Good. So now the government will be satisfied with the amount of revenue they have right?

They won't declare another funding crisis in two or three years will they?

Right....

Cheer up -- you still have halfway decent property tax levels and no sales tax. It could be worse.

But if you're expecting Oregon to climb out of this recession any time soon, forget it. If the country as a whole has another year to go, Oregon has two or more. Go by streetcar!

I have lost all faith in the state of Oregon. Class warfare exists big time! I now have no faith that we won't recycle the same myopic candidates and Kitz will be the next gov. What's funny, this has the potential to actually reduce total tax revenue for the state of Oregon. (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124329282377252471.html)

Yes, lets tax one group a larger percentage to pay for another group. Yeah, they can afford it, so what? It makes as much sense as taxing bicycle sales to support pot hole repair.

And next biennium when spending increases yet again, and state employees don't sacrifice one bit, once again, then we'll be trying to pass a sales tax. Then we'll have even higher and more taxes. It'll go on and on, until the whole thing implodes. Our founding fathers, who escaped this sort of taxation, are really giving us a big "WTF?"

This tax has nothing to do with streetcar, you know that!

People that have more money, need to pony up more money, simple as that.

It makes me happy to see that Oregonians are not falling for the right wing blabber mouths that inhabit the internet.

"Job killing taxes" my arse!

Businesses aren't gonna start losing money because of this.

Just goes to show you right wingers, you do not have support in Portland.

The rich people in the United States have gotten away with murder from a tax standpoint under Bush. This isn't going to kill them.

Those corporate taxes are going to show up for everybody at the grocery store and at the bank, however.

It makes me happy to see that Oregonians are not falling for the right wing blabber mouths that inhabit the internet.

Spoken like a true government employee, with benefits that nobody in the private sector gets. Enjoy, Al! Don't count on all that PERS, though -- it could go under before you do.

Great, getting closer to that $20 loaf of bread. Now watch the unemployment rate go up a couple more points...

Q,
Why don't we just go to a flat tax as proposed by silver-spoon Steve Forbes? Everyone pays the same amount. That's fair, right? Of course, low income folks would have to choose between food/shelter and paying taxes, but fair is fair.

The policies you and your ilk promote would result in real class warfare. Like third-world conditions where you have a tiny moneyed class surrounded by scores of poor. Of course, those wealthy folks would have to live in fortresses and travel with bodyguards at all times due to the constant threat of family members being kidnapped for ransom. Is that really the kind of society you want? I see measures like these as finally starting to turn the tide after a 30-year assault on the middle class.

Ha ha ha ! We got the rich - you are next!

I am not an angrymama tonight, because of this hope. My faith in humankind has been restored!!

Idiots!

“The projection of revenues has stabilized, not decreased. That is a very good sign because it is a sign that people are in fact making money and will be in a position, because they’re making money, to pay a portion of that in revenues to the federal government.”
--Steny Hoyer (D-Md.)

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!

Q, state employees have and are sacrificing . . . they have 14 days cut out of their pay over the next two years. That's called a salary cut. Add to that a salary freeze, and YES, state employees ARE sacrificing. And no, I'm not a state employee.

Enjoy, Al! Don't count on all that PERS, though

I don't get PERS Jack, here is what I get:
For 10 years of driving I get $562/mo, period.

Do you find that out of line?

It's less than what you get I bet!

I actually heard someone call into a radio show today who said that because his employer will have to pay $140 extra/year, or just over $11/month, that he would lose his job. Really? Begs credulity. $10 was a significant amount of money back in the '30s when the $10 tax was established . . . 'bout time it increases, given the rate of inflation since then! Wasn't this ten buck biz tax the cheapest in the nation?

And just so you can all see that I am not a FAT CAT PUBLIC EMPLOYEE here is a copy of my "confidential" PAY STUB!

"My faith in humankind has been restored!!"

Because 55% of people voted a marginal tax increase on rich people to plug a state budget gap?

Wow.

And I abstained from voting yes or no on 67, FYI, but I am definitely not crying over it passing.

I don't get PERS Jack, here is what I get:
For 10 years of driving I get $562/mo, period.

No pension? No lifetime free health care?

This is a win for the teat sucking PERS recipients, the unions, government employees, and...nobody else.

Once again, dumb Oregon voters have been scared into paying higher taxes at the expense of economic growth and prosperity in the private sector (which really pays the bills).

Clark county real estate just got a loot more valuable tonight.

Next thing you know, these dumb, uneducated (and soon to be unemployed) Multnomah knot-heads will be reelecting Adams, Leonard, and Saltzman. (wait, that would probably happen anyway)...

Wow, just wow. Keep Portland wierd, indeed.

Why do people vote for things that hurt them and their communities? Ask the rats at OEA....

enough ranting.

Now just sit and wait until that increase on the "rich" slips down the scale.

"Those corporate taxes are going to show up for everybody at the grocery store"

As if businesses don't simply charge customers the maximum they figure they can get away with already. You seem to assume consumers always mindlessly cough up any price demanded, for anything, and that they will never fight back by consuming less, or (more likely) buying cheaper stuff from other producers if forced to. Anyway, by this logic, why have any corporate taxes (or minimum wages) at all? Surely if we really set them free, the corporations would "pass the savings along" wouldn't they?

Many learned economists have demonstrated that corporate taxes are passed on to consumers and rank-and-file employees -- they are not absorbed by shareholders and top executives. The literature on this is fairly extensive, and it doesn't need me to paraphrase it beyond that.

In other words, you're simply wrong.

Many countries do not have corporate income taxes, or have only very minor ones. They raise their money through a value-added tax (VAT), which most definitely is passed on to consumers as well. All of these taxes essentially boil down to wage taxes and sales taxes in disguise. So enjoy the fruits of Measure 67 -- you're paying for them.

Califoregon.

Jack, the lifetime free health care is BOGUS!

At 65 everyone moves into medicare!

Believe it, cause that is what happens over here!

And the $562/mo is the pension.

Jack, why aren't you rallying against the federal income tax which is what is killing Americans.

At least this tax stays in Oregon, and even if, like the "world is ending" crowd says, it ends up getting paid in PERS or some such thing, at least it will get spent in Oregon.

If Business raise their prices too much they put themselves out of business, I don't think 67 has much impact on any of the small businesses in this city to be honest.

We'll see. I have no sympathy for the $250,000 couple that doesn't want to pungle up some more for the state. Yeah, the money may be wasted in Salem, but that set has gotten away with tax murder under Bush. And guys like Wyden are going to make sure that they continue to do so under the federal system for a long time to come.

"it ends up getting paid in PERS or some such thing, at least it will get spent in Oregon....

Oh, boy. Yeah, lets just give a bunch of cash to the PERS recipients....it's okay because it will be spent in Oregon....

What a load...but it is nice to hear the perspective of a PERS recipient. Not.

Elaine-

Public employees in Oregon at all levels (with minor exceptions in the City of Portland Bureaus of Planning and Sustainabiity and Development Services are not suffering much compare to what has gone on in the private sector in Oregon over the last 24 months.

I know many folks who have been unempoyed for 12 - 18 months who would happily trade their job situation with any sttae empoyee "suffering" a 14 day soread over two years furlough.

The folks who have been unempoyed in this state in the private sector actually know suffering.

It is, at best, inane, to establish a public policy that one small segment of the work force must be isolated from all the consequences affecting the majority of the labor force caused by a tanking economy.

Inane.

And I left the "s" out of "inane"

hear the perspective of a PERS recipient. Not.

I am not now, nor will I ever be, a PERS recipient! At least its tax money staying in Oregon, better than sending our tax money over to Iraq or Afghanistan!

Welcome to the new America. With Government employees and unemployment at an all time high, every single tax increase put on a ballot will pass until this country is completely destroyed.

At least its tax money staying in Oregon ...

Except for all the PERS benefits that get paid to retirees who flee to no-income-tax Washington and Nevada.

I wonder how Phil Knight is going to like living in Camas?

Clark county real estate just got a loot[sic] more valuable tonight.

From where the real estate valuation basis is starting from in Clark County, that's not a difficult scenario to imagine - for the few dozen wealthy folks who want to temporarily relocate there to realize some capital gains free of state tax.

After they get over that phase in their life, they'll discover the truth of what's already been revealed in his blog: The trouble with living in Vancouver, is that you have to live in Vancouver.

"The trouble with living in Vancouver, is that you have to live in Vancouver."

Yeah, it's pretty bad when the best thing Portland has going for it is that Vancouver sucks. If Vancouver were actually a nice place, imagine how empty P-town would be.

If you saved, say, $50,000 a year in taxes by moving to the 'Couv, you could have someone drive you back and forth to Portland in a limo, and someone else to give you massages all the way in and out.

I don't find the place all that bad, on its own terms. Easy to get around, if a bit sprawling -- it reminds me of the Rock Creek area on the west side of Portland, 32 years ago. But any life that involves the I-5 bridge on a regular basis would be hell without the limo-and-massage setup.

Let the class warfare begin. I can play this game for the rest of my life.

========================================================
Thank you for your donation request. We have assisted members of our community and organizations such as yours for many years.

Due to the recent passage of Oregon Ballot Measures 66 and 67, we regret to inform you that we are unable to assist your organization at this time. As much as we would like to donate to all of the organizations who make such requests, the voters of this state have chosen to direct our money elsewhere.

Please consider soliciting someone who voted Yes on Oregon Ballot Measures 66 and 67.

Of course, we wish you and your organization much success in your endeavors.
==========================================================

I never got a job from a poor man.

If you want to reduce the amount of any activity, simply tax it. Behavior changes quickly. Watch now as state revenues "unexpectedly" drop.

My prediction is that when this zany scheme doesn't pay off, that you'll hear rumblings about an overt sales tax again, on top of the 67 stealth sales tax.

67 is a stealth sales tax on all gross receipts. We will all buy less, due to higher prices. Oregon businesses won't be able to compete, locally or nationwide.

Now those businesses won't feel optimistic enough to hire employees. If I was a business owner, I wouldn't create any jobs here, even if I had the money.

66 ensures only that the mobile rich will relocate, leaving the rest to pick up the slack. Just keep defining rich down until you think you can bottle lightning.

The top 1% earning Oregonians already paid 23% of the income taxes. When will it be fair -- when they pay 50%? 75%?

How bad does it have to get before people understand that you cannot compel a person to put forth his or her best effort, when you simply take it all away. Why try?

Now where do I go to demand "jobs with justice"? Who can be compelled to remain here and somehow offer those jobs?

I never got a job from a poor man. I never got a job from a rich man who doesn't feel like hiring, either.

Garage Wine -

Maybe I'm confused, but I thought that the last time I checked, Oregon taxed PERS recipients on PERS income regardless of their current state of residence. The"nexus" thing, the PERS payment is the result of employment , yo those many years ago, in Oregon. Ralph Recipient usually gets a credit on his state income tax, if there is one, in his current state of residence, for the tax paid to Oregon on the PERS paymnets.

Were I a PERS recipient, the taxation by Oregon of PERS benefits by Oregon even if I lived in Washington, would be a disincentive to moving out of Oregon. If a PERS recipient moves out of Oregon, they are still taxed, but give up the right to vote confiscatory taxes on everyone else to continue the high PERS payouts.

Al m and others with similar thinking, "I don't think M67 will have much impact on any of the small businesses...":

My friend with a small business having $16 Million of state gross sales bought a home in WA last year. He'll be moving there soon. He'll be laying off 3 employees in the next two months. His family is a three generation Oregon family.

Another friend who's a small time developer/builder/property owner moved his residence to WA to escape taxes recently. He was a life time Oregonian and saw this coming.

I could go on with all the friends and clients I have had that have or will be doing the same as the above examples. One was a oil distribution company with over 90 employees. I know you don't like examples, they don't prove much in your thinking. Keep thinking like you do and we hope not to hear about your standing in line at the unemployment office. It's real and not hypothetical as your thinking.

I'd like to put to rest the idea that it's only 'households' over 250k. That's the IRS term, not the vernacular.

I support my girlfriend but we're not married, so it's not just individuals that get hit but also 'households' at 125k. Hardly the 'rich'.

Amen rsm. I told the Democratic Party, which I have supported generously for many years, to cross me off their list with the imminent passage of Measure 66. I've never felt more disappointed and betrayed by my party. I live in a $125,000 + household -- I am unemployed and supported entirely by my earning partner. We assist my unemployed brother in Eugene, and support many political and charitable causes. We never travel, rarely eat out, we own ancient, broken down appliances...we are not living the high life in any respect. My partner's salary has been drastically reduced from 2008 levels--no furlough days, just a lot more work for a lot less money. If only the pay decrease included some much needed time off.
Now we have no idea how the phase out of the federal tax will affect us, and will be forced to cut back on much of what we do for charity and the community. That part will be difficult, but saying no to the Democrats--far from it.

I support my girlfriend but we're not married, so it's not just individuals that get hit but also 'households' at 125k.

Getting married would save you a lot of money in taxes. Divorce is expensive, though...

So we raised taxes in the middle of a recession - we've redefined stupid is what we did. Do you REALLY think that this will be enough money? Do you REALLY think that the pigs at the trough will be satisfied? Do you really think that someone making $125K a year is rich????

Science has known for years that you can't squeeze blood out of stone. Unfortunately state government is arguing with science and we'll see how much blood we can squeeze out of something (someone) who has no more to give. This WILL hurt businesses in Oregon, which will hurt workers in Oregon; which will lengthen the recession in Oregon. Just like Sam Adams, I hope you like what you voted for.

I've said it before - Oregon use to be nice place to live.

Christ on a Bike, I wish I could earn enough money to save enough money to escape this place before it totally implodes.

This news is beyond grim for working people in this State...well, working people and small businesses who pay for the State's way, rather than feed from it's trough, I should say.

Wait 'till the unofficial Unemployment rate climbs above 14 or 15 percent in Portland. You fools who voted to further destroy the business climate here are gonna see out-of-control violent crime like you would not believe. There is a point desperate people reach when they have been out of work for a year or two, when they run out of hope, when they stop caring, and some of them turn bad. Really bad.

Mark my words on that, I am not kidding. My job just became that much more dangerous. The cops ? Watch their budget get slashed in a year or two when tax revenue suddenly and "unexpectedly" drops like a stone.

Does anyone know if Texas extradites people to Oregon for being behind on their tax payments ?

Allow me to add to my above comments -
First, I've never made even close to $125K but I've never consider that figure to be a rich man's level. Second - the company that I use to work for laid me off in January of 2009. Due to the recession a company with 3 offices statewide and almost 500 employees went down to one office with a total of 50 full time employees and about another 50 'on-call'/part time employees. Now you are telling this company that every dollar that they take in, they owe additional taxes on regardless of how much it costs to run the company.

Want proof that the educational system isn't working - the fact that the two tax measures passed is all the proof you need. And I have complete faith that the extra money will just make the educational system worse.

Hey PD, if the Oregon voters are so "dumb" and you are so smart, why did your side lose "once again"?

Oregon has effectively told the well healed they aren't welcome here, and would be better off moving to Washington, Nevada, or even Hawaii. In another 12-18 months, I predict we will have the highest unemployment in the country, which will continue to rise as the rest of the country's declines Better yet, Portland's weirdos will still be blaming George Bush four years from now.

state employees have and are sacrificing . . . they have 14 days cut out of their pay over the next two years. That's called a salary cut. Add to that a salary freeze, and YES, state employees ARE sacrificing. And no, I'm not a state employee.

Fourteen whole days? Wow. Thats like a 3% pay cut. I hope they can manage.

Well, at least we still get our kicker refund, right? Salem has all it needs now, right? They won't need to "move onto other issues, such as tackling Oregon's unique "kicker" law" as reported by the O, right?

I guess our move to Nevada in November is looking better all the time. My wife and I are hardly rich but we will be saving close to $14,000.00 in Oregon taxes in 2010.
Sure Nevada has it's share of problems, including the most home foreclosures in the nation. But we see way more Highway Patrol officers on the roads here than we ever saw in Oregon and they still continue to fix and upgrade the highways here all the time.

Jack, I'm curious. You say that couples making $250,000 made out like bandits (not your words) under Bush. I know Bush lowered the rates that Clinton had raised by about 3-4%. Is that what you're talking about or is there something else? Aren't most of those people hit with AMT anyway?

"they have 14 days cut out of their pay over the next two years."

Tell that to the guy who is:
a) Underemployed
b) Had to take a job with lousy benes
c) Unemployed
d) Took a perm 10% pay cut

My tears remain unjerked from my eyes. PERS empolyees have 100% job security, higher pay than private employees and the best benes in the state - Thank you taxpayers!

These taxes are a 1-inch patch on a 2-foot hole in the boat that is Oregon.

al m,

Ok so you're not or will be a PERS recipient.

Aren't you worse! A future TriMet retirement recipient who's retirement system is even more lavish and unfunded.

http://www.brainstormnw.com/archive/jun03_feature.html

"I am not a FAT CAT PUBLIC EMPLOYEE"

If you work for TriMet, I believe you get paid thru prop taxes collected and employer paid taxes. What makes you NOT a public employee?

Plus if pay is so lousy, why not get a job driving school buses to supplement it?

This is good news for teachers and state employees. If we all get jobs as teachers and state employees, everybody will be happy. The jobs will be paid for by the rich, though, so we need to keep and welcome more rich people here to maintain the scheme. I just hope they don't figure it out.

If the rich of this country continue to refuse to pay their fair share then we are all to witness just a quicker decline of what was once a great country.

California is a mess, primarily because of prop 13.

Why don't y'all just move to Mexico, you won't have to pay any taxes down there.

Phil Knight is whining cause he got to pay taxes?

Oh gawd, this country is doomed.

WHO'S GOT $$$?

Do you really think that someone making $125K a year is rich????

According to the Oregonian article two days ago, in 2008 those in the top 2% in Oregon made $153,480 on average. Those making $125k are at least in the top 5-10%. If the top 5-10% isn't rich, who is? I guarantee you those at median income ($32,659) sure think those at $125k are rich. I'm pretty sure median family income is somewhere in the low $60k range in Portland. For those of us who do well but still debate every month whether the Comcast cable/internet bill is worth paying, I think it's easy to forget how little most people make.

Oregon should be renamed The Sapphire State.
It is now the bluest of the blue.

It's interesting to see people complaining about excessive taxes for high earners, who after all have worked for what they have.

That done, they turn around and ask that state employees make all the sacrifices. I guess "excessive" is in the eye of the beholder.

-
One significant 'pressure' factor increasing Oregon's unemployment number wider than other states', comparatively, is that Oregon is the only state without a military base -- so no slice of the 'Defense Dept' pie sent here ... only cold caskets from the false war.

Another (my) perspective nationwide, sees the economy is ruined everywhere. We cannot restore our local prosperity with an Oregon ballot, impoverishment continues no matter what we voted on 66 & 67. Like Steve's comment sees it, we put "a 1-inch [state] patch on a 2-foot [federal] hole" (in Oregon's economy 'boat'). All America is in the same boat.

Businesses that can't make it here, can't make it anywhere; relocating is no help except for certain private rich individuals, maybe. I have a close personal insight into a large Oregon business on the edge and operating at a loss, which might indeed shut down here and now blame it on Oregon voters -- but the fact is their product sales slumped worldwide, (outmoded technology), and it is not Oregon voters' fault. Anyway, we can go on fighting among ourselves more viciously now, and ignore what's going on around us.

Jack's comment to you PERS recipients is perfect -- "it could go under before you do." Pension fund bankruptcy (such as in California, and Kansas, already), can only be prevented in advance, seeing the trend lines and taking action now, across the country.

- -

(I declare the (11:09pm) comment of 'Downtown Denizen' channels LIARS Larson verbatim. So it's totally bubble-world.)

Al M.: Please define "fair share" for us. Doh!

I guess our move to Nevada in November is looking better all the time. My wife and I are hardly rich but we will be saving close to $14,000.00 in Oregon taxes in 2010.

Dave A. ... To save $14,000 in taxes in 2010 by moving to Nevada, your income not attributable to Oregon sources (such as business income derived in state or capital gains from the sale of Oregon property) will have to be approximately $837,500. While we will certainly miss having someone with this type of income around, we wish you luck (which you apparently don't need) and much happiness living in Nevada.

Dave A. says: "I guess our move to Nevada in November is looking better all the time. My wife and I are hardly rich but we will be saving close to $14,000.00 in Oregon taxes in 2010."
====

ruralres: "Dave A. ... To save $14,000 in taxes in 2010 by moving to Nevada, your income not attributable to Oregon sources (such as business income derived in state or capital gains from the sale of Oregon property) will have to be approximately $837,500."
====

rural, I don't think that Dave stated he moved out of Oregon to avoid the "possible" extra 2% retro that 'might' get passed Jan 26th. He stated that he'll be "saving close to $14,000.00 in Oregon taxes in 2010."

At 9% state tax, that would take only one fifth the amount you claim. Dave may only be making $155K per year as a consultant or technology nomad, which is easy to relocate to tax friendly environs. Just like a 'creative' self employed may also be able to do.

"rich of this country continue to refuse to pay their fair share"

In Oregon, I think te top 2% are paying 40% of the income tax, how much is fair and why does fair only apply to non-public employees?

I guess that means you would be all for a Cadillac tax on health benefits that are overly generous?

"Hey PD, if the Oregon voters are so "dumb" and you are so smart, why did your side lose "once again"?"

The fact that you cite “your side” is very telling and a result of the class warfare Salem is brewing up. I actually do think Oregon voters are dumb for supporting policies and tax hikes that have proven to be detrimental in the past. The culture in Oregon has become one based simply on guilt; Salem and the unions have become very masterful at making voters feel responsible for everything wrong in Oregon while they pursue various endgames that only serve the bureaucracy instead of the public at large. Measures 66 and 67 passed because “yes” voters (your side I’m guessing), cited not wanting education cuts as the main reason. Further, the “yes” campaign set out long ago to make “the wealthy and corporations pay their fair share” to this end. Well, it’s simply B.S. because our trusted lawmakers have done nothing to “tighten their belts”. As a “no” voter, it is very difficult for me to feel responsible for the problems with education funding when the neighbors on each side of me are golf-playing PERS recipients who don’t give a crap about the burden on the private sector…they just want their checks to keep coming. It’s difficult for me to support higher business taxes when the private employment base has been battered and public sector workers haven’t had to suffer through downsizing. I simply can’t support idiotic million-dollar streetcars and bike infrastructure projects when our economy is in shambles. ..just because Sam Adams wants me to feel guilty for having a carbon footprint.

Don’t you get it, Oregon? Policy, very bad policy, is achieved through the magic and marketing power of making the voter feel guilty for all of the problems we face when in reality it is the fault of a dysfunctional bureaucracy. The average Oregon voter buys it – hook, line, and sinker; they’re dumb.

But I digress, I really do think Jack is right about the coming battle between the private sector and the entitled bureaucrats. Your comment is very reflective of that.

I'm not going to get sucked into debating all this tax stuff here, the voters have spoken, so it doesn't matter what I or anybody else thinks at this point.

Pay the taxes or leave, it really doesn't matter to me or anybody else. What will be will be.

(They could end the war and have money to fund all of the domestic programs)

Aren't you worse! A future TriMet retirement recipient who's retirement system is even more lavish and unfunded.

As far as this is concerned, the problem at trimet is the family health insurance cost.

I'd like to remind people, that Trimet does not set the rates for insurance, the insurance companies do.

This is another problem that Trimet is being blamed for that is not of their creation.

I have (actually I do not get that "platinum" health coverage) what every American should have, health care.

Rather than trying to tear down the few Americans that actually get decent health care, the public should be trying to build up everybody else, by getting our so called government to get a public option national health plan.

But we won't see that will we?

The rest of Trimet retirement is not that great, it's all smoke and mirrors in the right wing attempt to libel Trimet.

You guys wanna see what is is like to drive a bus around here?

Spend a shift with me, not just a trip but a whole shift.

Furthermore, people keep calling into question my "credentials".

They see the word "bus driver" so it conjures up images of someone without education.

I have a "Masters of Education" from Antioch, Bachelors of Arts from University of Massachusetts, completed Nurse training at Santa Rosa JC, owned 4 retail businesses, and manage property as power of attorney in NW Portland.

I am not a ideologue, I see issues from many points of view.

It can be hard to "leave" if you need to sell your house or commercial property in the current environment. I know: I've been trying to sell mine for the past 5 months. All the City of Portland needs now is a real estate transfer tax to kick us in the ass on the way out.

You say that couples making $250,000 made out like bandits (not your words) under Bush.

Among many, many tax giveaways, including complete repeal of the estate tax (at least for 2010), Bush cut the top tax rate on dividends received on stock from 39.6% to 15%. Not bad for people who can live off a stock portfolio instead of working for a living.

Hang in there, mister tee, national trends interpreted by economistic experts say another wave of Congress-complicit property foreclosures is coming to crest in June.
Maybe Congress oversight for public audit of bookkeeping in the Fed.Reserve, in FannieMae and GinnieMae, and in more mortgage lenders, could reveal who to prosecute for taking the money and could provide regulatory control to improve economic conditions going forward -- got Congress? -- but at least public records information should open eyes and end arguments to agree seeing the reliable way forward out of the ruin and chaos.

Similarly underscoring al m's comment, Congress enacting single-payer national health care, like the rest of the world lives by, could cut at least a third of Oregon's state tax burden going to insurance company-profit plans here. Then, too, it could cut maybe half of Congresspersons' private 'profits' without their bribes (called 'campaign contributions') from insurance companies.

And another example of national waste ruining our benefits in Oregon: From a Bend caller testifying on-air to LIARS today, (skepticize accordingly). He stated he will "pink-slip 15 employees on April 15" and liquidate his business, (and recoup only double his initial investment). He blamed 66 & 67 as too much (the final leech?) bleeding him broke to pay for Oregon schools, which he believes is unfair to him because he "home-schooled his three kids," then, and now they are all serving in the U.S. military -- so they are taxpayer-paid Public Employees.

The 'class warfare' or 'cultural warfare' or whatever it's called, mostly looks like the battlefield is only between some peoples' ears -- in half-brain fights between seeing the reality of what they vote for and get, and dreaming myth they get in life by obeying TV.
Humankind culture versus hypnotism culture.
One-for-all class cooperation versus all-for-one class competition.

BTW, LIARS aired the president of the 30,ooo-member Wilco-brand co-op stores, who said 66 & 67 enactment means each member's 2009 profit share is going to be only $70 instead of $100. And nobody is going to get a pink slip.

* * * * * * * * * * *
oops, CORRECTION:

Wilco is 3ooo members, NOT 30,ooo.

* * * * * * * * * * *

The other number is accurate -- about $210,000 profit to share (2009),
(instead of about $300,000 without 66 & 67).

One more example, for timeliness -- see the effects on your TV tonight.

Watchdog oversight shows (... vigilance is the price of liberty) :

.
Wall Street Bankers And Investors Fund New Media Platform For Gov. Bob McDonnell’s SOTU Response, Lee Fang, ThinkProgress.ORG, Jan. 27

Gov. Bob McDonnell (R-VA) will give the Republican response to President Obama’s State of the Union response tonight. For his speech, McDonnell has prepared an elaborate rally in the Virginia House of Delegates, a website, a live webcast of the event, a live twitter feed, and other social media tools. The online platform to broadcast the speech was launched this morning at “soturesponse.com.”

The website, as well as the rally, is funded by McDonnell’s political action committee, Opportunity Virginia PAC. According disclosures provided by the Virginia Public Access Project, the vast majority of the money for the PAC has been provided by the financial industry.

When McDonnell opposes Obama’s proposed efforts break up big banks, regulate the financial sector, and impose a financial responsibility fee to financial institutions which helped cause the current recession, it should be noted that the very industry McDonnell is fighting to defend underwrote the platform on which he is speaking, both virtually and in Richmond.

Hey, 'skwatawa, for somebody who always is slamming Lars Larson, you sure do waste alot of time listening to him.

You remind me of those Conservative Religous Republicans always bashing the homosexuals.... come to find out they are the ones with the 'wide stance' in the men's restroom. Closet homosexuals, they be.

Are you a closet Lars fan? When are you coming out of that closet?

Jack, I'd guess that most couples with $250,000 incomes (or singles with $125,000 incomes) are not living off stock portfolios or getting much advantage from the capital gains rate cut. The people you're talking about who really benefited from the Bush tax cuts are probably much higher earners. I wouldn't have had a problem with the Oregon tax increases if they had been aimed at higher income levels, like was done in CA, HI, NJ, MD, etc. Oregon's new high rates kick in at much lower levels than other states. Our concept of "rich" is much lower than in other states.

most couples with $250,000 incomes (or singles with $125,000 incomes) are not... getting much advantage from the capital gains rate cut.

I disagree with that. If a couple is pulling in more than $250,000, they ought to have a ton of dividends from stocks and mutual funds.

Obama ran on higher taxes at $250,000. He was very specific about that. He won, quite handily.

Too funny.

This afternoon Sleepy Ted gives a press conference and announces that he is asking the legislature to repeal the individual kicker on personal income taxes and create a "rainy day" fund.

The timing is risable.

The ink is literally not yet dry on the Sec. of State certifications of yesterdays vote and Ted is yet again advicating for what in effect is another personal income tax increase, this one aimed at all taxpayers, not just the "rich".

What were the lines attributed to Martin Neimueller (sp?) from 1940s Germany?

First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak out.

The folks who were so supportive of class warfare as practiced by the public employee unions should be real proud of themselves.

Here's where I'm truly puzzled . . . 97% of all the businesses in Oregon will pay $150, just $140 more than last year, or the 80 years prior. 97%!! At least I heard an honest bizman this morning who said he woulda protested a $50 bill. Wow. So an extra $3/month woulda been worth fighting, eh?

I support small biz and I try to buy local whenever I can. I try to buy my books at the independent local bookstores rather than the big chains where I could get discounts.

I support small biz.

But you can't tell me that an extra $140 for NINETY-SEVEN percent of the businesses in the state is gonna mean layoffs. Yes, it might add a few cents to a good that I might purchase, but goodness, it seems really an over-cry to complain that for the cost of $140 more/year that those businesses are gonna incur the costs of moving and uprooting to the 'Couv. Printing costs alone for that change cost more than that.

And what will those small biz owners gonna get once they're in Vancouver? Well, folks are gonna have to pay more for the products that they sold in Oregon due to the Washington sales tax. And lots of those buyers will just drive to Portland anyway so as to avoid that tax.

Yeah . . . I'm sure a huge percentage of those 97% of businesses in Oregon are gonna relocate to another state.
Not.

Those 97% of businesses should be thankful that they had a measly $10 tax for 80 years!! 80 years! That sure didn't keep up with the cost of inflation, did it?

So, I'll keep buying local and supporting my Oregon grown small businesses 'cause that was my family's lifeblood, too.

Tess

I see you fell victim to the YES campaign.

1. Many of the businesses that pay the minimum tax do so because they are pass-through entities. That means that instead of paying taxes as a business, their taxable income passes through to them as individuals. For example, if my business made $50,000 last year, instead of paying 6.6% on that amount as a business, that money would be added to my personal taxable income, taxed at 9%. I would still have to pay the minimum in ADDITION to the taxes I payed as an individual.

2. Another reason a business pays the minimum is that they had no taxable income for the year. If you as an individual had no taxable income for 2009, you would pay $0 in taxes to the state. Now, a business with no taxable income will pay $150, hardly fair. 2 out of every 3 corporations in the state had no taxable income.

3. Income taxes are just part of the taxes that businesses pay. You see, we get this lovely tax called the Business personal property tax. This one is collected by the county and is a property tax on all of our tangible assets, such as machinery, computers, chair, tables, paper clips, post-it notes, etc. We pay 1.5% of assessed value on that every year, individuals do not.

Jack, I think you're wrong about capital gains being a big part of a couple's $250,000 income. Individuals can earn $125,000 in salary without much or anything in dividends. You're a law professor, and I'd guess you earn a pretty good income. Are dividends or capital gains a big part of your income?

Yes, Obama ran and won on taxing above$250,000 incomes. So what? That doesn't mean it's the best thing to do.

"But you can't tell me that an extra $140 for NINETY-SEVEN percent of the businesses in the state is gonna mean layoffs."

I think the big issue that the YES side didn't address was the tax on gross sales. Even if you don't make a profit, if you sell anything, you now owe taxes. This is what is going to sidetrack any big business moving here. Getting side-tracked by $140 is peanuts.

As above, Ted waking up with this win and thinking now everyone wants higher taxes is pretty foolish.

You sure don't need to leave too many Cheerios on the counter for these cockroaches to start swarming.

What I find interesting and disappointing at the same time is that the "yes" folks did a brilliant job of brainwashing folks that "someone else" will have to pay this tax. No problem taxing those nasty old rich folks or those evil corporations, right?

Last time I checked, anyone that wanted to send along extra money to Salem could do so. But no, it's easier to have the government take the money by force from "someone else"....with no consideration as to where "someone else" got their cash in the first place.

Let the games begin....

Yes, Steve, but again, that's only 3% of the businesses that will pay that, just as they do in Washington state. My point was that 97% of small businesses will only pay $140 more, and that $140 ain't gonna shutter any businesses.

mp97303

Regarding #1: Well, sure you pay income tax on what your business made last year. Why shouldn't you? After all, that was your income, and that's something that the majority of workers pay.

So you pay $150 for a business tax - that's 'cause you're a business owner, something the rest of us who just pay income tax are not.

I mean, really, that $10 tax instituted 80 years ago, adjusted for inflation, would be a figure close to, if not more than, $150.

Would you substantiate your claim that 2/3 of Oregon businesses don't have taxable income? What is the threshold for taxable income? Surely it doesn't mean that all 2/3 of those businesses didn't make a profit. And to ask them to pay under $12/month to the state for the pleasure of doing biz here doesn't seem at all unreasonable.

Oh well, we don't need to pit ourselves against each other. I'll keep buying local to support y'all.

Tess

Oregon Corporate Excise and Income Tax
Characteristics of Corporate Taxpayers
2008 Edition

Exhibit 3.14
Page 34

btw, I already pay $100 now for the pleasure of doing business here. Income taxes are to tax income.

when is the last time any state worker or teacher had the level of money annually going into their pers pensions cut?dont give me this blabber that state employees have suffered with 14 day furloughs because they really have not.when is the last time a state worker or govt class official in oregon was laid off?