|
Thanatosian posted:Unfortunately, there are actually Republicans in Western Washington; we keep trying to drive them into the sea, but the tunnel-digging keeps getting in the way. And in case you don't know anything about Washington State: the state House has a Democratic majority, but the Senate is controlled by Republicans. Given that we have a strong bicameral system, bills need to be passed by both houses of the Legislature in order to become law. Of course, the only reason the republicans have control right now is that a "democrat" from Redmond decided to switch allegiance and hand control of a nearly-balanced senate to the other party. Rodney Tom is not a popular guy these days, and his decision not to run for reelection even robbed the dems of the catharsis of running him out on his rear end.
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 17:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 08:09 |
|
|
Thanatosian posted:Unfortunately, there are actually Republicans in Western Washington; we keep trying to drive them into the sea, but the tunnel-digging keeps getting in the way. And in case you don't know anything about Washington State: the state House has a Democratic majority, but the Senate is controlled by Republicans. Given that we have a strong bicameral system, bills need to be passed by both houses of the Legislature in order to become law. It's only controlled by Republicans due to a coalition with Democrats. Another side point which should probably be noted is that many of the legislative districts that voted No on this transport proposition are still represented by Democrats, not Republicans. quote:And yes, the Democrats in the state Legislature are largely completely loving worthless, which would be the whole point of a referendum like that: it would force them to play loving hardball, instead of continually bringing a wiffle bat to a gun fight. See, the equivalent to that referendum is basically what happens in the EU - regions that are poor can't/don't get aid and regions that are rich gain a lot more, with little incentive for the latter to help the former (at least until poo poo hits the fan but that's usually a long way down the line). And again, the metric of "gives the state taxes therefore is beneficial" is flawed - there are plenty of activities that generate low/no taxes but are still beneficial to the people of a state or region. For example, if people in Western Washington/Seattle rely significantly on agriculture from Eastern Washington, then that's something that would mess with Western Washington if you cut the Eastern Washington road fund.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 18:01
|
|
|
computer parts posted:It's only controlled by Republicans due to a coalition with Democrats. As to the agriculture issue, something tells me that a 50% increase in state spending in King County would more than make up for the price of apples going up a quarter a pound. And what we're doing right now is nothing but the rich counties "helping" the poor counties. And I wouldn't have a problem with that (hell, I'm a socialist, I'm generally a big fan of the idea), if it weren't the legislators from the poor counties completely loving over the rich counties in the name of hating the government whose largesse they're living off of.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 18:10
|
|
|
Thanatosian posted:
If you can't get your goods to market it doesn't mean poo poo. Maybe you'll shift to another food supplier but all that does is say "yeah you're right paying for roads to Eastern Washington actually did help Western Washington". quote:And what we're doing right now is nothing but the rich counties "helping" the poor counties. Yeah, and what I'm saying is that the opposite is not what you want.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 18:12
|
|
|
computer parts posted:If you can't get your goods to market it doesn't mean poo poo. Maybe you'll shift to another food supplier but all that does is say "yeah you're right paying for roads to Eastern Washington actually did help Western Washington". I'm not saying it wouldn't hurt Western Washington; it would just hurt Eastern Washington way, way, way more. And the benefits Western Washington (especially King County) would reap from it at the very least greatly mitigate the damage, and probably would more than make up for it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 18:33
|
|
|
Thanatosian posted:I'm not saying it wouldn't hurt Western Washington; it would just hurt Eastern Washington way, way, way more. And the benefits Western Washington (especially King County) would reap from it at the very least greatly mitigate the damage, and probably would more than make up for it. Yeah, and I'm saying you don't really want to do that unless you want to emulate the EU.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 18:37
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Yeah, and I'm saying you don't really want to do that unless you want to emulate the EU.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 18:45
|
|
|
Thanatosian posted:Low poverty rates, cheap universal healthcare, and a belief that government and infrastructure are good? I'm in. Unless you happen to be in Greece.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 18:47
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Unless you happen to be in Greece. Last I checked, Greece wasn't trying to take healthcare or public transportation away from the other countries in the EU.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 18:53
|
|
|
Thanatosian posted:Last I checked, Greece wasn't trying to take healthcare or public transportation away from the other countries in the EU. No, but other parts of the EU are forcing them to "cut costs" because they don't generate enough tax revenue. This sounds familiar to something else I heard recently.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 18:55
|
|
|
computer parts posted:No, but other parts of the EU are forcing them to "cut costs" because they don't generate enough tax revenue. The idea isn't "hey, you guys aren't bringing enough money in, you need to tighten your belts!" The idea is "you can either be 'bootstrapping, independent fiscal conservatives who don't need no durn gubment' or live off of our charity, not both."
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 19:01
|
|
|
Thanatosian posted:I honestly don't give a poo poo about Eastern Washington's tax revenue generation; cutting state spending in counties until the revenue is equalized is just a more easily saleable way to punish them for voting for poo poo like I-695, every Tim Eyman initiative that shows up on the ballot, and fuckstains that won't let Western Washington localities establish their own taxes in order to provide services. It's not saleable at all though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 19:03
|
|
|
computer parts posted:It's not saleable at all though. Call it the "tax equalization initiative of 2014." Proclaim that it's the solution to all of your tax money constantly going to those welfare queens in Seattle. At the very least it will put some Republican legislators in a very uncomfortable position.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 19:25
|
|
|
Thanatosian posted:I honestly don't give a poo poo about Eastern Washington's tax revenue generation; cutting state spending in counties until the revenue is equalized is just a more easily saleable way to punish them for voting for poo poo like I-695, every Tim Eyman initiative that shows up on the ballot, and fuckstains that won't let Western Washington localities establish their own taxes in order to provide services. The idea isn't "hey, you guys aren't bringing enough money in, you need to tighten your belts!" The idea is "you can either be 'bootstrapping, independent fiscal conservatives who don't need no durn gubment' or live off of our charity, not both." Completely agreed. There's no good reason that urbanites need to be on the defensive all the time - constantly fending off tax raids from country conservatives and simply holding the line on essential services. What we need is a willingness to expose the reality of the situation - these so-called "independents" are living off the public dole. And this is an issue that certainly extends beyond Western Washington. All over the country, progressive urban centers fund the inefficient conservative backwaters that declaim public spending while being first in line at the pork barrel. It's well past time that liberals went on the offensive about this sort of issue. If country conservatives want to experience small government independence, their hypocrisy should be the first thing to dry up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 19:45
|
|
|
Laughing at the thought of someone from western WA going on any kind of offensive. We'll just passive aggressively pass some law saying that we really don't appreciate getting our services cut.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 19:51
|
|
|
Thanatosian posted:Call it the "tax equalization initiative of 2014." Proclaim that it's the solution to all of your tax money constantly going to those welfare queens in Seattle. At the very least it will put some Republican legislators in a very uncomfortable position. The fact is that tax money pouring across county lines to go fund folks who refuse to tax themselves has terrible optics for the GOP. It calls into question their entire charade about being independent. People don't like the idea of their tax dollars going to hypocrites that simply refuse to pay for their own services. And I think the best way to use it would be as a rider for any Eyman funding slash/tax cut that gets attempted - it'd leave conservatives in the impossible position of arguing that their extra funding needs to be protected while they attack funding that goes to the people supporting them. edit: Fundamentally, "Why should my tax money go to people who simply refuse to tax themselves" is a powerful question, and it taps into the same kind of self-interested egotism that the GOP motivates their base with. I don't think that the GOP is going to have a lot of luck bringing out urban moderates to defend that kind of special relationship. And like I said, this is a problem that extends beyond the county level; Washington as a whole picks up only $.88 on the dollar in federal funding/federal taxation - despite massive deficit spending on the part of the fed. Oregon and California are in the same boat. The entire West Coast is being squeezed for funding by the states that have the lowest tax rates in the country. Kaal fucked around with this message at 20:21 on Apr 25, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 19:53
|
|
|
Kaal posted:The fact is that tax money pouring across county lines to go fund folks who refuse to tax themselves has terrible optics for the GOP. It calls into question their entire charade about being independent. People don't like the idea of their tax dollars going to hypocrites that simply refuse to pay for their own services. And I think the best way to use it would be as a rider for any Eyman funding slash/tax cut that gets attempted - it'd leave conservatives in the impossible position of arguing that their extra funding needs to be protected while they attack funding that goes to the people supporting them. You can't attach riders to other people's initiatives.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 19:54
|
|
|
oxbrain posted:You can't attach riders to other people's initiatives. You can write an initiative that is contingent upon another initiative passing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 19:56
|
|
|
Thanatosian posted:I honestly don't give a poo poo about Eastern Washington's tax revenue generation; cutting state spending in counties until the revenue is equalized is just a more easily saleable way to punish them for voting for poo poo like I-695, every Tim Eyman initiative that shows up on the ballot, and fuckstains that won't let Western Washington localities establish their own taxes in order to provide services. But, again, while Eastern Washington voted for it, their numbers aren't enough to move the needle on their own without a pantload of votes from Federal Way or Issaquah or Arlington or whatever. We, as a state, hosed ourselves over, even if Seattle itself tried to save us from ourselves.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 20:07
|
|
|
This is possibly the most biased piece of poo poo headline i've ever seen. http://www.komonews.com/news/local/King-Co-Metro-releases-bus-hit-list-after-Prop-1-failure-256720111.html I was feeling bad for komo after the helicopter crash but i'm pretty mad right now.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 20:13
|
|
|
Thanatosian posted:Call it the "tax equalization initiative of 2014." Proclaim that it's the solution to all of your tax money constantly going to those welfare queens in Seattle. At the very least it will put some Republican legislators in a very uncomfortable position. Yeah and the only people that will benefit from it are the people who fundamentally disagree with the concept of welfare queens. I get that you're doing a "lol we'll just trick those dirty rural types into loving themselves" thing but it seriously wouldn't pass even if they were too dumb to realize what the ramifications of the law would be.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 20:23
|
|
|
Hell, paying for a bunch of billboards in these welfare counties showing how much they take would be rather amusing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 20:32
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:Hell, paying for a bunch of billboards in these welfare counties showing how much they take would be rather amusing. It'd be interesting to see that sort of information publicly disseminated, that's for sure. According to The Stranger, King County schools effectively lost $1 billion in funding in 2008 because that money was being diverted to prop up rural conservatives. And Washington State as a whole lost out on $3.4 billion in federal taxes in 2005 - that money given to red states that refuse to pay for their own services. That's a lot of bake sales. http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/welfare-state/Content?oid=6686284 http://taxfoundation.org/article/federal-taxes-paid-vs-federal-spending-received-state-1981-2005 Kaal fucked around with this message at 20:50 on Apr 25, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 20:44
|
|
|
Kaal posted:You can write an initiative that is contingent upon another initiative passing. And who's going to pay the couple hundred thousand needed for each of these initiatives? You'd be better off passing a progressive initiative of your own.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 20:45
|
|
|
You know you're in a PNW thread when even the dark revanchist fantasies are passive-aggressive. Equalizing funding between counties or legislative districts or w/e is all nice and pat until you have to clean up the Oso landslide.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 03:33
|
|
|
Gerund posted:You know you're in a PNW thread when even the dark revanchist fantasies are passive-aggressive. Equalizing funding between counties or legislative districts or w/e is all nice and pat until you have to clean up the Oso landslide. That's what FEMA is for.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 04:14
|
|
|
Gerund posted:You know you're in a PNW thread when even the dark revanchist fantasies are passive-aggressive. Equalizing funding between counties or legislative districts or w/e is all nice and pat until you have to clean up the Oso landslide. And the latest I've heard on that front is that the Oso and Darrington residents resent the presence of FEMA and the rest of the "gubbmint" in their communities, preferring instead to "take care of their own." Remember, this is the same area of Snohomish County that tried to break off into "Freedom County" not too long ago.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 06:58
|
|
|
$15 is seeming a bit precarious, and I'm thinking it will be gutted ($15/hr, minus the cost of benefits) if passed at all. Is anyone else around here more hopeful?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 18:34
|
|
|
OwlBot 2000 posted:$15 is seeming a bit precarious, and I'm thinking it will be gutted ($15/hr, minus the cost of benefits) if passed at all. Is anyone else around here more hopeful? I'd wait until after mid-May for the protests to run their course before making any pronouncements. The 'compromise' position has yet to be attacked in the public sphere, and its up to the progressive movement to land the public consensus on the most beneficial option past the roadblocks.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 18:54
|
|
|
Min wage would be over 20 bucks now if it hadn't been crippled by Reagan. If we can't even get 15 then burn the system down.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 19:05
|
|
|
The protests seem much smaller than those in 2013 and the polls show that business propaganda is paying off. I think the longer we wait the more time business groups have to regroup after being blindsided by Kshama's election and SeaTac wage.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 19:28
|
|
|
OwlBot 2000 posted:The protests seem much smaller than those in 2013 and the polls show that business propaganda is paying off. I think the longer we wait the more time business groups have to regroup after being blindsided by Kshama's election and SeaTac wage. The protests haven't happened yet. 15Now just finished its pre-event conference yesterday for the week of protests that begins next month.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 20:06
|
|
|
Oregon is closing up shop on their own ACA healthcare exchange and using the federal system now. That's a cool $248 million from the state budget just wasted. http://www.oregonlive.com/health/index.ssf/2014/04/cover_oregon_after_spending_24.html
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2014 04:29
|
|
|
Bucket Joneses posted:Oregon is closing up shop on their own ACA healthcare exchange and using the federal system now. That's a cool $248 million from the state budget just wasted. All that money, including the money that will spent shifting us over to the federal system, comes from a federal grant.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2014 07:02
|
|
|
Kaal posted:All that money, including the money that will spent shifting us over to the federal system, comes from a federal grant. It's about time we got to waste some federal funds.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2014 08:08
|
|
|
It mostly went to Oracle, which is a Bay Area based company. The only money that stayed in state was the hotel bill of the overpriced and ultimately useless contractors.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2014 20:30
|
|
|
What was the reason we didn't just go with the federal exchange in the first place? I've never really understood why we needed to pay contractors to make something that already existed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2014 20:36
|
|
|
Ernie Muppari posted:What was the reason we didn't just go with the federal exchange in the first place? I've never really understood why we needed to pay contractors to make something that already existed. State-based websites can be more efficient because all of the regulations for that specific state would limit the forms of the insurance available to members of that state. It 'prevents' people from other states crossing borders and getting insurance that would be invalid for them in the future. The federal exchange is a replacement of a state exchange, it does everything the state exchange would do but also filters people into their home state to buy their home state's insurance.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2014 21:08
|
|
|
It's also probably a concession to Republicans who think any benefit from the federal level is tantamount to socialism and communism.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2014 21:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 08:09 |
|
|
mod sassinator posted:It's also probably a concession to Republicans who think any benefit from the federal level is tantamount to socialism and communism. Its actually a Very Important Thing to keep state citizens in their own state-run exchanges. Having the insurance crossing the borders you'd have the same issues that result in a Delaware post box being the mailing address of 80% of american corporations.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2014 21:13
|
|