Who benefits the most from 695?

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

Easy to see that this is a rich man's vendetta. "Honey, this is great, the tabs on the Mercedes will be $30!"

-- Whose agenda is this? (bunk@aol.com), September 03, 1999

Answers

Bunk !!!

Hey,, slow down and take a deep breath.. should you have time to look into state spending and taxing, you might see that all of the tax paying fools in this state will benefit. If you are convinced that the well to do people are going to get the most from this, I would guess that you either have not paid taxes long, or you know very little about I-695.

Than not being the case, I would then ask what branch of government you work for and at what level?

Besides, my Mercedes is not much above the $30 now, $42.15 last yr.

-- rons (ron1@televar.com), September 03, 1999.


Actually, MVET is a tax break for the rich. Joe sixpack goes out and gets a new car (does happen)or pickup. Generates a $500 MVET. Pays $500. Takes the standard deduction, so he gets NOTHING off his income tax. Net is $500

Marcia Mercedes buys a new car or SUV. Generates a $500 MVET. Pays $500. Adds the MVET to her standard deductions. Since she's in the 35% bracket, the feds credit her with $175. Net is $325.

Lets see. Rich person pays $325, low income person pays $500. Oh yeah Dave, the MVET is a REAL good deal for the low income. People gripe about "flat tax" proposals as being "regressive". They are much more progressive than this turkey.

-- Gary Henriksen (henrik@harbornet.com), September 03, 1999.


695 will cut off Light Rail funding. And the result will be Gridlock.

Unless Y2K creates 12% unemployment.

-- Whose agenda is this? (bunk@aol.com), September 03, 1999.


"695 will cut off Light Rail funding"

At $100 million a mile it ought to be cut off!

Read this, and educate yourself:

http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/taubman/report/articles/transit.htm

-- Gary Henriksen (henrik@harbornet.com), September 03, 1999.


The $30 tab is the agenda of families who would like to be able to afford a newer vehicle. It's the agenda of senior citizens who really need a more reliable car but can't afford one because they are living on fixed income.

Washington new car registrations are 25% lower than the national average. (See page 136 of the Department of Revenu's January 1999 "Tax Referemce Manual") This explains Washington has a higher percentage of junkers on the roads.

Those that oppose I-695 are waging "class warefare" against the working poor and senior citizens. Their attitude is "soak the richer". Well working families and senior citizens are not rich!

Opponents of I-695 want to deny people the right to own a newer vehicle by setting the licensing fee's way beyond their ability to pay.

Bill Gates was not standing out side of Wal*Mart gathering signatures for I-695. Seniors and the working poor were gathering signatures. One 75 year old man went door to door and obtained over 200 signatures because he would like to be able to update his 1975 pickup.

To those that think $100 is easy to come by. Try living on a fixed income for a while. Try supporting a family where the needs are great. If those opposed had once of compassion for the taxpayer I- 695 would not be necessary!

-- RD (Monte) Benham (rmonteb@aol.com), September 04, 1999.



An interesting item I picked up reading the (student) Republicans against I-695 site. Really good design layout by the way, technically a neat website, although there logic is superficial and easily rebuttable (if they had a bulletin board to rebut it upon). Anyway, it leads to a legislative study that looked at the MVET issue (with an eye toward increasing it, no doubt). But here, in this quote, it rebuts the oft spoken statement by proponents of the MVET that we need the MVET because gas taxes "have not kept up with inflation." That apparently ain't so, at least not for the ten year period covered by this report. See below: Two of the three major state transportation revenues, gas tax and motor vehicle licenses, permits, and fees (LPF), grow at a much slower rate than most state revenue sources. The third major transportation revenue source, the motor vehicle excise tax (MVET), grows significantly faster than inflation but represents less than one-third of the transportation revenues. Adjusting for inflation, collections of the state sales tax, state property tax, and MVET have grown annually over the last ten years by 3.4 percent, 5.5 percent, and 6.6 percent, respectively, while gas tax and LPF revenue have grown at 1.4 percent and 2.8 percent, respectively. These growth rates include revenue generated by increases in the MVET, gas tax, and LPF tax rates. State sales and property tax rates did not change during the period.

http://www.leg.wa.gov/senate/scs/swm/other/mvet.pdf I think it is obvious that the MVET has been the politicians "cash cow." No wonder they are in despair at the thought that it will be lost to them.

.

-- Craig Carson (craigcar@crosswinds.net), September 08, 1999.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ