Measure 97
#1
I'm not going to get caught up in this fight. I think it's the business of our LEGISLATURE to enact laws and deal with tax issues. 

But, it's going to be a donnybrook. 

From todays (9/9) Mail tribune:

MEASURE 97 FORUM
The good and the bad 
Both sides debate the merits, consequences of corporate tax increase
By Greg Stiles
Mail Tribune
Measure 97 backers and foes dug in their heels during a Thursday debate at the Medford library.
The measure would generate nearly $3 billion annually by imposing a $30,000 minimum tax on C-corporations, plus a 2.5 percent gross receipts tax when their sales exceed $25 million. At present, Oregon’s minimum tax on corporations is capped at $100,000.
Shamus Lynsky of the Oregon Consumer League and Phoenix resident Mark Kellenbeck, co-founder and co-chair of Main Street Alliance of Oregon, told a gathering of about 150 why the initiative should pass, while Portland Business Alliance CEO and President Sandra McDonough and Medford Fabrication President Bill Thorndike explained reasons for defeat. The debate was co-sponsored by the League of Women Voters Rogue Valley and the Mail Tribune.

>Snip< . rest of the piece in the paper. 
Reply
#2
Anyone who votes for this is an ignorant citizen. Or a Teamster.

The entire fund is going to go to PERS and OBAMACARE. It is a slush fund to bail out the unsustainable promises made during the good times before 2008. Anyone who thinks that the "Evil Corporations" that will be made to pay this will simply pull it out of their ass and not pass it to the consumer is a fucking moron. This is a Sales Tax on EVERYONE.

Companies and people will leave this state in droves.
Reply
#3
I don't know if this is a good idea or not, but if Hugo is against it, it is probably a good thing. I will investigate this more before before I cast my vote.
Reply
#4
I am Taxed Enough Already. Absolutely voting NO!
Reply
#5
This one is an easy no vote. But in this damn state it will pass. I always know i am on the correct side of an issue if the results are opposite of my vote.
Reply
#6
(09-10-2016, 08:07 AM)GPnative Wrote: This one is an easy no vote. But in this damn state it will pass. I always know i am on the correct side of an issue if the results are opposite of my vote.

Thank God we have Portland, Eugene, Ashland, Salem, Corvallis and the North Coast in the great State of Oregon. Otherwise hillbillies from the hinterlands would be making these important decisions.  Razz

My vote is usually the same as the majority vote.
Reply
#7
(09-10-2016, 07:07 AM)tornado Wrote: I am Taxed Enough Already. Absolutely voting NO!

How do taxes work with illegal workers?
Reply
#8
(09-10-2016, 08:44 AM)cletus1 Wrote:
(09-10-2016, 08:07 AM)GPnative Wrote: This one is an easy no vote. But in this damn state it will pass. I always know i am on the correct side of an issue if the results are opposite of my vote.

Thank God we have Portland, Eugene, Ashland, Salem, Corvallis and the North Coast in the great State of Oregon. Otherwise hillbillies from the hinterlands would be making these important decisions.  Razz

My vote is usually the same as the majority vote.

That is no surprise  Razz
Reply
#9
http://medfordmailtribune.or.newsmemory....=02e499d05

If you read nothing else on the subject, here is a dose of reality from Umpqua Dairy.
Reply
#10
Good read, clearly 97 is a bad idea, so count on Oregon voters to pass it.
Reply
#11
(09-18-2016, 08:09 PM)GPnative Wrote: Good read, clearly 97 is a bad idea, so count on Oregon voters to pass it.

Oh yeah, Umpqua Dairy doesn't have a dog in this fight...they have a PACK of dogs in this fight. Of course they don't want to pay taxes. They want YOU to pay more taxes. 

The hell with these Measures. Let the legislature do their work and find a way to make taxes as equitable as possible. (Like that is going to happen anytime soon. So as good citizens we need to hold their feet to the fire. But, better than these "Measures". They ALL have some vested interest behind them. "We the people" should not be making laws. Let the folks we send to Salem do the heavy lifting. The can at least debate it 

But, if we have to consider this thing, lets read the considered and expert opinions of academics and the like rather than businesses who have a vested interest in the thing. 

Better yet, let Clete bear the tax burden. He's got more money than Trump.
Reply
#12
I've always been curious why conservatives and libertarians are so against business paying sales tax, but think it's such a good idea for all the rest of us.

OG, Hugo, anyone want to justify that?
Reply
#13
(09-18-2016, 08:09 PM)GPnative Wrote: Good read, clearly 97 is a bad idea, so count on Oregon voters to pass it.

The two comments below yours are a good indication of that. Hard to believe anyone can be that stupid, but the tactic of driving a wedge between Employers and Employees through Jealousy and Envy has been very successful.  If I were to follow their train of thought, I should HATE my employer, and be actively trying to damage the company's viability?  Isn't that suicide?
Reply
#14
(09-19-2016, 06:11 AM)Hugo Wrote:
(09-18-2016, 08:09 PM)GPnative Wrote: Good read, clearly 97 is a bad idea, so count on Oregon voters to pass it.

The two comments below yours are a good indication of that. Hard to believe anyone can be that stupid, but the tactic of driving a wedge between Employers and Employees through Jealousy and Envy has been very successful.  If I were to follow their train of thought, I should HATE my employer, and be actively trying to damage the company's viability?  Isn't that suicide?

Of course it would be suicide (or something like it) to try to "damage the company's viability" for which one works. Good employees want the company to prosper. But either you or the people you work for are more than likely going to face increased taxes. Your company might well be able to absorb that burden more easily than you. 

The issue about "97" is adding taxes to larger company's in an attempt to raise needed revenue for the the needs of the state. It's not "a given" that those increases would necessarly have to be passed on to consumers. 
Or, the state could raise taxes on individuals for the needed revenue. 
Or the state could cut services and not raise any taxes. 

We have choices. Personally I don't like any ballot measures and think our legislature should slug it out in the halls of the captiol until they reach a reasonable compromise. 

I'll vote no on "97", but wonder just how many servicies the State can cut until we become a backwater with lousy schools, fewer OSP officers, children services that are neglected, and other needed services cut or dismantled. 

No easy answers. We all need to stay alert, read all we can from good and reliable sources, and remember to vote. 

Citizenship is not easy.
Reply
#15
Yeah wonky, businesses never pass on increases in cost of goods sold to consumers, just ask mark m, and apparently yourself as well.
Reply
#16
(09-19-2016, 08:41 AM)Wonky3 Wrote:
(09-19-2016, 06:11 AM)Hugo Wrote:
(09-18-2016, 08:09 PM)GPnative Wrote: Good read, clearly 97 is a bad idea, so count on Oregon voters to pass it.

The two comments below yours are a good indication of that. Hard to believe anyone can be that stupid, but the tactic of driving a wedge between Employers and Employees through Jealousy and Envy has been very successful.  If I were to follow their train of thought, I should HATE my employer, and be actively trying to damage the company's viability?  Isn't that suicide?

Of course it would be suicide (or something like it) to try to "damage the company's viability" for which one works. Good employees want the company to prosper. But either you or the people you work for are more than likely going to face increased taxes. Your company might well be able to absorb that burden more easily than you. 

The issue about "97" is adding taxes to larger company's in an attempt to raise needed revenue for the the needs of the state. It's not "a given" that those increases would necessarly have to be passed on to consumers. 
Or, the state could raise taxes on individuals for the needed revenue. 
Or the state could cut services and not raise any taxes. 

We have choices. Personally I don't like any ballot measures and think our legislature should slug it out in the halls of the captiol until they reach a reasonable compromise. 

I'll vote no on "97", but wonder just how many servicies the State can cut until we become a backwater with lousy schools, fewer OSP officers, children services that are neglected, and other needed services cut or dismantled. 

No easy answers. We all need to stay alert, read all we can from good and reliable sources, and remember to vote. 

Citizenship is not easy.

Here is where the bullshit meets the road.  The State is NOT in dire need of more revenue, except in two areas.  To cover the atrocities of the promises made to PERS recipients, and to fund the failing Obamacare.  The PERS recipients are the ones who need to suck it up and accept realistic changes to their retirements, and Obamacare needs to wither and die.  Oregon State Government has never had MORE money than they get right now, so go sell your bullshit elsewhere.
Reply
#17
(09-19-2016, 12:18 PM)Hugo Wrote:
(09-19-2016, 08:41 AM)Wonky3 Wrote:
(09-19-2016, 06:11 AM)Hugo Wrote:
(09-18-2016, 08:09 PM)GPnative Wrote: Good read, clearly 97 is a bad idea, so count on Oregon voters to pass it.

The two comments below yours are a good indication of that. Hard to believe anyone can be that stupid, but the tactic of driving a wedge between Employers and Employees through Jealousy and Envy has been very successful.  If I were to follow their train of thought, I should HATE my employer, and be actively trying to damage the company's viability?  Isn't that suicide?

Of course it would be suicide (or something like it) to try to "damage the company's viability" for which one works. Good employees want the company to prosper. But either you or the people you work for are more than likely going to face increased taxes. Your company might well be able to absorb that burden more easily than you. 

The issue about "97" is adding taxes to larger company's in an attempt to raise needed revenue for the the needs of the state. It's not "a given" that those increases would necessarly have to be passed on to consumers. 
Or, the state could raise taxes on individuals for the needed revenue. 
Or the state could cut services and not raise any taxes. 

We have choices. Personally I don't like any ballot measures and think our legislature should slug it out in the halls of the captiol until they reach a reasonable compromise. 

I'll vote no on "97", but wonder just how many servicies the State can cut until we become a backwater with lousy schools, fewer OSP officers, children services that are neglected, and other needed services cut or dismantled. 

No easy answers. We all need to stay alert, read all we can from good and reliable sources, and remember to vote. 

Citizenship is not easy.

Here is where the bullshit meets the road.  The State is NOT in dire need of more revenue, except in two areas.  To cover the atrocities of the promises made to PERS recipients, and to fund the failing Obamacare.  The PERS recipients are the ones who need to suck it up and accept realistic changes to their retirements, and Obamacare needs to wither and die.  Oregon State Government has never had MORE money than they get right now, so go sell your bullshit elsewhere.
Lars Larson in the flesh.
Reply
#18
(09-19-2016, 12:24 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(09-19-2016, 12:18 PM)Hugo Wrote:
(09-19-2016, 08:41 AM)Wonky3 Wrote:
(09-19-2016, 06:11 AM)Hugo Wrote:
(09-18-2016, 08:09 PM)GPnative Wrote: Good read, clearly 97 is a bad idea, so count on Oregon voters to pass it.

The two comments below yours are a good indication of that. Hard to believe anyone can be that stupid, but the tactic of driving a wedge between Employers and Employees through Jealousy and Envy has been very successful.  If I were to follow their train of thought, I should HATE my employer, and be actively trying to damage the company's viability?  Isn't that suicide?

Of course it would be suicide (or something like it) to try to "damage the company's viability" for which one works. Good employees want the company to prosper. But either you or the people you work for are more than likely going to face increased taxes. Your company might well be able to absorb that burden more easily than you. 

The issue about "97" is adding taxes to larger company's in an attempt to raise needed revenue for the the needs of the state. It's not "a given" that those increases would necessarly have to be passed on to consumers. 
Or, the state could raise taxes on individuals for the needed revenue. 
Or the state could cut services and not raise any taxes. 

We have choices. Personally I don't like any ballot measures and think our legislature should slug it out in the halls of the captiol until they reach a reasonable compromise. 

I'll vote no on "97", but wonder just how many servicies the State can cut until we become a backwater with lousy schools, fewer OSP officers, children services that are neglected, and other needed services cut or dismantled. 

No easy answers. We all need to stay alert, read all we can from good and reliable sources, and remember to vote. 

Citizenship is not easy.

Here is where the bullshit meets the road.  The State is NOT in dire need of more revenue, except in two areas.  To cover the atrocities of the promises made to PERS recipients, and to fund the failing Obamacare.  The PERS recipients are the ones who need to suck it up and accept realistic changes to their retirements, and Obamacare needs to wither and die.  Oregon State Government has never had MORE money than they get right now, so go sell your bullshit elsewhere.
Lars Larson in the flesh.

Never listen to him.  Is he any good?
Reply
#19
You know it's a bad idea when even the fish wrapper Oregonian calls it a hidden sales tax on every person in oregon, rich or poor.

Also, according to the state of oregon's own nonpartisan study, if the measure passes it will cost a typical household more than $600/yr.
Reply
#20
(09-19-2016, 12:59 PM)Hugo Wrote:
(09-19-2016, 12:24 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(09-19-2016, 12:18 PM)Hugo Wrote:
(09-19-2016, 08:41 AM)Wonky3 Wrote:
(09-19-2016, 06:11 AM)Hugo Wrote: The two comments below yours are a good indication of that. Hard to believe anyone can be that stupid, but the tactic of driving a wedge between Employers and Employees through Jealousy and Envy has been very successful.  If I were to follow their train of thought, I should HATE my employer, and be actively trying to damage the company's viability?  Isn't that suicide?

Of course it would be suicide (or something like it) to try to "damage the company's viability" for which one works. Good employees want the company to prosper. But either you or the people you work for are more than likely going to face increased taxes. Your company might well be able to absorb that burden more easily than you. 

The issue about "97" is adding taxes to larger company's in an attempt to raise needed revenue for the the needs of the state. It's not "a given" that those increases would necessarly have to be passed on to consumers. 
Or, the state could raise taxes on individuals for the needed revenue. 
Or the state could cut services and not raise any taxes. 

We have choices. Personally I don't like any ballot measures and think our legislature should slug it out in the halls of the captiol until they reach a reasonable compromise. 

I'll vote no on "97", but wonder just how many servicies the State can cut until we become a backwater with lousy schools, fewer OSP officers, children services that are neglected, and other needed services cut or dismantled. 

No easy answers. We all need to stay alert, read all we can from good and reliable sources, and remember to vote. 

Citizenship is not easy.

Here is where the bullshit meets the road.  The State is NOT in dire need of more revenue, except in two areas.  To cover the atrocities of the promises made to PERS recipients, and to fund the failing Obamacare.  The PERS recipients are the ones who need to suck it up and accept realistic changes to their retirements, and Obamacare needs to wither and die.  Oregon State Government has never had MORE money than they get right now, so go sell your bullshit elsewhere.
Lars Larson in the flesh.

Never listen to him.  Is he any good?

Sure OK Then. You know I haven't looked in to this much but scanning over your posts I see that anyone who disagrees with you is either ignorant or stupid.
That's not exclusively how right wingers act but it seems to be the norm for the deplorable onesLaughing
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)