Jake's Unpopular Opinion Hour
So, I think we should vote No on Seattle Proposition 1.
First of all, let's address the logic of their statement. This is the tax to support the Pike Place Market revisions and improvements.
"Proposition 1 is a one-time, 6 year investment in our market"
Then, on the same flyer it says "This is a timely investment in an institution that has repaid earlier support many times in creation of small-business opportunities".
Wait, earlier support? What happened to the one-time? Do we really believe there will never be a request for further revisions? Or do they hope by the time further revisions are requested, we'll have forgotten about this request.
Which brings me to the very popular "extension of levies" technique that is used so often in Seattle politics. When this levy is up, they will ask for a renewal for new purpose, and will say "No new taxes, just an extension of the levy"...this they have done several time, as we all know. You instantiate a levy by promising it to be a fixed amount of time, and then extend it by claiming it is "no new taxes". You can bet that when this levy is up, something new will come up to renew it.
Next point, there is no reason to create a new tax to support this. We can do it out of current funds. The stadiums have taught us that things can be built, fixed, and maintained without voter approval, sometimes in direct defiance of voters. There is no reason they can't perform these repairs out of the current tax base. This is basically a new tax using an emotional icon as the bait. Schools and historic institutions are prime candidates for opening wallets, and that's what they are doing.
For instance, let's say the public restoration budget for Seattle is 100 dollars a person, and Pike Place Market is on the block for restoration.
They can reduce the public restoration budget by 42 dollars a person, to 58 dollars, put that 42 dollars in some other area (let's call it the slush fund), and then put on the ballot an initiative for 42 dollars a person for restoration of Pike Place.
The total restoration budget is returned to 100 dollars, and the slush fund is increased by 42 dollars, and they will claim the extra tax is going to the restoration fund. Well, that would be true, except that money is fungible, and politicians know this. When ever you want to raise taxes, aim the taxes to some purpose that people are sympathetic to, and then drain the taxes out of that reservoir.
So, to reiterate, No on Prop 1. It's an emotional purse grab, using lies and dirty techniques.
That said, also vote yes on initiative 1000....because, duh!
First of all, let's address the logic of their statement. This is the tax to support the Pike Place Market revisions and improvements.
"Proposition 1 is a one-time, 6 year investment in our market"
Then, on the same flyer it says "This is a timely investment in an institution that has repaid earlier support many times in creation of small-business opportunities".
Wait, earlier support? What happened to the one-time? Do we really believe there will never be a request for further revisions? Or do they hope by the time further revisions are requested, we'll have forgotten about this request.
Which brings me to the very popular "extension of levies" technique that is used so often in Seattle politics. When this levy is up, they will ask for a renewal for new purpose, and will say "No new taxes, just an extension of the levy"...this they have done several time, as we all know. You instantiate a levy by promising it to be a fixed amount of time, and then extend it by claiming it is "no new taxes". You can bet that when this levy is up, something new will come up to renew it.
Next point, there is no reason to create a new tax to support this. We can do it out of current funds. The stadiums have taught us that things can be built, fixed, and maintained without voter approval, sometimes in direct defiance of voters. There is no reason they can't perform these repairs out of the current tax base. This is basically a new tax using an emotional icon as the bait. Schools and historic institutions are prime candidates for opening wallets, and that's what they are doing.
For instance, let's say the public restoration budget for Seattle is 100 dollars a person, and Pike Place Market is on the block for restoration.
They can reduce the public restoration budget by 42 dollars a person, to 58 dollars, put that 42 dollars in some other area (let's call it the slush fund), and then put on the ballot an initiative for 42 dollars a person for restoration of Pike Place.
The total restoration budget is returned to 100 dollars, and the slush fund is increased by 42 dollars, and they will claim the extra tax is going to the restoration fund. Well, that would be true, except that money is fungible, and politicians know this. When ever you want to raise taxes, aim the taxes to some purpose that people are sympathetic to, and then drain the taxes out of that reservoir.
So, to reiterate, No on Prop 1. It's an emotional purse grab, using lies and dirty techniques.
That said, also vote yes on initiative 1000....because, duh!