Just to briefly follow up on my earlier post, I thought the chart above might clearly illustrate just how little grassroots support Tim Eyman enjoys these days. The chart is drawn from PDC data, and shows the number of individual contributions to Eyman’s initiative campaigns from 2000 through 2006.
As you can easily see, Timmy’s support has steadily declined since contributors first learned that he was secretly pocketing their money… and lying about it. (It is also interesting to note that of the seven initiatives charted, only one, I-900, remains on the books — and it has absolutely nothing to do with cutting taxes.)
No wonder Tim has been reduced to begging for food:
URGENT: Please help us raise funds. Can you arrange a lunch or dinner at your home or at a local restaurant with a few other potential donors attending? Great chance for us to meet, talk, answer questions, and explain the latest initiative and talk about ideas for future initiatives.
Actually, I-776 is still on the books. We aren’t paying the $15 per year local option vehicle tab tax any more, now are we? And the repeal of the 0.3% MVET for Sound Transit was perfectly valid in principle — IT JUST HAS TO REMAIN BEING COLLECTED WHILE EXISTING BONDS THAT CONTRACTED TO KEEP THAT 0.3% MVET IN PLACE ARE STILL OUTSTANDING! Small detail, MAJOR DIFFERENCE.
As for I-747, the state Supreme Court still hasn’t decided that case yet. There is a good chance they will uphold the law — and a good chance that they won’t, for that matter.
The bottom line of Tim Eyman’s tax-cutting crusade is this: Our modern economy is made possible by roads, schools, and government services that cost money.
Realistically, the only way to eliminate taxes is to live a feral existence in the wild (if you can find any wild).
If you want to live in a no-tax haven, try this place: http://tinyurl.com/ypfgsf
The notion of a no-tax society is a pipe dream. Let’s say Eyman did manage to repeal a tax. All that does is raise some other tax.
And 9 times in 10, the net result is to shift taxes from those most able to pay to those least able to pay, making our tax system even more regressive than it already is.
We need a rational tax system. We already have a rational system for setting priorities and limiting government spending: It’s called elections.
Yeah, the car tab tax was an obnoxious tax; but at least it was somewhat based on ability to pay. Those with newer or more expensive cars paid a higher tax. And those who owned several vehicles paid more than households owning only 1 vehicle. The Legislature’s repeal of the car tab tax hit city and county budgets hard, especially in rural areas, and led to pressures to increase local option sales taxes, which are regressive.
The so-called “tax revolt” has shot its bolt. Voters aren’t stupid — they understand that roads, schools, cops, firemen, libraries, and prisons aren’t free; and slashing taxes means cutting services. Conservatives, when in power, have failed to deliver on their claims that deep tax cuts can be achieved by eliminating “waste” and “fraud” in government. These promises were never realistic because modern government is, in fact, efficient and money-wise.
Now let’s review the effects of California Prop. 13 (“Jarvis-Gann”) 30 years later. Wikipedia catalogs its negative impacts:
“Some of the biggest losers under Proposition 13 were … public schools, libraries, and other city services (i.e. firefighters and police.) California public schools, which in the 1960’s had been ranked #1 nationally in student achievement, have fallen to 49th in many surveys …. Police forces and fire departments were gutted because of a drastic loss of funds ….
“California’s Proposition 13 has introduced major problems of equity and efficiency into the state’s tax structure …. [It] freezes the value of properties at the time of purchase …[;] neighbors who purchased a property at different periods of time … pay a different assessment, without any relationship to ability to pay or benefits received ….
“Proposition 13 creates inefficiencies because it provides dis-incentives for selling property in favor of modifying or transferring to family members in order to avoid a new tax rate …[;] it would follow that this policy … limits individual’s mobility from one community to another and other private economic activity.
“Similarly, Proposition 13 greatly benefited homeowners whose homes have appreciated in value since it was passed, particularly those (such as the elderly) whose incomes have not risen as fast as property values. In cities with many older residents, this has led to a severe shortage of affordable housing, since new developments must often be far above the state’s median home price in order to provide enough tax revenue to pay for the services they require. …
“Owners of commercial real estate have also benefited: if a corporation owning commercial property (such as a shopping mall) is sold or merged, but the property stays deeded to the corporation, ownership of the property can effectively change hands without triggering Proposition 13’s provision that fixes the amount of tax based on the property’s resale value. Since many properties are nominally owned by shell companies whose sole assets are the properties in question, this has led to situations that have struck many commentators … as absurd and unfair. For example, … the property tax bill of the historic Capitol Records building in Hollywood is approximately five cents per square foot, while a small house assessed at $300,000 may pay up to 60 times that on a per-square-foot basis. Critics of Proposition 13 have argued that this situation unfairly benefits commercial property owners ….
“Proposition 13 has hurt immigrants and young upwardly mobile workers in California. Because Proposition 13 is a disincentive to sell, there is less turnover among owners near the older downtown areas, and prices have appreciated fastest in these areas. Young people who would be wealthy in other states are ‘house poor’ in California, and are forced to live dozens of miles from their workplace in order to afford a home. Thus, the Proposition can be seen as a transfer tax from the working classes to the retired class, as retirees are subsidized and the young have fewer working hours in their day because of long commutes.
“Immigrants are another class of losers under Proposition 13, since they come from other states where real estate is more affordable (due to property taxes being a larger fraction of the overall tax base) and their real estate equity buys less in the California housing market. …
“Imaginative strategies have been necessary for localities to compensate for Proposition 13 and the state’s loss of most property tax revenue (which formerly went to cities and counties). Most California localities have recently sought their voters’ approval for special assessments that would levy new taxes earmarked for services that used to be paid for entirely or partially from property taxes: road and sewer maintenance, school funding, street lighting, police and firefighting units, and penitentiary facilities. Sales tax rates have skyrocketed from 5% (the typical pre-Prop 13 level) to 8% and beyond.
“California localities have taken measures such as using eminent domain and redevelopment laws to condemn blighted residential and industrial properties and convert them into sales tax generators such as shopping malls, multi-dealer ‘auto malls’ … and strip malls anchored by big-box stores …. However, the spread of big box retail is … another major factor behind California’s severe housing shortage, as cities have routinely rezoned vacant parcels and ‘blighted’ neighborhoods for retail in an attempt to increase their share of the sales tax pie. With developable land made scarce … the resulting market pressures have led to urban sprawl ….
“Some commentators have said that cities no longer control their own property tax revenue, and even claim Proposition 13 has exacerbated city-suburb class and racial tensions in California, particularly in Los Angeles.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C....._13_(1978)
Studies show that over several decades the federal government has consistently spent 18%-22% of GDP, while state and local governments have consistently spent about 15% of GDP, results in an overall tax burden of 33%-37% of GDP. Actual tax collections are slightly less because of the federal government’s consistent propensity for deficit spending; but borrowed money isn’t free, either, and citizens end up paying an “inflation tax” that erodes their savings and reduces the real value of their wages and investment income.
Why is government spending so consistent? Well, in large measure, because the big-budget spending items are driven by demographics. Given X population, you need Y classrooms, prison cells, etc., and will spend Z on social security and medicare. Taking away these programs would make our citizens poorer, less secure, and less safe. So we don’t.
What this really means is that tinkering with taxes shifts, not reduces, the tax burden. And tinkering with peripheral spending can’t hope to have more than minimal effect on tax burdens; the only way to get big tax cuts is to make big cuts in big programs like highways, schools, and defense — which, as noted above, would have consequences.
A prime example of the above was Eyman’s slot machine initiative. Eyman promised $400 million a year in property tax cuts, a ludicrous figure that could be attained only if every household in the state dropped $15,000 a year into slot machines.* And even if revenue of this magnitude was realized, it would result in a property tax cut of about $160 on a typical house. In other words, you’d have to lose $1050 a year in slot machines to get a $160 tax cut.** Where’s the profit?
* Assumes a 93% payout ratio and 20% state tax on gross profits.
** Assumes you win back 93% of what you spend.
What Eyman wanted you to do was give the businesses who donated to his initiative campaign and personal salary fund $1050 in return for a $160 tax break. Works for him, works for them, doesn’t work for you. The voters saw through this turkey, and crushed it at the polls. Like I said, voters aren’t stupid. Only Eyman and his die-hard supporters think they are.
I guess when people started to realize that Timmy Lieman was a liar, they decided his bullshit was a bad investment. Sort of like what’s happening to the Bush regime and the Publican party right now. People are bailing on these traitors at an amazing rate.
Roger Rabbit @ 6
But aren’t the Indian tribes in this state already making well over $400 million in gambling revenues? Yes, I know you or I wouldn’t lose $1,050 a year in slot machines. But there are a lot of people who dump far more money than that into the one-armed bandits in a given year. Those gambling businesses figured they would make tons of money, so they backed Eyman’s initiative.
Roger Rabbit @ 5
Proposition 13 can be re-amended by initiative too. It is easy to get enough signatures with the money or the volunteers to do so. Constitutional amendments down there only have to be put on the ballot and passed by a simple majority in a general election. California is a pretty blue state. They could at least pass something that gave property tax breaks only to natural persons (or natural creatures).
Can you arrange a lunch or dinner at your home or at a local restaurant with a few other potential donors attending? Great chance for us to meet…
Gawd. Now the guy is begging for food. How pitiful.
Tim Eyman’s 1990s era stupidities appear to have a new champion in John Stanton of Medina, who doesn’t need anyone to buy him dinner, and who appears to think that the way to raise more taxes to pay for Eyman’s delays in transportation is to bash government again and again and again.
11: I know its pityful…what is the world coming too.
http://www.horsesass.org/?p=2456#comments
oops
Basing taxes on ability to pay amounts to promoting socialism.
Flat, low-rate taxes = Fair taxes
14 – A FLAT TAX IS ANOTHER PIPE DREAM. THIS SOCIETY COULDN’T FUNCTION WITH A FLAT TAX. YOU COULDN’T PAY FOR THE MILITARY AND THINGS THAT GO ALONG WITH IT LIKE VETERANS HEALTH CARE. IN FACT THAT’S THE ONLY BARGAIN YOU CAN MAKE WITH THE RICH FOR PAYING THE HIGHER RATE. IF YOU DON’T PAY WHO’S GOING TO PROTECT YOUR WEALTH, YOUR PROPERTY, ETC.
ONE THING LIBERALS SHOULD UNDERSTAND ABOUT THE MILITARY – YOU HAVE TO SEE IT AS ANOTHER MIDDLE CLASS ENTITLEMENT. I DON’T BEGRUDGE THE MILITARY. YOU NEED THEM IN A FIGHT. BUT THIS COUNTRY SPENDS MORE ON THE MILITARY THAN ALMOST EVERY OTHER COUNTRY COMBINED. AT THE CURRENT RATE OF SPENDING, IT’S JUST NOT SUSTAINABLE. HOWEVER, NATIONAL SECURITY SPENDING OCCASIONALLY THROWS OFF MAJOR TECHNICAL INNOVATIONS INTO THE GENERAL ECONOMY LIKE THIS INTERNET WE’RE ALL USING. PENSION AND EDUCATION BENEFITS ARE ANOTHER PLUS.
SO I’M WILLING TO TOLERATE A MODERATE LEVEL OF MILITARY SPENDING GROWTH FROM THE BASELINE OF THE CLINTON YEARS IN EXCHANGE FOR THE BENEFITS AND THE DOD’S ADOPTION OF GAO AUDIT PRACTICES. THAT LAST PART IS REALLY IMPORTANT. TOO MUCH MILITARY SPENDING IS WASTEFUL.
re 12: Wasn’t “Dutch” Reagan’s nickname?
BLASPHEMER!!!!!!!!!
LWB/YOS LIB BRO (.5 HISPANIC .5 SOUTHERN EUROPEAN,
What do you think of this idea – We start to gradually withdraw all troops from foreign lands. Let’s start with the Republic of Korea. We’ve been there for over 50 years. Let’s bring those guys and gals back to the states and announce to the world that North Korea is a Chinese, South Korean, Russian and Japanese problem. If the Koreans and Japanese can build and export cars and electronics to this country and make a handsome profit, they can surely take care of that pipsqueak in North Korea.
While this is going on, let’s close down the show in Iraq. After all, Saddam is dead, and those folks over there aren’t THAT keen on American-style democracy in the first place: too much religious craziness in the area.
Now it’s time to close-down all those European bases. The Europeans hate our guts, so it’s a good idea to leave town.
Next, let’s stop giving countries like Egypt and Israel money to “be good.” We give those folks a boat-load of money each year to not fight. What do we care if they fight or not?
What we need is a more isolationist stance when it comes to these foreign adventures. Once we stop trying to change the world to suit our notions of “truth and justice,” we’ll be better off and can have a sensible tax structure that flat, low and fair. It’s time to start looking out for the US and accept the fact that the world doesn’t dance to our tune.
“Sen. Diane Feinstein has (finally) resigned from the Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee…Feinstein was chairperson of MILCON for 7 years during which time she had a (roaring!) conflict of interest due to her husband Richard Blum’s ownership of 2 major defense contractors who were awarded billions of dollars for military construction projects approved by Feinstein.”
Whoa—Culture of corruption!!!!! Get mad, y’all. Feinstein profiting off of tax money SHE awarded to her own husband!!! way to go, Dianne—Now we know why you ran for senate! A culture of corruption!
7 s/b 6 years of chairmanship. This is from MetroActive, btw. I’m sure y’all will be demanding her resignation from the senate for war profiteering.
Eyeman blew it. He should have learnt his lesson when the courts threw out his first initiative on car tabs. Instead, he followed up with another multi-subject initiative that repeated the same mistake.
In the beginning, he was a hero to many people for standing up to the state. Then he was unmasked as being just another politician when he got caught with his hand in the cookie jar.
Now he is just tiresome and irrelevant, having squandered his original potential. If he had played his cards right, he probably could be a contender for Governor by now. Instead, today most people probably wouldn’t even buy a watch from him.
Hey Libertarian,
What do you think of these folks? Are they ‘mainstream’libertarians?
MainstreamLibertarian.com
Milo,
Thanks for the link.
They seem like nice folks over there, pretty much good Libertarians. Can’t say that I support Guilianni (SP?) for prez, as they do, but they seem like good people, and I agree with most of what they have listed as Libertarian views. I only gave it a quick look, however. I’ll read more closely soon and get back to you.
There certainly not socialists!
Once again, work is interferring weth my social life!
Libertarian,
They seem to be rabid pro-interventionists regarding US foreign policy…I thought most libertars were isolationists.
Prop. 13 was sold as a benefit to elderly persons on fixed incomes, and when it was passed people in that class were often being forced out of their homes, by sale or foreclosure, as a result of rising property taxes in a hot real estate market.
Fears that such a state of affairs could be revisited on aging baby boomers makes repeal a highly unlikely prospect. Ads in the mold of “Harry and Louise” could easily be made of the original arguments.
The Wiki that RR quoted, however, rather downplays who the real beneficiaries of Prop 13 have been, those immortal, faux individuals the corporations. Entities such as Standard Oil, Southern Pacific (and their buyers), and Hewlett-Packard, had the largest real estate holdings in California at the time of the enactment of Jarvis-Gann, and now enjoy tax rates that have remained largely unchanged for almost thirty years. The elderly who voted in Prop 13 are mostly dead by now, and the buyers of their property pay higher taxes, another transfer of wealth from the middle and working classes to the rich.
A much better solution to the problem Prop 13 was advertised to solve would have been exemptions for at risk individuals, but, of course, the predominant beneficiaries of the broad tax limits that were passed, with their big bucks, wouldn’t have fallen behind such an initiative.
#18
Are you sure? Really? I hadn’t heard this before. I can understand the Democrats not wanting to bring that up. But why didn’t Bush, Rove, Chaney or any other Republican bring this up in the last 6 years…especially WHILE the Dems were yelling about Republican corruption? That would have been perfect timing.
I’m always a little suspicious when I read something that’s only in a blog, but seems to be ignored (in this case by the Republicans) for the last 6 years. There must be some reason Bush/Rove never complained about this. Hmm.
18.
Have you heard of Caspar Weinberburger and George Schultz, respectively the one time chariman and president of Bechtel Construction in San Francisco? Later the Secretaries of Defense and State in the Reagan Administration?
Of course, Cap and George were pikers in relationship to Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld, but how about getting real, huh?
I agree that the military-congressional-industrial complex (Ike’s first-draft identifier) is pernicious, but it is also non-partisan.
LIBERTARIAN @ 17
WE HAVE TO SEE THE WORLD AS IT IS AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE AND ONLY PARTIALLY AS WE WOULD LIKE IT BE.
WHAT YOU ARE ADVOCATING IS WALKING AWAY FROM THE TABLE. AN INWARD-LOOKING, ISOLATIONIST STANCE TOWARDS THE WORLD ONLY LEADS TO STASIS AND STAGNATION IN OUR OWN COUNTRY.
SOME OF WHAT YOU ADVOCATE IS REASONABLE, SOME OF EUROPE FOR EXAMPLE. BUT KOREA? NO WAY. THE MIDDLE EAST, DEFINITELY NOT. AS MUCH AS I HATE THE WASTE AND FRAUD OF THE CHIMPANZEE’S DISASTROUS DECISION, IT IS IN OUR BEST INTEREST TO REDEPLOY FORCES TO CONTAIN THE JIHADIST MOVEMENT AND ANY OTHER NEGATIVE FALLOUT FROM THE CIVIL WAR IN IRAQ.
WE WILL BE ENGAGED THERE FOR A LONG TIME TO COME.
Roger @8: And 9 times in 10, the net result is to shift taxes from those most able to pay to those least able to pay, making our tax system even more regressive than it already is.
But wasn’t that the entire point?
Maybe Timmy ought to go back to selling watches to frat boys.
8th @ 18/19: For what it’s worth, most liberals (outside of California, anyway) don’t have much use for DiFi, and have wished her gone for ages already, as long as she isn’t replaced by an even more corrupt Republican!
Feinstein was chairperson of MILCON for 7 years during which time she had a (roaring!) conflict of interest
OH YEAH, SO IF THIS WAS TRUE WHERE WERE HER PURER THAN SNOW REPUBLICAN COLLEAGUES IN MILCON ON THIS ISSUE?
MAYBE WITH THEIR HANDS IN A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT KIND OF COOKIE JAR?
Troll @18,
Other than your unlinked reference to something on some unknown blog, I have never heard anything about this. But…
a) It seems unlikely that she was the chair of an important subcommittee for 7 years considering the Republicans have controlled the Senate for most of her career there.
b) Now that the Dems control the Senate, if it is true that she resigned a chairmanship due to perceived conflict of interest, then that was her acting ethically, and the system working properly.
Next time, cite your sources.
3 You’re right, Roger…in California the Prop13 folks and Reagan did a big terminology dance, talking about “user fees”. So, the state parks got a lower subsidy but it cost you nine bucks if you had to pull into one for 15 minutes for your 5-year-old daughter to pee.
They closed all the state-run mental institutions, then the crazies got dumped out on the street. A lot of ’em messed up and wound up in the prison system, one of many reasons why criminal incarceration has been such a growth industry nationwide.
Right now, the “something-for-nothing” Bushista tax-and-spend program is costing us all plenty as inflation kicks the shit out of the buying power of the sweat of our brows, and worse yet, it’s screwing our children and our childrens’ children along with us.
Oh yeah….let’s not even get started about what’s happened to the entire California educational system since Prop. 13. The LA Unified Schools that everyone bitches about used to be where the Ward and June Cleavers sent their kids to to become rocket scientists.
Why does Bush hate our troops? He says he will veto the bill that gives them the funding they need. Too bad he doesn’t care about our troops.
C’mon, fellow liberals, the questions surrounding URS, Richard Blum and his wife, Senator Feinstein, are hardly new, or unknown.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/.....310531.DTL
The Defense Budget is a deep, wide trough, that all sorts of political animals feed at. Did Dianne give URS any special attention or favor? It hardly matters in a society that will spend billions on unworkable and undesirable weapons systems, at the same time it cuts health and education programs for poor children. If not her, someone will be glad to show their “patriotism” and take her place. Chuck Spinney was pointing that out for thirty-five years, before he retired from his position as a Pentagon budget analyst in 2002.
The spectacle of politicians pretending that putting forward specific budget cuts, aimed at disengaging from a war that 70% of the country wants to disengage from is, somehow, politically risky underscores the collective moral bankruptcy in this regard.
Milo says:
Libertarian,
They seem to be rabid pro-interventionists regarding US foreign policy…I thought most libertars were isolationists.
=====
Well, I’m certainly NOT in favor of getting involved in this insanity overseas, regardless of the flavor. With that said, however, I am not against retaliation for anybody that screws with us. If Bush had spent our energies on retaliation rather than invasions, maybe we’d be better off today. As it is now, we’re mired in a conflict that is a religious war involving some serious crazies.
That website you mentioned can think what it wants, but I came away with the idea that they’d prefer not to get involved militarily but would respond to attacks if they occurred.
We have allowed ourselves to become entangled in a religious mess. I don’t give a sierra whether Israel or Palestine make it through next week or not. We should declare neutrality in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. That’s why we are in the Middle East – the Israelis.
And, oh yeah, the oil…
We have allowed ourselves to become entangled in a religious mess.
AGREED.
I don’t give a sierra whether Israel or Palestine make it through next week or not. We should declare neutrality in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. That’s why we are in the Middle East – the Israelis.
WE SHOULD BE NEUTRAL ON THE ISSUE OF RELIGION BUT WE CAN’T BE NEUTRAL ON HUMAN RIGHTS. NO ONE HAS THE RIGHT TO ETHNIC CLEANSING OR GENOCIDE WHICH COULD HAPPEN ANYWHERE WHEN PEOPLE WHO SHOULD KNOW BETTER WALK AWAY FROM THE TABLE.
And, oh yeah, the oil…
AGREED. OIL IS IN OUR NATIONAL INTEREST. NOT JUST TO RUN OUR CARS, TRUCKS ETC. BUT THE WORLD’S CARS TRUCKS ETC. THIS IS THE CASE UNTIL WE FIGURE OUT HOW TO TRANSFER AWAY FROM FOSSIL FUELS AND MAYBE NOT EVEN THEN.
LWB/YOS LIB BRO (.5 HISPANIC .5 SOUTHERN EUROPEAN)
We’re in agreement on a couple of issues, at least. I’d be wary of getting involved in human right issues, on the face of it. Those can get messy, and I’d need some clear and very convicing evidence for our guys and gals to get in harm’s way. Sometimes, once the opressor is overthrown, the oppressed become the oppressors and the whole cycle starts over again. Whose side is the correct side to support?
I’d be wary of getting involved in human right issues
WE’RE ALREADY INVOLVED. WE’RE PART OF THE UNITED NATIONS AND THE UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS IS SOMETHING WE’RE SUPPOSED TO UPHOLD. WE’VE DONE A LOUSY JOB ON THE WHOLE BUT SOMETIMES WE STEP UP TO THE PLATE AS WE SHOULD AND WE BENEFIT ALMOST EVERY TIME WE DO.
Whose side is the correct side to support?
THE SIDE OF PRINCIPLES. TO ME IT’S A SIMPLE MATTER OF UTILITY. LESS VIOLENCE, A BETTER, MORE PROSPEROUS WORLD.
WE’RE PART OF THE UNITED NATIONS
====
Here’s where we part company. I’d prefer the US to NOT be part of the United Nations. I don’t think they have our best interests at heart. We should excuse ourselves from the UN. For those nations that remian in the UN, live long and prosper. No harm done.
========
THE SIDE OF PRINCIPLES. TO ME IT’S A SIMPLE MATTER OF UTILITY. LESS VIOLENCE, A BETTER, MORE PROSPEROUS WORLD.
========
I like you idealism, but even the principled side can be an abuser. Nobody truly wears a white hat in the world. More often than not, we’re dealing with shades of gray.
I ask everyone – Do you think the US has behaved in a hgihly principled manner at all times? Have the European nations? Have the Israelis, the Japanese, the Chinese, Koreans ad nauseam, been principled throughout history?
Involving ourselves in foreign adventures will not bring us peace or prosperity.
@9 I don’t know what the tribal casinos’ net is, Richard. But I do know this. Only a couple small Indian wars occurred in the Washington Territory; for the most part, the Indians in this part of the country ceded their lands without armed conflict, the more readily because they were promised hunting and fishing rights which they believed would sustain them in perpetuity. They did not foresee the draining of wetlands that destroyed 98% of salmon reproductive habitat, the commercial overfishing that decimated the salmon runs by 1890, or the dams that blocked salmon migration upriver to the upstream tribes. These actions by white settlers destroyed their livelihood, and for most of the 20th century, the tribes here (as elsewhere) lived in abject poverty. Indian populations plunged as tribes struggled with chronic high unemployment and social problems.
At the end of the Indian wars and Indian land dispossession, the Indians were made wards of the federal government for their protection (and, in part, to protect the settler populations). For decades, the federal government struggled to find ways to help the tribes get on their feet economically. Then along came casinos, and federal-sanctioned tribal gambling franchises suddenly did get the tribes on their feet, creating jobs for tribal members and bringing in revenue to the tribes that have paid for schools, health programs, community and economic development, etc.
Part of the reason for this tribal prosperity is that, given restrictive state gaming laws, the tribes had a government sanctioned and enforced monopoly on popular types of gambling such as slot machines.
Take that away, or create competition by opening gambling up to non-Indian commercial enterprises, resulting in loss of revenue and jobs for the tribal casinos — and you’re right back to Indian dependency on taxpayers.
Personally, I’d rather not see widely available gambling, and all the social problems it brings — on or off reservation. I’d rather see the tribes get what they were promised — fish. Instead of 1 or 2 million salmon migrating up the Columbia River every year, I’d like to see something akin to the 60 to 80 million-fish runs of yore. All the way to the headwaters of the Columbia and Snake rivers.
But I don’t know how to do that.
@10 I won’t argue with that, Richard, but in fact amending Prop. 13 has been attempted — and failed. Can’t argue with the will of the voters. But they’re digging themselves into a hole. Senior citizens sitting in $1 million cottages they bought years ago for $40,000, on which they pay next to nothing in property taxes, aren’t complaining — they’re lapping it up. But the state as a whole will eventually pay a price. Young workers will refuse to transfer there, so companies will pull out, and the state’s economy will suffer. Lots and lots of other side effects, too. When California voters figure out they’ve shot themselves in the foot, they’ll do something about the situation they’ve created. But it takes a while for the effects to hit home, and for the lightbulbs to go on inside voters’ heads. However, I predict that someday Prop. 13 will be tossed into the ash heap of failed experiments.
@14 Progressive taxation in a capitalist system doesn’t meet most peoples’ definition of “socialism,” Lib. One consistent feature of righty propaganda is its penchant for playing word games — by redefining terms, demonizing certain words, then using them to label things you don’t like.
What you’re really saying is you want to take food off the tables of poor, hungry families so you can pay less taxes so you can buy another big-screen TV or add a Hummer to your car collection. I have a label for people like that: Selfish pricks.
Here’s where we part company.
INDEED. YOU LIBERTARIANS ARE ALWAYS ABOUT THE INDIVIDUAL TO YOUR DETRIMENT. I’M A BIT OF A MAVERICK MYSELF BUT I RECOGNIZE THAT HUMAN BEINGS OCCASIONALLY HAVE TO COOPERATE AND ASSOCIATE WITH ONE ANOTHER.
WE ARE SOCIAL BEINGS. THAT IS REALITY. WE DON’T GET VERY FAR WITHOUT ASSOCIATING WITH ONE ANOTHER.
ANOTHER TRUTH: WE ARE A HIERARCHICAL SPECIES. THIS IS WHY WE HAVE MAYORS, GOVERNORS, GENERALS, PRESIDENTS, ETC. THERE IS NO USE DENYING THAT. IF PEOPLE SMASH DOWN ONE HIERARCHY ANOTHER SPRINGS UP TO TAKE ITS PLACE. THERE’S NO SUCH THING AS HUMAN SOCIETIES WITHOUT AN ORGANIZATION CHART, ONLY GOOD ONES AND BAD ONES.
IF THE UN IS BAD, IT’S ONLY BECAUSE WE AND OTHERS ARE NOT SERIOUS ABOUT LEADING IT.
I’M NOT AT ALL SAYING WE SHOULD EMBRACE THE COLLECTIVE TO THE DETRIMENT OF THE INDIVIDUAL. I’M SAYING WE SHOULD EMBRACE BOTH WITH THE GOAL OF MAXIMIZING FREEDOM AND WELL-BEING FOR ALL.
Involving ourselves in foreign adventures will not bring us peace or prosperity.
IT ALL DEPENDS ON HOW YOU GO ABOUT IT. STUPID LIKE DUBYA I AGREE. BUT SOMETHING LIKE A CAMP DAVID WHERE WARRING PARTIES AGREE TO STOP WARRING – THAT’S MY KIND OF FOREIGN ADVENTURE.
@14 (continued) Well, just keep beating on poor people long enough, Lib, and eventually you’ll rehabilitate the term “socialism” and make it respectable — even popular — again. If putting the tax burden on those who have more money than they know how to spend is “socialism” then I say “socialism” is a good thing and we need more of it, and I think a lot of voters will agree with me.
Better be careful how you misuse the language, or you may popularize “socialism” to the point where you get some real socialism along with it.
@14 (continued) Let’s review: In Washington state, the bottom 20% of households pay 17% of their income to state and local governments, while the top 20% of households pay 4% of their income to state and local governments. That’s what assholes like Libertarian call “socialism.” A couple centuries ago, a different generation of assholes got the guillotine for this attitude.
Libertarian:
I left this for a while hoping that someone else would chime in, but since that hasn’t happened, I’ll take a whack at it..
While the UN is often little more than a debating society, I would propose that our membership in that body has done both us and the rest of the world much good, with almost no down side.
At least some of the cause for the current mess we find ourselves in is that we chose not to use the United Nations to solve our difficulties with Iraq. Of course, the Bush administration chose to ignore the UN primarily because they already knew that the UN would disapprove of the course of action that President Bush favored and eventually took.
Talking is better than fighting. The UN is a place for talking and for the airing of different perspectives.
Many of the folks that are opposed to the UN take that position because the UN does not always side with us. I’ve heard statements like “We’re the most powerful nation on the planet! How dare some little pipsqueak country tell us what we can do, and why should we listen anyway?”
The answer is, of course, that sometimes the little pipsqueak country is right.
One additional point. You’re right in saying that the UN does not have our best interests at heart. Each country is primarily looking after its own interests. The UN just gives us all a place where we can at least try to find out if we can make all of those interests work together.
@17 That “pipsqueak” has one of the largest standing armies on earth, with over 1 million artillery pieces deployed within range of S. Korea’s capital. Without the U.S. military umbrella, there’s only one way S. Korea could stop an attack, and that’s with nuclear weapons. If we pulled out, S. Korea would start building such weapons within a week.
18, 19 The 8th needs a rabbit-hugging congressman now! Not that do-nothing hairpiece.
48 Pardon me, I meant to say congressperson.
@35 Two questions for ya good buddy:
1. Which is cheaper, preventive dentistry, or restorative dentistry?
2. Which is cheaper, proactive foreign policy, or reactive military retaliation?
@36 The world has a finite supply of fossil fuels, and we’re squandering it in the stupidest manner possible — by living 50 miles from where we work; by moving freight with trucks instead of trains, etc. Another market failure.
51 But don’t worry; in the long run, when oil rises to $200 a barrel and gas costs $10 a gallon at the pump, Redneck’s “invisible hand” will let go of his penis long enough to make us use our limited supply of fuel more rationally.
@39 Now I know for sure you’re terminally stupid, Lib. The U.N. isn’t supposed to be a U.S. lackey; it’s supposed to be a forum in which nations can talk out their differences and reach compromises, as an alternative to war.
Which is cheaper, compromise and respecting other nations’ sovereignty, or fighting endless colonial wars?
@39 (continued) Let’s take the current Iran crisis as an example. It goes without saying the kidnapping of British sailors from Iraqi waters is a calculated provocation and attempt to gain a bargaining chip. Britain and Iran are both members of the U.N., so it’s possible for them to talk about it, and the U.N. membership can bring pressure to bear on Iran to resolve this peacefully. In the old days, before the U.N., there would have been no diplomacy, just an immediate knee-jerk military response, and you’d have another war.
@43 The fundamental flaw in libertarian philosophy is that it elevates the desires of the individual above the needs of society, but throughout human history social need has always trumped individual desires — in all societies, in all places, in all epochs. Why? Because real life experience demonstrates that humans can’t survive except in societal groupings, therefore the needs of the group must come first.
@46 “The answer is, of course, that sometimes the little pipsqueak country is right.”
The even more important answer is that quantity and quality of military power do not equal military victor, and more often that not, those little pipsqueak countries can, in fact, kick our asses if we mess with them.
victory not victor
The poorer and more primitive a country is, the more likely it is able to defeat a superpower’s army.
The fewer roads a country has, the more useless an occupying army’s tanks are.
The less physical infrastructure a country has, the more useless airpower is.
How the fuck do you subdue peasants with aircraft carriers?
Well, I knew Roger and the Gang would all chime in eventually.
I wish the UN no ill will, but I don’t think the US needs to be a member. For those countries that wish to stay in the UN, great.
If North Korea has a big army, then the Russians, Chinese, Japanses, and Chinese have an even bigger combined army. North Korea is their responsibility. We’ve been too generous with those countries. time for them to take care of North Korea. We’ve been subsidizing the Japanese and Korean economies for far too long. Let’s leave both countries and China and Russia to deal with North Korea. Like I said before, if they can exports cars and elsctroninc into this country and make a good profit doing it, then they can take care of the pipsqueak.
Here’s a question for you guys – Why do we still have troops in the former Yugoslavia? Aren’t the Europeans capable of handling that one? Haven’t we done enough there?
I don’t want the UN to be our lacky, but i don’t want them to be a collective active enemy to us either.
Let’s review: In Washington state, the bottom 20% of households pay 17% of their income to state and local governments, while the top 20% of households pay 4% of their income to state and local governments. That’s what assholes like Libertarian call “socialism.” A couple centuries ago, a different generation of assholes got the guillotine for this attitude.
=======
OK, let’s have equality of cost in everything. The cost of a loaf of bread will depend on what you make. If you earn only minimum wage, a loaf of bread is, say, a penny. If you’re making a zillion bucks a year, a loaf of bread will cost your $500,000.
A haircut will cost a minimum-wage guy a quarter, but our rich guy has to pay a million.
Does that sound fair?
BTW, Rog, calling me an “asshole” doesn’t add much to you credibiltiy or your argument.
Lib,
Roger’s just a failed attorney who coulnd’t survive in the private sector for more than 15 minutes. Don’t pay attention to any of his shit.
COuld be he’s just much better at stealing donors’ money than reporting it. He’s demonstrated he’s really good at stealing his donors’ money beofre…
@62 I don’t have a gang. I only have two trillion cousins.
@62 Last time we fought a war with N. Korea, the Chinese were fighting alongside them, and the Russians were supplying them — and you trust those to contain them?
@65 “BTW, Rog, calling me an ‘asshole’ doesn’t add much to you credibiltiy or your argument.”
That isn’t name-calling, it’s stating facts.
To wit: You’re one of those assholes who wants to take everything our society has to offer, but you don’t want to pay your fair share of what it costs. Fuck you.
Fuck your fucked up fulosophy, too.
@66 You wouldn’t have lasted 5 minutes in my gummint job.
@63 Yeah, I think so, we should get out.
@63 Except maybe the CIA has secret listening posts there.
I can’t figure out why Feinstein resigned. Seems odd.
Anyone?
Anyone?
Bueller?
I can’t figure out why Feinstein resigned.
‘CUZ YOU’RE A MORON.
Hey Goldy, will read these later (got to run out at the moment). Fascinating to see that chart, hadn’t realized he was begging for food.
But, what’s the chances of tagging your chart with the timing of the Gorilla and Darth Vadar costumes? Might add another perspective as to what ol’ Timmy was feeling about his paycheck at the time.
Ahem, Gold One, I already mentioned the piece was from Metroactive. I didn’t know it was so hard to type metroactive.com into the address line to find said story. I think you’re much more computer saavy than to not get that.
and don’t you think that it would’ve been MORE ethical to never permit herself onto said committee from day one (of course it would be!)? I guess her hubby isn’t in the running for this stuff anymore, so it looks like THAT’s why she stepped down. But they suuuuure got the goods, didn’t she and hub? A CULTURE OF CORRUPTION!!! I only heard one guy here say she should go. Where’s the rest of ya??? She and Jefferson could make quite a pair, yes? He’s stashing bribe money in the Frigidaire, she’s been awarding her husband tons of our tax dollars. Way to go, girl!!! Your fellow dems here are proud of you and your resourcefulness.