In a television advertisement, Bill Gates Sr. came out in favor of Initiative 1098 -- the income tax initiative. Mr Gates is not as wealthy as his son, the Microsoft Bill Gates, but the senior bill is a pretty wealthy lawyer. There is nothing wrong with being wealthy; I'd like to try it too.
But a rich guy is for it: Does this mean I-1098 income tax is good for Washington State? Or does it mean the rich Gates Sr. thinks he can dodge income taxes? Would anybody sincerely try to increase his own taxes?
1098's real hazard is in the details. Washington State's constitution effectively bans income tax. In order to get around the ban, the initiative would legally redefine your income as not your property, but rather a purchase subject to excise tax. This is so nutty most people can't believe it, but its there (See the section 501 pdf)
The other hazard of I-1098 is the legislature will not be satisfied with the tiny amount of tax collected from the rich people. Washington's constitution allows the legislature to change initiatives after a two year waiting period. The legislature will have a voter approved tax. The legislature's recent history shows they will extend the income tax to everyone who makes an income.
If you're tired of paying taxes on nearly everything in Washington State, you should vote against new taxes on income. They'll get around to taxing you with whatever you vote for. Vote No on I-1098.
~~~~~~~~
Afterword
The top five donors to the Initiative 1098 campaign, according to Ballotpedia
Most revealing is the government bureaucrats' union, Service Employees International Union (SEIU), gave $1,237,954. The Washington State Federation of State Employees gave $100,000. The union bosses will be delighted to tax you.
Bill Gates Sr. gave $500,000 to sponsor I-1098. The other two major donors are Nicolas Hanauer at $250,000 and Ann Wyckoff, $200,000.
What I’m Drinking Tonight
-
Been a while since I’ve published one of these but Fear Not Gentle Reader I
have been drinking continuously. This is quite yum I have been on a Paso
Robles...
Well put. This state is losing ground rapidly to the money grubbing dems. I am so tired of them wanting more of our money to "buy" votes with social programs for those dumb enough to vote for a handout. Can't you see what is happening? Politicians are slowly eroding your freedoms under the guise of "taking care of you". WAKE UP! Do not let them continue on this path of self destruction for your society.
ReplyDeleteTrev,
ReplyDeleteI think you got it nailed. Why should the secular leftist care about anything other than his/her own comfort and power? Let's deny them that.
A very slippery slope who's final intent is to tax everybody. This initiative is so well (class war between the poor and rich - i.e. succesful) put that it makes it look like it's there for the people. The truth it's just to tax us all. With the current spending and deficits, even with all of Washingtonians income given to the State, it's still would not be enough and will mandate all of us to do overtime!
ReplyDeleteTake a look at this site, shows that unless you make over $100,000 and own property you will be fine.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.yeson1098.com/calculator.html
Even then you have to be over $500,000 yearly to pay more taxes? So looks like the wealthy and stingy do not want this passed, but the wealthy and freely willing to give away and pay more are willing to pass this. remember the gates give away more than anyone else
This legislature has shown itself unwilling to be responsible with money. Although the current content of the initiative is put the way you say, under our state constitution, the legislature may modify the content. As money-hungry and greedy as this legislature is, they will extend the new income tax to everybody as soon as they can.
ReplyDeleteAlso, do you like owning what you earn? Read section 501 of the initiative. It effectively re-defines your income as not your property. Your income becomes sales proceeds, subject to excise tax. This is the technicality the income tax people are using to get around the state's constitutional prohibition on a state income tax. The implication of not owning what you earn is enormous.
How does secular have anything to do with this Bob? Moron.
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteYou remark is puzzling.
You must not know what the word "secular" means.
The definition from Dictionary.com is, "of or pertaining to worldly things or to things that are not regarded as religious, spiritual, or sacred; temporal: secular interests. ..."
dictionary.reference.com/browse/secular
Exactly Bob. It doesn't have anything to do with it. Idiot. This is from another anonymous.
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting that the pro-tax the successful to ease the load on the not-so-successful voices post anonymously and with insults and grenades--typical liberal entitled bigot. Discriminating against the successful is a bad formula. Washington State is already anti-business--this initiative will make it even more so.
ReplyDeleteAgain, more incorrect information is being used to help sway voters on 1098. The legislature CANNOT enact a state income tax WITHOUT A VOTE OF THE PEOPLE, who will not vote it in. Something that gets left off every time. Pass 1098 and help our children get a decent education!!
ReplyDeleteAnon 1 -- Don't you think people exist the world? I'm always interested in the latest developments....
ReplyDeleteAnon 2 -- Name calling is not very persuasive. Thanks.
Anon teacher -- You are right about the legislature needing a vote of the people to enact an income tax, because the income tax violates the State constitution on permitted tax types. In effect, I-1098 is a constitutional amendment.
The dollop of guilt in I-1098 about funding schools is typical of Mr Gates. He knows the legislature can and will change who must pay income tax. See Section 41 of the State's constitution. The final result will be a general income tax everyone will pay. Also, the income tax will be redirected into the general fund, not earmarked for education.
Mr Gates used a similar tactic in 1998 on his soundly defeated Initiative 676. The practical intent of that initiative was to disallow use of firearms in self-defense. Mr Gates and his supporters termed I-676 as an "initiative for child safety" as well as the more official "handgun safety act."
Mr Gates' guilt trip ignores the fact that the State's constitution, Article 9, makes providing "common schools" the "paramount duty of the state."