Quick Hits: catching up and taking note

Kari Chisholm FacebookTwitterWebsite

Some of the things you might have missed last week:

  • Garrett (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Way to recylce another story about Merritt Paulson being related to Hank. So dad is loaning the son money he would inherit anyway. We already knew it was Hank's money. I don't see the problem here...

    Let's get into it a bit. Does it really matter where the money comes from? At this point nobody really knows what Hank Paulson did with the money in the original stimulus. To be fair we may be crucifying a guy for nothing. The banks haven't collapsed and the Paulson's family wealth has only decreased. I'm still waiting for anyone to say what Hank directly did that was bad other than working for the Bush administration and just assuming they're an evil unsufferable thief. I guess Robert Gates is the exception right?

  • (Show?)

    I have a better suggestion...Eat the Rich...

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlygmOt5AUU&feature=related

    Take one bite now and spit out the rest....

  • StephanAndrewBrodheadForCongress (unverified)
    (Show?)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1YE_N91ZQc

  • (Show?)

    Milk was a great movie. My husband and I watched it recently and really enjoyed it - and that's huge since he isn't into politics.

    I also like the idea of naming the bridge after Chavez.

  • (Show?)

    Wal-Mart reduced their taxes by the full $11 million from the state in state tax credits that they take over a five year period. They paid (a legitimate business expense) $7.3 million to SolarWorld and received the tax credits from the state. In other words, Wal-Mart is earning a guaranteed 49% on their investment.

  • Kurt Chapman (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Kari - re Solar World's sale of renewable Tax Credts to walMart; please explain how this is any different tahn "Cap and Trade". I have no personal knowledge of how these programs actually function, but it would seem that any trading program based on monetary incentives would be most available to those with cash.

  • Mike (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Kari,

    If you throw all the rich people into the ocean, wouldn't that increase the tax burden on everyone else?

    Just sayin. . .

    I have no problem paying more taxes. Just tell me how much, and then live with your decision.

  • (Show?)

    When I saw that editorial in the paper I thought of you, Kari. Funny how there was no mention of others who have previously been promoting the idea, huh?

    I have to say, I'm still not convinced Chavez is the right guy to promote, but I like the idea of naming the bridge after a prominent Latino. It would be a far more entertaining and productive discussion to agree to name the bridge for a Latino and then have the discussion: which one?

  • Bill Holmer (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Jim McDermott may be a successful litigator, but he’s dead wrong to blame increased income inequality on lower personal income tax rates. According to IRS statistics, in 1980, when the top personal income tax rate was 70%, the top 1% paid 19.1% of all personal income taxes, while the bottom 50% paid 7.0%. By 2005, when the top personal income tax rate was 35%, the top 1% paid 39.4% of all personal income taxes, while the share paid by the bottom 50% had dropped to 3.1%.

    Perhaps he should consider other socio-economic factors contributing to increasing income inequality, such as out-of-wedlock births, single parenthood, or the failure of our public schools to provide quality education for lower income students. Income inequality is not the result of lower income tax rates.

  • (Show?)

    Bill -- don't the stats you cite actually support Jim's claim? The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer.

    Incidentally, I don't think Jim is alleging causation ("blame"), but noting that the opposite - higher tax rates - may be a solution. Or at least, a way to ameliorate the negative effects.

  • (Show?)

    Isn't it a good thing that it is the Paulson family money rather than just Merritt buying and backing the teams?

    As the deal is structured, the bond payments are going to be guaranteed by Paulson family money for 25 years (the life of the loans). This protects the taxpayers. I am much more comfortable with actual Paulson wealth backing the bond payments them Merritt's LLC that could go belly up in 5 years and the city would be on the hook.

    Also, any construction overruns are guaranteed by the Paulson family money (over $2.5 million) which I think once again is a good thing. I want the deepest possible pockets both bankrolling these teams and protecting tax payers.

  • Bill Holmer (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Jim: "Our tax system is dividing our country into haves and have-nots."

    Kari: "Incidentally, I don't think Jim is alleging causation ("blame")"

    Huh?

  • mp97303 (unverified)
    (Show?)

    The op-ed written by McDermott is entitled "I want to pay more taxes." Well, good for you. There is a state in the NE, which one I can't recall, that allows residents to pay additional tax when they file their annual state return.

    I think the time has come for the tax loving state of Oregon to implement the same system. Let the people who WANT to pay more do so. I just Oregon has better results than the 3% (percent of taxpayers that make an additional payment) rate the other state has. I won't hold my breath.

  • R. Ritchie (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Why the sizzle for Cillizza-a wanker, msm bamboozler, super silly dead tree jackass!

  • (Show?)

    "I think the time has come for the tax loving state of Oregon to implement the same system. Let the people who WANT to pay more do so."

    I assume you will therefore support the will of the people, as represented by their elected officials, if they attempt to create a more progressive tax structure by raising marginal rates at the top, taxing corporations with an eye towards their historic burden, and getting rid of the kicker(s)?

  • mp97303 (unverified)
    (Show?)

    TJ

    You are gonna have to help me here. I don't quite understand how you are linking tax reform with my call for a voluntary "additional" tax element.

    As for your comment, No, I will not support any tax reform that I don't agree with. To assume "the will of the people" is pretty arrogant on your part. If, after an election, the majority calls for tax reforms, then Yes, I will go along with them.

  • (Show?)

    Not that it's particularly relevant any of this, but I just want to note that Jim McDermott is married to Karen Immergut, Oregon's U. S. Attorney that you guys were bashing a year ago when she applied for a vacancy on the U.S. District Court for Oregon.

  • zigloo warmer (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Cap and Trade baby: it's the Obama Way.

  • (Show?)

    Jack -- Thanks for the tip! Must be some kinda Carville/Matalin thing, eh?

  • (Show?)

    Isn't it a good thing that it is the Paulson family money rather than just Merritt buying and backing the teams?

    Yes. I didn't say otherwise.

  • ellie (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Our founding fathers were upset about higher taxes on tea, so they threw tea into the ocean. Since President Obama has proposed higher taxes on rich people, shouldn't they be throwing rich people in the ocean?

    I love this. I'm usin' it. Thanks, Kari.

  • (Show?)

    Jack -- Thanks for the tip! Must be some kinda Carville/Matalin thing, eh?

    You guys have had Immergut all wrong from the beginning. She's not really political, and worked as an attorney in the Starr investigation thinking it would be good experience and probably look good on her resume. Little did she know what she was getting into.

    She got high marks as U.S. attorney across the board. She was much more a victim of politics than a participant.

  • Fireslayer (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Apparently this blog can't stand a little good natured ribbing.

    Not to mention freedom of speech.

    I forgot to mention that Blumenhauer was great at the Health Care Reform town meeting that apparently does not rise to the level of reportage from this sainted page.

    Earl is for the public system option to compete with the so-called private insurance subsidy plan.

    <h2>Congradulations on your prize for an open discussion forum.</h2>

connect with blueoregon