Steve,

I heard your "debate" with Russ Walker on the radio yesterday. It must be hard to debate someone who is willing to lie in that setting.

Though you both interrupted each other, there was a big difference--you interrupted his personal attacks against you, which I think is a legitimate disruption. You might want to keep that in mind the next time you're in one of these situations.

It's funny, Ted Piccolo at NW Republican likes to go on about how the unemployment is so much lower in Washington, yet he ignores the fact that business taxes are significantly higher in Washington.

It does seem as though lowering taxes has a negative effect on employment--unemployment went through the roof in 1982 after the Reagan tax cuts in 1981.

Steve,

"I think that what the Legislature just did – increasing the corporate profits tax, and adding the beginnings of a gross receipts tax – is a pretty good start. I think it’s goofy that the gross receipts tax is capped at $60,000, because that means that a business with a trillion dollars in revenue pays the same tax as one with $100 million in revenue, but we can straighten that out later. "

I agree! Let's hope this will get straightened out later.

Actually, the better question for progressives is how do we get lawmakers to think in terms of shifting to a GREENER tax system instead of just a bigger one?

That is, how do we get legislators to tax what we DON'T want (pollution, use of nonrenewable resources, creation of toxic wastes, emissions of greenhouse gases, etc.) instead of taxing what we DO want (jobs, wages, income, investments, savings -- in other words, the things we want an economy to produce).

We're in the position of someone who is trying to stomp on the brake and the accelerator at the same time --- we want to encourage jobs and investments, but those are precisely the things we tax (taxing wages and businesses).

It's not the tax burden that's crippling but how the burden is distributed. (The best metaphor is a 200# weight and a sturdy horse. The horse easily carries the weight when it's on the horse's back or in a wagon; but tie the same 200# weight to the horse's leg and it won't move.)

Oregon has a tax system that works against most of what the taxes are being spent to provide. That's what we should fix.

I've long been of the opinion that Oregon needs to rethink the property tax limitation measures. Even granting that the people desire some kind of property tax limit (both Measure 5 and Measure 47 passed, after all), they aren't married to the Sizemore/McIntyre scheme (both measures passed by slim margins). The legislature could legitimately send voters a counter-proposal -- say, a split-roll property tax system that limits taxes on homeowners (that is, property that doesn't generate revenue to pay the tax) but permits higher taxes on business (that is, revenue-generating) property.

The home you live in is an expense. The home you rent out is an income-producing asset that can pay its own way. There's no reason to limit taxes on the rental home to the same extent as the one you live in.

George A. Seldes makes an excellent point.
It is much more likely that our elected officials will focus on the goal of generating more revenue than they will on fixing the problems with the tax system.
My guess is that all those evil corporations (who don't pay their fair share) are working within the law and paying the taxes that are due. If they don't pay as much as some legislators want, who is at fault?

Excellent post Steve. I heard the re-broadcast of the debate with Walker. You did well.

The problem we have with this issue is that George, Walker, and their allies simply scream that us donkeys are raising YOUR taxes.

Barack Obama showed us how to use these simple phrases: 1) "If you make less than $250,000.00 your taxes will no go up" 2) "95% of all taxpayers will see their taxes go down under my plan"

We need to stop having to refer to obscure and difficult to find studies and reduce our argument to a couple of easy to comprehend statements along with a few simple slogans.

I for one would love to see a WA style B&O tax in place of an income tax. For low sales/high margin businesses like myself, it would turn out to be a colossal windfall.

Before we squeeze businesses, shouldn't the governor squeeze the unions? This is a recession. Everyone should share the pain. The only people not sharing the pain are those that work for the government. Average salaries for teachers in the state are the 14th highest in the US. Businesses are cutting back wherever possible, shouldn't we expect the same from government? My wife had to take a 5% salary cut and the company sponsored contributions to her 401K have been put on hold. However, she's happy to still have a job in this economy. The revenue for my small consulting firm is off 20% this year. It's not hard to see that this tax increase is nothing more than a concession to the unions just like bailouts were for Chrysler & GM. At the end of the day, the tax increase will most likely be repealed by referendum. By then the state will already have spent the money, incurring a deficit in the process.

"It does seem as though lowering taxes has a negative effect on employment--unemployment went through the roof in 1982 after the Reagan tax cuts in 1981."

This is called spurious correlation. It's like saying I only hit home runs when it rains.

The problem we have with this issue is that George, Walker, and their allies simply scream that us donkeys are raising YOUR taxes.

Barack Obama showed us how to use these simple phrases: 1) "If you make less than $250,000.00 your taxes will no go up" 2) "95% of all taxpayers will see their taxes go down under my plan"

We need to stop having to refer to obscure and difficult to find studies and reduce our argument to a couple of easy to comprehend statements along with a few simple slogans.

Since Obama is lying through his teeth about middle class taxes while proposing cap & trade, a health care entitlement, and simply printing money to monetize the debt ala Zimbabwae, you could all just follow suit. The inflation Obama is sparking is already reflected in the price of crude oil and gasoline, and inflation, along with the attendant usurious interest rates it brings, makes mere tax hikes look like a day at the beach.

So just get down with Obamanomics and lie as if there is no tomorrow.

"We're busy destroying the economy with our bullshit pet causes, but trust us, your taxes won't be going up."

Catchy.

damn idiots. Damn, an i like Mathews. Kahl is probably a one-termer for this too.

EDITORIAL Legislators forget vows of moderation The Gresham Outlook, Jun 13, 2009

What happened to the moderation and business-friendliness that East County’s Democratic legislators promised when running for office last fall?

It certainly disappeared entirely this week — if indeed, it ever existed at all — when the whole block of them voted the straight party line to raise taxes permanently on businesses and high-income earners in Oregon.

We do not believe these large tax increases represent the values of East Multnomah County. But Democratic Sens. Laurie Monnes Anderson and Rick Metsger, along with Democratic Reps. Greg Matthews, Nick Kahl and Suzanne VanOrman, chose to fall in line with their caucuses and offered not a peep of public objection to everlasting tax hikes that will hurt businesses large and small.

The tax increases will damage Oregon’s economy. They will encourage more businesses and individuals to move across the river to Washington state to avoid income taxes. They will cost people their jobs right here in East County. But all of our legislators simply voted yes without regard to the consequences.

People will lose jobs These lawmakers will defend their actions by saying the tax increases were necessary to protect working families. Monnes Anderson stated precisely that in explaining her vote on Wednesday. But how, must we ask, do working families benefit from imposing higher taxes on their employers? Do the benefits start when the workers get laid off from their jobs and join thousands of other Oregonians on the unemployment rolls?

We fully understand that the state needs additional revenues to maintain basic services such as education and health care during this deep recession. We even support the idea of temporarily raising taxes on businesses and affluent Oregonians, as suggested by the Oregon Business Association.

But the Democrats in control of the Legislature couldn’t be satisfied with a temporary solution to the immediate budget crisis. They saw an opportunity, with their newly established supermajorities in both the House and the Senate, to make a permanent change. This was the very trap that Matthews said he wouldn’t fall into when he ran for office in House District 50 last fall. In interviews with our editorial board, Matthews assured us, as well as voters, that just because Democrats had a supermajority, that didn’t mean they could count on his vote to raise taxes.

They may not always have gotten his vote this session, but they did get it on the House floor Tuesday. In addition to raising tax rates on businesses’ net income, legislators also jacked up the so-called corporate minimum tax beyond reasonable levels. The corporate minimum tax — which is based on a company’s gross income, regardless of whether it makes a profit — was outdated, but legislators took their revisions too far.

Taxes likely to spur referendum With their votes this week, we fear our legislators revealed an astonishing naivete about the way Oregon’s economy works. By supporting higher taxes on businesses and on individuals who earn more than $250,000 a year, lawmakers hope to escape the wrath of voters who will see these increases as applying to “somebody else.”

But we believe East County citizens are aware that without the private sector, the public sector would not exist at all. The income taxes generated by people who work for private businesses provide the financial foundation for all public services in Oregon. Imposing permanent punishment on the “evil” corporate world surely will mean less employment in the future — and less tax money for schools, health care, prisons and other services.

Beyond the issue of employment — which isn’t exactly an irrelevant concern at this point in history — legislators also may be setting Oregon up for an even bigger budget crisis next fall when these tax increases are subjected to a referendum drive.

If legislators had accepted the compromise offered by the Oregon Business Association, these tax increases would have stood a better chance at the ballot box. In overreaching, however, Democrats have pitted business interests against public employee unions in what will be a bloody campaign.

That’s not our definition of moderation. It is, in fact, just the opposite of that.

Copyright 2009 Pamplin Media Group, 6605 S.E. Lake Road, Portland, OR 97222 • 503-226-6397

The Statesman Journal is going to weigh in on Sunday and EiC Bill Church is hinting in his blog that it ain't gonna be love and kisses for the legislature.

Passing a permanent tax increase is going to be seen as pretty stupid come next autumn.

The inflation Obama is sparking is already reflected in the price of crude oil and gasoline, and inflation, along with the attendant usurious interest rates it brings, makes mere tax hikes look like a day at the beach.

Boats, I'm curious to know how you can be so certain the cause of current inflation? What evidence do you have that it is directly connected to any policies or actions by the current administration rather than the former or any other cause?

It is not rocket science to draw a direct connection between poorly received Treasury auctions, the monetization of the debt through the "buying" of our own T-bills ("paid for" with printing presses), China, Brazil, Russia and India all poor mouthing the dollar and casting proposals for an IMF backed alternative, the weakening performance of the dollar vis-a-vis a basket of other currencies and an increase in the price of crude, denominated internationally in dollars, despite weakened demand due to the economy.

It is becoming very clear, just via projected deficit numbers, steadily creeping interest rates on bond auctions, the constant reassurances his team has to make to international creditors, and his very public shafting of domestic creditors holding GM and Chrysler secured debt, that Obama has taken a fire lit under Bush and doused it with gasoline.

His reckless spending and non-credible statements on fiscal prudence, which are betrayed routinely by his big ticket spending plans, are creating a perfect storm that is going to swamp us all with stagflation.

Dino, my experience, having consulted in the past myself, is that your "small consulting firm" is supporting a solidly middle class lifestyle, if not better. PLEASE do not whine like you are in the same category as wage workers who choose between electricity and bus tickets this week. Or even those who don't have that deeply-conflicted economic picture, but who NEVER shop at the fine food emporiums that are extolled here at times. Unions are not all the same. The union that tries to help secretaries and broom draggers is NOT winning the same big pay as unions that protect and cajole for the nurses.

Be specific in your posts. Your thoughts might gather substance with specificity.

@Jack

So Jack, you don't think that for every tax policy there are winners and losers? Of course there are. What I was pointing out is that very fact. If we implement a B/O tax, my type of business will benefit greatly.

And as long as there is NO WITT here, I will be looking out for myself first.

Sorry Jack, but any group showing a favorable quote from Dick Armey is not a group I am required to take seriously.

I actually know Brent Walth, and I will believe what he said in the Oregonian until someone shows me data compiled in Oregon (not at a national think tank) which proves him wrong.

http://www.oregonlive.com/news/index.ssf/2009/06/businesses_taxed_more_people_s.html

"Oregon businesses will continue to enjoy one of the lowest tax burdens in the nation even after the Legislature voted last week to raise their taxes. "

Actually Jack, I haven't complained about anything. Merely pointed out that a change in corporate tax policy would benefit some types of businesses.

If Oregon does implement such a program, all it will do is enable me to establishment a mentoring program here like the one I ran for 4 years in AZ. Teach people the skills of small business ownership and then lend them the capital needed to buy a small business. Worked for 6 people in AZ who now employ 80+. More permanent private sector jobs than Obama will ever create.