Alan Pittman Spreads The Stupid
Eugene Weekly special investigator Alan Pittman has a great, definitely-not-socialist article in this week’s EW titled “Spread the wealth in Oregon.” Here’s the lede:
With Barack Obama popular in Oregon while calling for a tax increase on those earning more than $250,000, could such a tax plan work here?
Tell me, Alan Pittman! I certainly can’t guess what your answer will be.
If Oregon state income taxes were raised 10 percent on those earning more than $250,000 adjusted gross income, taxes on everyone else could be cut about 4 percent, according to an EW analysis of state tax return data. That’s an average savings of $86.
Why, what a novel idea! It’s practically foolproof. For example, if I was an evil, evil rich person, I certainly wouldn’t move to a different state to avoid getting raped by taxes. Nope, I would sit tight and make less money. All that stuff about people being “rational actors” is just plain phooey. In fact, I’m sure the wealthy would flock to Oregon! Nothing drives entrepreneurs and business into a state like a draconian state income tax. Hold on, I’m going to quote something else silly Pittman said:
Oregon’s wealthiest could easily afford a tax increase. In the last three decades the income of the wealthiest 1 percent of Oregonians has doubled while the wage of the typical Oregon worker has dropped slightly after adjusting for inflation, according to the Oregon Center for Public Policy (OCPP).
Oh yes, easily. But who cares if they can afford it? It’s their fault for being so inconsiderately wealthy in the first place. Pittman is right; the rich are a resource to be harvested, like timber or zinc.
By the way, this isn’t Pittman’s first call to action against the landed gentry. I’m going to go out on a limb and venture that he is not in the $250,000 income bracket. Just a guess.
I agree that rich people aren’t evil, but I disagree about “rational actors” in the global economy where often enough, irrational decisions that make sense for the now to spite the long-term are often…the norm.
Rational rich people would move though….maybe.
rich people aren’t evil, but guess what they benefit from? LIVING IN AMERICA. so who should they give some of their profits too? probably the country that helped make them rich. they didn’t get rich on their own. they got rich because of a system that helps people move up in life. And all Barack Obama will do is make that system better for more people. It is not a fundamental right for people to become insanely rich by taking advantage of lower classes. You guys are idiots, why the fuck do you even go to a public university, your very existence on campus makes no sense whatsoever.
It is not a fundamental right for people to become insanely rich by taking advantage of lower classes.
I believe the Constitution of America guarantees my right to the pursuit of happiness, even if that happiness is based upon making boatloads of money by exploiting others. Its a free country, after all.
so who should they give some of their profits too? probably the country that helped make them rich.
They already do … its called a federal income tax.
… they didn
“TedTheTiniestTurtle” is a copy editor’s worst nightmare. Or a semi-literate high schooler. I suppose the two aren’t mutually exclusive.
Just pointing out: the “pursuit of happiness” is the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution.
Doh!
And this is why I’m better suited at REAL science than I am at political science.
Heh, it’s all good. I just have this image forever cemented in my brain of an old political science professor ranting about it all the time.
“It is not a fundamental right for people to become insanely rich by taking advantage of lower classes.”
Excuse me? Somehow I am taking advantage of people who want to buy my products? Unless what I sell is somehow addictive, every single person who has bought something from me did so at their own free will.
We bring in well over $250,000 a year but we see barely a penny from it. I have worked at less than an official “living wage” for the entire 2 1/2 years that I have contributed to this business (Not the full lifetime of the stores. I am officially a manager but have privileges like an owner, like paying bills, buying product, and lying awake at night wondering if it is all worth the effort.) and never once considered a raise. I have a high overhead business. Something hard to explain to those not writing the checks.
If Obama (or the State of Oregon) wants to raise our taxes or require that we provide health insurance it will make our position untenable. We will either close or contract to a size that isn’t affected by the “Change.” At least 15 people will lose their jobs. Even if they are not so-called “living wage” jobs they are jobs that people want. Some are young and can’t get a higher paying job. Some are old and do not want a higher paying/ more demanding job. Some just like the environment and the employee discounts. These folk chose me as much as I chose them for the job.
I am afraid that Obama and his sympathizers will cost me my job and my business. And after I am unemployed they will offer to swoop in and save me from the evil business that caused me to be out of work.
Sounds like a bad business…..my heart goes out to you, but if you’re pulling in that much profit and not making any money and can’t provide benefits or anything close to a ‘living wage’, it begs the question as to why one would stay in business and/or working for the company. It sounds miserable is what I’m saying…there must be an outside shot at making it bigger? Expanding? Getting to a point where your hard work can be rewarded?
I don’t think Obama or his sympathizers are out to get you and your job. There is a desire to build the economy and to provide Americans with basic health care. None of that sounds bad to me. I think that the way things are going with health care and wages in general does sound bad to me though. Hopefully something can be done with minimum impact to small business owners, et al.
Since when do democrats attack one another on Universal Health Care? I thought we were trying to realize Harry Truman’s dream?!
I’m not sure that “the buck stops here” is really a slogan that any of today’s Democrats can really lay claim to.
Thankfully.
Well, since we’re on the subject of universal health care:
It starts locally. You cannot start a sweeping nation-wide program like that without testing it out locally and the problem with all these politicians at the national level saying that they’ll be the ones to provide health care is that they never will. It hasn’t changed in 20 or more years.
If we as a people, as a nation want that kind of health care it needs to be pushed for at a state level, lacking that a county level. It won’t go anywhere unless you’ve seen how it’s actually working closer to the ground.
That’s all I’m saying. Intentionally, deeply deeply question any health care provided by the government that wasn’t started at a more local level.
Just what we all want – the same folks who brought you the DMV, the post office, the IRS and the TSA running the doctor’s office. Sounds great, sign me up.
I don’t want universal health care but that’s me.
I’m just saying if they do it I don’t want it to be at a national level because it will fail so miraculously that fire works might actually be seen during its inevitable implosion.
Well, with the new Secretary of Health And Human Services more than likely being John Kitzhaber, America may not have a choice.
Trust me, I’m not celebrating this one bit.
I was pretty drunk when I wrote that comment. I apologize for the grammatical errors, but not for the argument. I don’t think its absurd to think that regulating business in smart effective ways is going to bring the whole system down. We need to start thinking about the environment, and also realize whats best for your neighbor is whats best for you. Your less likely to get a disease if your neighbor doesn’t have that disease. Why would anyone be against universal health care it benefits the entire society, and will in the end, probably be cheaper on society as a whole.
I will try not post drunken, half thought out, rants anymore.
Starting when?
I find your argument much more offensive than your grammatical errors. What’s best for my neighbor is not what’s best for me. I pay my $30 a week for health insurance, and I would rather pay that than pay $20 a week so that everyone can be insured on my dime. First, healthcare seems to be worse everywhere that has a universal health care plan in place. Second, I don’t want to pay for other people on general principle. Also, you have clearly never taken an economics class, or else you only took one from Paul Krugman, and you don’t seem like the Princeton type. My goal is to look out for Number One, and that’s my right as an American.
oh man your a jerk
Does Obama’s tax proposal apply to gross income for businesses? My impression was that it applied to personal (or joint for couples) income only. If it did apply to business income, I would assume that it would be based on net income (i.e. profits) rather than gross, or on payroll taxes per employee rather than the sum of all employees.
I’m going to read http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/taxes/Factsheet_Tax_Plan_FINAL.pdf and report back.
That file was not as long as I thought. It mentions only individual/joint income tax, capital gains tax paid by businesses, and closing tax loopholes. No mention of other taxes paid by businesses.