Ssshhhhh, the Oregonian could be listening. You know how they can't stand to hear reality.

This sort of thing could pull the plug on the big bloated bubble of hot air that is the anti-tax hysteria. They won't know how to rebut this without making something up.

Alright, forgive me. I know. They'll make it up because they can.

Didn't the Tax Foundation just rank Oregon #14, down from #8 last year. Anyone know the differences in methodology between the two?

The anti tax lobby and Tiernan have a big problem with telling the truth don't they? Wonder what state those folks who opposed the measures plan on moving too?

So where are all those anti 66/67 business owners going to move to now?

You know - that giant sucking sound of independent businesses that were all moving out of state if those measures passed.

Oh don't tell that was all hysterical hyperbole!

Currently, the average combined federal and state corporate tax rate in the U.S. is 39.3 percent, second among OECD countries to Japan's combined rate of 39.5 percent.

Many states impose state corporate income taxes at rates above the national average of 6.6 percent. Iowa, for example, imposes the highest corporate tax rate of 12 percent, followed by Pennsylvania's 9.99 percent rate and Minnesota's 9.8 percent rate. When added to the federal rate, these states tax their businesses at rates far in excess of all other OECD countries.

When compared to other OECD countries:

24 U.S. states have a combined corporate tax rate higher than top-ranked Japan. 32 states have a combined corporate tax rate higher than third-ranked Germany. 46 states have a combined corporate tax rate higher than fourth-ranked Canada. All 50 states have a combined corporate tax rate higher than fifth-ranked France.

Source: Tax Foundation

With capital gains taxes in Oregon among the highest in the nation, coupled with the increase in taxes with 66/67, and the federal corporate rate, I honestly wonder what economic advantage Oregon and the U.S. have over their competitors? Especially when it comes to competing for jobs on a global level?

Also, the notion that Oregonians get the most out of their tax dollars is highly subjective. It depends on what a person believes is tax-worthy and at what amount. For instance, while people in Portland may believe it's a good thing to spend $600-million on new bike trails and routes, another populous may not.

While that may not be the best example, the point is that not everyone views tax value the same. I would also argue that because of Oregon's historical liberal bent, and union representation, especially from the OEA, the response to tax value for education is going to be assumed positive based on the political and philosophical leanings of the majority.

Steve

Here is the report I am referring to. It is the 2010 State Business Tax Climate Index. Oregon is ranked 14th, down from 8th last year due to the new taxes.

Another BS "study" that obfuscates pass through entity tax receipts which are taxed on individual returns. How many times does the OCCP plan to pull this?

Such a great tax environment, job creation must be very high here, right? Right?

Jason,

Just what are you aiming at, I can't tell? COST finds that Oregon has the nation's lowest taxes and greatest efficiency of public spending, and you write about Japan!

If US taxation is high, perhaps it is because the U.S. military budget is almost as much as the rest of the world's defense spending combined and is over nine times larger than the military budget of China. From where do you think that money comes? If you want lower taxes, get out and protest a war or two. Tell Congress to stop funding weapons programs.

Also, the notion that Oregonians get the most out of their tax dollars is highly subjective. It depends on what a person believes is tax-worthy and at what amount. For instance, while people in Portland may believe it's a good thing to spend $600-million on new bike trails and routes, another populous may not. /// Jason

Where did you get this expenditure information?? Pull it out of ........

I question the comparisons made about tax rates around the nation, and world as self serving when they are sourced. I find it incredulous to source anti-tax groups as authorities on tax burdens.

If we have such a high rate of taxation today, what explains the levels of taxation we subject our citizens in the sixities, and seventies? How do you think we thrived as the strongest economy in the world for so long?

So, how is it we are so over taxed, and so under served by our government with the exception of our military! How do you think the rest of the industrial nations managed to provide comprehensive health care for it's citizens, while maintaining a sound governance?

Jason, you can tell when someone has very little basis for argument - just as you point out, they cite nominal tax rates rather than effective tax rates.

It's such a joke, low taxes are called high taxes.

Where I have I seen this sort of deception before.......

Okay Chuck. If what you say is true then please explain our higher than average unemployment.

Love it.

Well Chuck, like his sister here in obsfucation likes to cherry pick the data that reinforces his preconcieved notions. Once private business ctually factor in convoluted central land use planning, fees, regulations, the 1% "tax" on health care insurance and a host of other add-ons, Oregon really is not a very business friendly state. More and more companies will start and grow elshwere, mainly Nevada to the detriment of Oregon.

Well Chuck, like his sister here in obsfucation likes to cherry pick the data that reinforces his preconcieved notions. Once private business ctually factor in convoluted central land use planning, fees, regulations, the 1% "tax" on health care insurance and a host of other add-ons, Oregon really is not a very business friendly state. More and more companies will start and grow elshwere, mainly Nevada to the detriment of Oregon.

Oregon is not a bad place to do business- not yet anyway. Of course there's a happy, pragmatic medium between the polar extremes of the Chuck Sheketoff's & Bill Sizemore's.

IMHO, the cost of doing business in Oregon should be slightly higher than average. First off, take a look around. I can think of least 30 states off hand that aren't nearly as scenic. Secondly we tend to value little things like clean air, good water and individual liberties. We also think a strong educational system is important, dysfunctional as our current setup may appear to the layman. So, considering the overall state of the good 'ol U.S.A., Oregon still has plenty to offer. Let's keep it that way and move forward.

So Jason and Kurt... why wouldn't you trust a report sponsored by corporate America and conducted by a big 3 accounting firm? What about their methodology or bias concerns you?

Really, it seems that it's YOUR preconceived notions that are the stumbling block!

As a business owner here in Oregon, I am constantly annoyed by the amount of paperwork that the different departments of government require businesses here to complete. But I'm not bothered in the least by the tax load.

Exxon in 2008 paid 36.36 billion in fed taxes, and only made 11.36 billion in profits.http://www.istockanalyst.com/article/viewarticle/articleid/2459357

"Okay Chuck. If what you say is true then please explain our higher than average unemployment."

Just in case Chuck is busy, I'll take a guess and suggest incompetence, greed and corruption.

Now let me ask a question. If Oregon is such a lousy place for businesses to invest, why did Genentech set up shop here?

"EXACTLY! Low taxes do not create jobs, and high taxes do not destroy jobs." And excess bureaucratizes built with tax dollars help.

Kari Take some economics, I would recommend basic 101. A pass me what your smoking.

To take one tax or rule out of many and say see. Please be more professional, I believed Obama was less hypocritical when he made the unbelievable claim(with lots of smoke and mirror) that health care bill would save us money.

Boy this board bought that hook and sinker!

Government is way to big and you guy can't stop drinking your own KoolAid. We give G our hard earning, and a very big amount just goes to wasted bureaucratic black hole.

Government can't fire, they have to much union, they have no way to police themselves, their turning evil now with their hiding transparency and back room deals. PERS is a big boondoggle and you want more money.

Please hand me what you smokeing.

dsdh332edsededfde As a business owner I hire more people when the demands for my products increases to the point where my current employees can't handle the new business. When I get a tax cut I go to Aruba!

Your the one who needs Economics 101.

Your helping Oregon and the National government become more corrupt, Government has gone evil! it's with your help is in a great grasp for power.

They waste so much money, we have a bureaucracy nightmare that many of the small companies I work with hate G. Several small companies have gone under and blame the government excess regulations.

Oregon is off the chart in small business closures. I believe Portland is 6th and Oregon is 12th, and were very small communities to have so many bankruptcies. This is just off the charts, then saying 66-67 helped. As your killing the growth engine of jobs.

The deficit is growing every years, and your single response is "FEED ME" "I WANT MORE". This is growing unbelievable large, and you so sick you just keep spending.

Buy a clue? Does a favor read some history?

Government is way to big and you guy can't stop drinking your own KoolAid. We give G our hard earning, and a very big amount just goes to wasted bureaucratic black hole.

Ya, minus the incorrect word usage, we've heard this before, over and over and over. It's a point of view, an opinion. What is "to[sic] big"? How much is wasted in that "bureaucratic black hole"? Which spending is waste? All you offer is verbal flatulence.

From the Oregonian this morning, about Genentech's opening of a 400 million dollar plant that currentely employees 250.

"Genentech chose Washington County in 2006, drawn in by Oregon’s favorable corporate tax structure, property tax exemptions and worker training assistance. It also liked Hillsboro's proximity to Genentech's Bay Area headquarters."

However, these jobs are largely low skill manufacturing positions. Genentech also stated that they're unlikely to bring research to Washington County. The research jobs are the more coveted high paying, highly educated positions.

It COULD be concluded that low corporate taxes, tax deferrals and taxpayer training for manufacturing positions are a magnate for low skill manufacturing, but the high personal income tax is poison to the six figure income set. Including executives who would prefer a low income tax, low capital gains state.

So, everyone is correct. Low corporate taxes, tax deferrals and subsidized training will attract multi national corporations who want to manufacture in Oregon. But the highly paid decision makers will see a progressive personal tax structure as a place to be avoided, if they have a choice.

"we have a bureaucracy nightmare that many of the small companies I work with hate G."

Name one.

"Several small companies have gone under and blame the government excess regulations."

Name one.

"Oregon is off the chart in small business closures."

Which chart?

"The deficit is growing every years,"

Yeah, well 8 years under Bush Jr. will do that.

"we've heard this before, over and over and over. It's a point of view, an opinion" The why can't you listen, your have to much KoolAid in your ears, read history. It's not a opinion it's the facts.

Government is the single biggest waster of resources. The government Bubble were in is killing us. They can't even police themselves. The freer you are to choose the better you are.

Are you know telling me a large health care institution could make better choices about my care then I can.

Read history follow the Soviet Union, North Korea, where government turned Evil. Look a the free counter parts, add two and two together.

Portland is 6th in "THE NATION" in Business Bankruptcies. Oregon is "12th" Look up the Portland Business Journal.

Scott by a clue talk to them, I do it every day. I own three myself, I can't afford health care for my own family, even though I have it for my employees.

yea bush was sick in spending also, but what we have now is just unethical waste.

" I own three myself"

Ok, I'm goin' there...

Name your three businesses you own.

hell no

Here is the link for you lazy bones on commercial bankruptcies. That cannot be a good sign.

As far as the effects of 67 on business, I suspect we may never really know. Businesses are locked into multi-year leases and cannot just pack up and leave. Even if they intend to shut down, they may struggle along at least until they can get their spaces sub-leased or the term expires.

It really is hard to convince a small business owner that struggling to make payroll each month that they were somehow not paying their fair share, and yet, that is exactly what we did. I hope it works out. I know for a fact that it changed my business model.

hell no

Illiterate chickenshit

Scott

A business owner is no more likely to divulge their business name on BO than you are to post your name and home address on a teabagger site.

dyslexic chicken shit get it right mike

dsd,

I do not think you can blame dyslexia for your deficiencies. Looks like FoxNews induced dementia to me. Fortunately, there is hope. Turn off the television, stop commenting here, and read Zinn's People's History of the United States.

Attack, attack, attack, call me chicken, call me dementia, this is your BS policy.

You use personnel attacks to hide and cover up, when you know your policies don't work. How unethical. Your the chickens, your so afraid you know your wrong on policies, that's when you become unethical.

This is just plain narcissistic, your just finding "ANYWAY" to run from the real issues, until you have some cooked date " like the health will save us money" or I love Obama's quote " If the health care puts us one dime in deficit I won't support it" You support this you supported 66-67 like its KoolAid, claiming the "money will go to the schools" it didn't it went to PERS and elsewhere, The state budget went up 5 billion and schools got cut....but when it's not true you attack, attack, attack, because you can't, or worse yet won't deal that the Government is the evil problem here.

Jake "Zinn's People's History of the United States"

I liked the quote"Washington Post Book World, reviewer Michael Kammen, a professor of American History, wrote:

"I wish that I could pronounce Zinn's book a great success, but it is not. It is a synthesis of the radical and revisionist historiography of the past decade"

I understand your point, (ha ha) that I'm dementia because in my history and economic background I didn't read this one side propaganda. Nice..

Let's continue to work our way up to the national average and put the resources towards the common good!

Please let me in, I want what your drinking, because the facts have been a little short in the underling logic.

Now it's the map. Yea whats next our proximity to the moon!

Government is to big, the bigger it grows the less we as a people have. The more choices you and I have the better we live. Government and regulations take away those freedoms.

Their is a 99 percent correlation between government interference (lack of freedoms) and the wealth and standard of living including the poor.

Their is another study that say taxes and union involvement hurt unemployment.

I enclosed it.

"High Unemployment States Have High Income Taxes or High Unionization or Both.

As the nation considers increasing marginal tax rates and facilitating greater union membership, I thought it might make sense to look at the states with the highest and lowest unemployment rates to see if there might be any relevant patterns.

The six states with the highest unemployment rates are:

*

  12.6% Michigan

*

  12.1% Oregon

*

  11.4% South Carolina

*

  11.2% California

*

  10.8% North Carolina

*

  10.5% Rhode Island

The six states with the lowest unemployment rates are:

*

  5.2% Iowa

*

  5.2% Utah

*

  4.9% South Dakota

*

  4.6% Nebraska

*

  4.5% Wyoming

*

  4.2% North Dakota

In the six states with the highest unemployment rates, the average top state income tax bracket is 8.05%. All but Michigan have marginal tax rates of at least 7% (and Michigan has a very high unionization rate).

On the other hand, the average top tax bracket for the six states with the lowest unemployment is only 4.4%, with 4 of the 6 states having a top marginal rate of 5.54% or less.

Further, union representation averages 14.1% in the six high unemployment states, with a median of 17.4%. All but the Carolinas are among the most unionized states in the nation (and the Carolinas have relatively high marginal income tax rates of 7% and 7.75%).

Putting this together, 3 of the 6 states with the highest unemployment (California, Oregon, and Rhode Island) have both high marginal income tax rates and high union representation. Michigan has high unionization but moderate marginal income tax rates, and the Carolinas have high marginal income taxes, but low unionization rates.

Among the 6 states with the lowest jobless rates, 4 have low unionization rates and no state income tax or modest marginal rates and a fifth (Nebraska) has average income tax rates and low unionization. The exception is Iowa, which has average unionization rates (13%) and high marginal income taxes (8.98%).

Yes again attack me for being dyslexia, I thought you were the party that help those, with handicaps. No not you, you attack. Is this hypocritical or what?

Take some basic statistics, I would recommended the basic 364-365 this might be difficult, because you said:

"your point by correlation of unemployment rates and tax rates" It's correlated that right!!!! Thanks for proving my point.

Now that is laughable, someone how can't spell, that has dementia, is chickenshit and illiterate, and you prove my point for me. Thanks.

Maybe we should eliminate all corporate taxes as a way to stimulate economic activity. That surely would get some businesses to move here.

OK, I understand. Our taxes are so low now that the only thing we can do is raise them some more and then the business will come flocking in.

Thank you for clarifying.

I know we have all been advised to not feed the trolls, but Oh, mp97303, Steve Marx, and eijfiejej (or whatever), you make this all just too, too easy.

Obviously, from your remarks, you believe we should eliminate all taxes on corporations and wealthy individuals, since, according to you, they are the bestowers of all employment and rightful heirs all wealth. In your imaginary world, with their new-found wealth, these elites will immediately put all the unemployed to work. But wait, everyone knows the greatest expense most companies face is not taxes but payroll. If we really want to reward corporate America we need to eliminate the burden of paying wages. Why, we'd have full employment over night. That strategy of "rapid economic development by withholding wages" certainly worked wonders for this countries economy during its first 2 centuries. And it just so happens, in time to kick off your new "no wages" campaign, the governor of Virginia has just announced that the Month of April will be "Confederate History Month". You know, to honor and praise the South's willingness to fight and die to preserve the right of employers to not pay wages (or provide health care, for that matter). What could be more fitting than to launch your paean to corporate preeminence than by glorify treasonous insurrection in the name of wealth accumulation for the privileged few. How lucky for you.

And to the question of How Large Government; government need be only large enough to defend its citizens from attack, both external and internal. Since America's biggest internal and external threat continues to be the extra-national corporate oligarchy, and since their threat to our sovereignty, and our very viability as a nation, grows daily, I don't foresee the potential for a diminished government presence any time soon.

I am sorry Jimbo that such a concept is beyond the capabilities of your atrophied brain to comprehend. Try getting out of the echo chamber for a while daily and expand your horizons a bit.

What a load of crap..especially with measure 66/67.. I just wrote a fat check to the State for taxes because of measure 67 when my business made no money.. im in investment mode and have not laid off any employees despite the economy and slowdown in business..The business will pay no fed tax, but a mandatory state tax based on revenue and not profit with no sunset period. I am going to move accross the river next year and take all my employees with me (they will all move). Yes I do create jobs and so do all the small business owners who are being impacted by this atrocity.

Perhaps all the fools that voted for this measure and all the fools that supported it all work for the government.... thats it, the only job creation is going to happen in the state bureaucracy and add to our deficit. I am moderate democrat - now I am going to vote for Allen Alley...

"Obviously, from your remarks, you believe we should eliminate all taxes on corporations and wealthy individuals,"

I don't believe I said that. I just stated that Mr Sheketoff thinks raising taxes is the only answer and I disagree.

You may want to read this though if you think the rich are getting off scot-free:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Nearly-half-of-US-households-apf-1105567323.html?x=0&.v=1

What I think is more of a solution is for govt to prioritze what is important and what is not. And to do less of the latter.

"I did get a laugh out of "underling" logic."

Actually he meant long in the underling's logic.

"high taxes do not destroy jobs."

You're right, they create more jobs in China.

Am waiting to hear of the first business that moves here because of M66/67.

Steve Marx,

You "...believe we should eliminate all taxes on corporations and wealthy individuals" just as surely as "Mr Sheketoff thinks raising taxes is the only answer". Why isn't my interpretation of your remarks equally as valid as your interpretation of Chuck's?

Steve, I think I understand, attack anybody against you, attack the rich because they are wreath. Then you help pull down the successful, so you can help those milking our economy with all those (wasteful) new state bureaucratic jobs.

Well Steve, My hope and dream's are with my little boy and little girl that when they grow up, they work very hard and become wealthy.

So now do I understand this right.

If my children are so lucky do achieve the "American Dream", that guy's like you will attacked them with your rage, and discredit them for their hard work?

Steve

"You may want to read this though if you think the rich are getting off scot-free:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Nearly-half-of-US-households-apf-1105567323.html?x=0&.v=1"

Please read the article you quote because it said: "About 47 percent will pay no federal income taxes at all for 2009...their incomes were too low."

"That the top 10% of income families paid 73% of taxes."

The KoolAid shared between you and Jimbo is just to strong for me. And you call me the underling's.

"If my children are so lucky do achieve the "American Dream", that guy's like you will attacked them with your rage, and discredit them for their hard work? "

Wealth = hard work?

Tell that to someone working in retail standing on the sales floor all day, someone working in construction, someone working in a hospital, someone working in child care, or some other physically, mentally, emotionally difficult positions.

The "too big to fail" crowd who made a lot of money but whose actions brought down the American economy were really "working harder" than the frontline workers in the previous paragraph?

Yeah, right, tell me another one.

I don't understand why people who suffer from dyslexia can't use spell check.

People shouldn't blame self-induced Fox "News" hysteria on a legitimate health condition like dyslexia.

Wealth = hard work?

Absolutely = LT do you know how many time schools and other have put me down, because I'm very dyslexics, even you have.

I work dam hard and now have 3 companies, with many employees, and I can hardly spell, I had teachers and professors tell me I won't make it, that something is wrong. I had co-workers laugh at me, I had a father that walked out when I was in the 6th grade, my mother basicly never recoverd form his, and my brother mental abuse.

Since the 6th grade I was almost on my own.

To survive and grow, I leaned very early I had to think out of the box. To be inventive, to find niches not served.

I know few other that have achieved more success than I have.

I found that all the rules and regulations,knowing two of my companies are regulated by the government bureaucracies, and that this truly a nightmare, especially when you don't fit into the proper government box.

More time is spent appeasing the time and money wasting (fat government bureaucrats) than working for good customers.

Because I often want to offer new more efficient ways, to provide services that are often overlooked, they (the government)has gone out of the way, and actually written new rules specifically so I can't.

Your quote "The "too big to fail" crowd who made a lot of money but whose actions brought down the American economy"

I say bull, the problem is government is taking small business down every day.

Hard work doesn't necessarily equal wealth. To the contrary, some of the hardest workers are the poorest among us.

Why isn't my interpretation of your remarks equally as valid as your interpretation of Chuck's?

I can assure I know what I am thinking. Meanwhile, everything Mr SHeketoff has written has always been in favor of more taxes as opposed to lower taxes.

"That the top 10% of income families paid 73% of taxes."

I can't believe so many people are gullible enough to fall for this meaningless statistic to the point that they're actually repeating it to advocate for still lower tax rates on the wealthy.

Here's a question that anyone who sees this statistic should immediately ask: The income earned by that "top 10%" was what percentage of total income earned by everybody? Hint: the answer is more than 73% (and WAY more than 10%). But the article doesn't mention that, ostensibly because it doesn't fit the narrative.

Reading comprehension, people!

Yeah, let's emphasize comprehension when the whole construct is bogus. Uhhhh...does either side of this debate realize that there's not a strong relationship between tax rate and unemployment rate?

"Why is our unemployment high?" That's easy. Because it's a good place to live. People vacation here. That means they save money and spend their discretionary time, their best times, doing what you do and seeing what you se when you take the dog for a walk. Next time you see a tourist, ask them where they're from and ask yourself, "would I do that to have the priv of experiencing their life". Ver, very rarely do I find the answer to be "yes". From Russia to Japan, there are beauty spots and there are industrial areas. Unemployment is endemic in the beauty spots. Every environment has its carrying capacity. By definition people will oversaturate the beauty spots. Jobs are one of the few things that still follows the old law of supply and demand. QED, the supply of workers in a beauty spot will always exceed the jobs on offer. If you created enough jobs for every last resident, more would relocate. It's based on individuals' perception of how much is "too much" unemployment to try living someplace.

So, yes, Joe and Jane ditto talk, our bike paths and our green ways and our gosh..just being wonderful us..WILL help the economy on its way, without addressing the things that you think are so important. You don't get it, because, unlike most Americans you can't appreciate it. Your lives are filled with cultivated ugliness because you think the world can only be ugly. Out of curiosity, do you take vacations to places like Indianapolis? Places like that have nothing. They kiss every conservative's backsides to get a handout. Sre that creates jobs, but who wants to live like that? You say you do. Have you tried it? You should look out the window and be grateful.

Look at where your return your census. In a fair system places like Tillamook would have an equal chance of getting those jobs. Impossible under the uber politicized Bush administration.

I'll recap without exceeding the right wing verbal buffer's limited capacity.

Conservative areas have better job economies because no one wants to live there and they grease the wheels playing the influence game. It is not a function of the tax rate. Liberals care more about the quality of life. They are more likely to live in nice areas and try to make a living, even though jobs will always be scare there. It is not due to their taxing business out of the area.

• Alisa "You Want A 'Tillamook Dairy Letter'?" Anderson

Alice

your quote "Yeah, let's emphasize comprehension when the whole construct is bogus. Uhhhh...does either side of this debate realize that there's not a strong relationship between tax rate and unemployment rate?"

Boy read economics, read history,look a Louisiana, they are NOW doing the right thing in a very large tourism industry state, after a hurricane, after a economic mess worse than our, and they brought down government and taxes, and have a strong economy with jobs.

Not only bring down government helps with jobs, the problem with Oregon and this broad is they don't have the ETHICAL fortitude to even admit whats right.

So Alive your are saying low taxes or government can't help Oregon because of tourist, even though reduced taxes greatly helped one of the largest tourism states after a an economic and weather cause nightmares.