Log in

No account? Create an account
And an addendum... - Chronicles of a Hereditary Geek [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Darth Paradox

[ website | Pyrlogos - a fantasy webcomic ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

And an addendum... [Oct. 28th, 2010|02:07 pm]
Darth Paradox

The preceding rant was mostly about national politics, though most of it applies at the state level as well. I have a few words about some of the specific Washington initiatives, though.

  • I-1053 - requiring a 2/3rds legislative vote or a statewide initiative to raise taxes. The latest from Eyman and his usual gang of idiots, trying to hobble the state's ability to fund its necessary programs. I don't find this as objectionable as most of his proposals, but the status is in enough budgetary trouble as it is, and the usual response of "cut spending" never comes with any useful suggestions of what to cut. As it is, some vital areas of state spending - education being the most important, in my opinion - are already ridiculously underfunded.
  • I-1082 - privatizing industrial insurance and worker's comp. This one's a little complex, but the big danger to it that I see is throwing employers into an insurance market that's already shown itself to be greedy and short-sighted. Good luck to any small business trying to get insurance at a reasonable rate under this law.
  • I-1098 - state income tax on adjusted gross income above $200K/person; reduces property taxes and small business taxes. I understand where people are coming from on both sides of the argument here, but the fact remains that Washington has the most regressive taxation in the country - the high sales tax and no income tax disproportionately affects the poor - so any attempt to rectify this is a good thing. (The noise about the tax being extended to everyone by the legislature is explicitly disallowed by the initiative, so a lot of the "No" campaign is based on lies.)
  • I-1100 and I-1105 - two initiatives to privatize liquor sales and distribution. Again, I see where the proponents are coming from, but a) I've never found shopping at the state liquor stores to be much of a burden, and b) the state really can't afford to lose the money right now. I'd support this if it didn't come in the middle of an ongoing budget crisis, but let's get that fixed before we try this.
  • I-1107 - repealing the sugar tax. The whole initiative is paid for by soda manufacturers trying to increase their sales, and again the state needs the revenue badly. Besides, I consider this a good example of economic incentivizing.

[User Picture]From: seorin
2010-10-28 11:31 pm (UTC)
The other thing I noticed about the I-1098 naysayers is their primary argument is founded on a logical fallacy. I do so love slippery slopes. That kind of thing makes me want to vote against them just on principle.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: misterflames
2010-10-29 05:00 am (UTC)
The thing is, history works for the "slippery slope" argument. Look at the original Federal Income tax proposal, and where we are today.

Not that I really care, I'm on disability and beneath the poverty line. I just don't trust politicians, and typically on that subject I'm right.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: dacut
2010-10-28 11:52 pm (UTC)
On I-1098: I'd be happier if they repealed all sales taxes and made up the difference in income taxes (extending it all the way down to, say, $40k individual incomes). Then we wouldn't have to fret every year over whether Congress will keep the sales tax exemption *and* we would have a properly progressive tax regime (modulo loopholes).
(Reply) (Thread)