrows bridge, enterprise zones, etc. Right now interest groups, be they unions or big companies can buy the process of government. If we diffuse it out to all the people, they'll at least have a harder time and have to spread the bribes more widely. Influence with an elected official can be bought for a donation to his/her re-election campaign and a cushy lobbyist job after retirement. If favorable tax treatment requires convincing HALF OF THE VOTERS, they're going to have a lot harder time. I'm sorry that the date is already passed for this election but Nick, if you can organize an initiative for this for the next election cycle, I'LL SURE SIGN IT. For right now, I'll vote on I-695. Half a loaf is better than nothi

-- Craig Carson (craigcar@crosswinds.net), August 29, 1999.


Sadly, the problem with corporate giveaways is that everybody else is willing to hand them out like candy. So while it's noble for somebody (let's say Washington) to refuse them, the result is that others will just be standing in line right behind us when we say no.

An unfortunate fact of life, but a fact nonetheless.

BB

-- BB (bbquax@hotmail.com), August 30, 1999.


BB-

"So while it's noble for somebody (let's say Washington) to refuse them, the result is that others will just be standing in line right behind us when we say no"

And then what?? You don't get the company or the congestion or the infrastructure costs that go with it. We've got to stop being schizophrenic about this. If these outfits don't pay there way, why should we be not only recruiting them, but offering a discount from what the current inhabitants get in tax burden, to entice them to come here? When you're losing money on every subsidy, why do you keep offering them??

-- Gary Henriksen (henrik@harbornet.com), August 30, 1999.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ