State Hypes No Income Tax

If 1098 passes, we’ll see an annual shakedown of voters from someone in Snohomish County to get it overturned.

I’ll go so far as to say (since I’m lately in this camp) that the current economy IS the new normal. We’ll have to live with low single digit growth for a decade(s) globally. And that’s fine, if that’s what it is. Sustainable, not like the abortion of a fictional economy that came from Reagan’s wake.

But we’ll still need our services, if we don’t want to live in an idealized Tea Bagger World, which will look like Mad Max’s Australia and everyone for themselves. We’ll have an income tax on all of us, because it’s unavoidable; the 2/3 tax increase system will be defeated; and in the end if a man from Mukilteo, bankrolled by wealthy trolls, continues to troll Washington, I predict someone wealthy will bankroll a change to our system.

10-30 years from now, the initiative system will be gone.

1098 is not “an income tax”. It’s a specific tax on specific people. If you think what the initiative says is BS and everyone will really be taxed, then you should probably stop voting completely because what’s the point, everyone’s lying, right? But if you haven’t gotten that far into either unreality or cynicism, remember that only 7 of 50 states don’t have an income tax. A state income tax is neither unusual nor stupid. What’s stupid is depending entirely on sales tax. (And don’t point out that California has an income tax and they’re bankrupt; California has problems that Washington can’t even imagine which have nothing to do with its revenue system.)

Last I heard, all but 4 states were having deficits. Washington’s budget issues are not because of the lack of a income tax.

People wealthy enough to be taxed by this proposed income tax are also wealthy enough to easily relocate elsewhere to avoid taxes like these.

No income tax now.

But not if Bill Gates, Sr, imposes his Rich Man’s Property Tax Cut and steals the revenues.

This is a falsehood, it doesn’t happen. The states with income tax are in general higher income per capita states than those without.

You see, the income tax buys things like roads, education, etc. This helps produce wealth.

Also most people dont’ want to live in bumfuck, Wyoming, and prefer CA CT NY NJ MD CT MA etc., you know, the more desirable places to live.

They repeat this canard in every debate and it’s still a lie. If this were true, Somalia would have a booming economy. Fact is, the pluses of being in the great places with more stuff and an income tax far outweighs the minor economic benefit of shaving your tax bill a bit, and the rich people in the world know this, and act on it, by mainly staying in states with an income tax, unlike the yokels who spour this nonsense that suggests one would leave La Jolla CA and relocate to Casper WY to take home $267,000 instead of $300,000 and live in a sod hut on the windy plain. Get real.

“The states with income tax are in general higher income per capita states than those without.”

This could be true despite the income taxes, or it could be true BECAUSE of the income taxes. Knowing their take home income will be reduced by taxes, employees may demand higher wages to maintain the same standard of living.

“You see, the income tax buys things like roads, education, etc. This helps produce wealth.”

Fantastic idea! It makes me wonder, why just tax the rich? If we taxed everyone at like 90% then the government would have enough money to make us all MILLIONAIRES!!!1

That’s not a falsehood. High income people do move when taxes go up. It happened in Jersey. It happened in New York. So much so that that it’s become a panic point to both state governments.

We live in a country where most public corporations register their incorporation in a single state due to tax laws, even though most of those corporations own little more in that state than a post office box, for high income individuals to change their state allegiance isn’t much harder – no matter where the live.

Passing that tax will be the best gift that the people of Washington ever gave to the people of Nevada and other states with similar tax laws.

no, if you look at population and economics statistics you will find you are wrong. States like NY and Cal and such with the most people have income tax, also MA CT NJ MD etc. States like Wyoming and the other insignificant states with no income tax ….are not markedly more populous, are not markedly growing faster, and are not higher in per capita income. You’re just spewing nonsense, and to make it worse, you veer off into corporate registrations when in fact for a person you have to LIVE in wyoming and MAKE MONEY in wyoming to get the benefit of their not having income tax there, and you can’t deal with the fact that wyoming is abig and empty and california Md nj ct etc. are all full of people and have high per capita incomes.

BTW if you live in Wyoming and earn in NY, you’re going to pay NY income tax.

Go ahead get some facts tell me the states with no income tax and put up the population growth stats and stop lying, okay?

under certain circumstances, perhaps invasion, 90% on everyone would be just, and would be worth it. Otherwise it’s as silly to use reductio ad absurdem the way you do, as if I were to say “conservative love tax cuts and say they spur the economy…so let’s cut all taxes down to zero!!!!! woo ho!!!”

Notice how that doesn’t convince you? similarly your evasion of the facts by using reductio ad absurdem is not convincing to me.

BTw your argument about workers demanding more is false, if they could get more thru demanding more they’d demand more wh. or not they had income taxes. You totally avoid the facts that there is NO association between income tax and a state economy going to hell, the avail. data shows the opposite in fact, and your notion that people leave states with income tax is merely a lie.

All taxes on income are regressive and unfair.

Only assets should be taxed.

A man may make one million one year and nothing the next.

Another may have thousands of acres and intellectual property and pay zero tax.

You should only tax what is owned…not what is made.

Income reflects the future productivity of the person.

Assets reflect the past laurels.

Right now the winners of the 20th century want to tax the children of the 21st to keep the ice and vodka flowing.

Taxing the high income group is a ruse. Income tax is prohibited by the Wa State Constitution unless it applies to all levels of income. The Initiative is designed to test/void that Constitutional Ban and once overturned the Politicians will be able to tax any level of income they want and the people will be duped again !

I would support this but only if it were structured in a way to be revenue neutral. It is stupid to rely completely on a sales tax, and if this were intended to right that wrong, it would have been structured in a way that simultaneously lowered the sales tax. Sadly this is not the case.

Also, the “ceiling” of $250,000 is not indexed for inflation, meaning that every year, more and more people will be paying this tax. In 30 years, assuming a 3% annual increase in salary, someone making less than $107k today would be subject to this tax. While $107k is certainly above average, it is far from the bar reached by what most consider the “very wealthy”.

Approach tax structure reform from a revenue neutral standpoint first and come up with something more fair and sustainable. Then, separately, address the need to increase taxes. don’t handle both at the same time.

I-1098 is, pure and simple, a GRADUATED NET STATE INCOME TAX. Income up to $250,000 for singles, and $500,000 for couples. If this initiative passes, and is NOT thrown out by the Washington State Supreme Court, then expect a full blown graduated net state income tax within two or three years.

I-1098 has three chances of becoming law: Slim, None and Snowball in Hell.

Gregiore is just another Democratic liar that does not know what truth and logic are.

Gregiore is just another Democratic liar that does not know what truth and logic are.