Comments on: ‘Head tax’ and parking tax for transit? Councilmember Licata pitches 34th District Democrats on Wednesday

By: redblack

redblack — Thu, 10 Jul 2014 18:44:03 +0000

so sales tax is considered “taxed up the yin-yang?” sure, we have extra taxes on car tabs in the city. we have more infrastructure to support. and we pay an extra pittance on the state sales tax, which goes to olympia for disbursement. what other city taxes apply?
.
unless you’re self-employed – and those who are are a minority – you have it pretty cheap as far as seattle taxes go. and city taxes don’t do much to fuel county services like metro, for example.
.
a modest and progressive city income tax for those who aren’t self-employed would level the field a bit, if tax fairness is your concern.

By: jim

jim — Thu, 10 Jul 2014 18:22:00 +0000

Wouldn’t a tax on developers just increase the cost of a house or rent?

By: WestofJunction

WestofJunction — Thu, 10 Jul 2014 12:56:54 +0000

Why not a tax on developers?

By: WSince86

WSince86 — Thu, 10 Jul 2014 05:40:52 +0000

Before Scuba. You crack me up!

By: Elise

Elise — Thu, 10 Jul 2014 00:27:12 +0000

Here we go again! The Seattle City Council is on a rampage to drive small businesses out of the city. First they ram the highest minimum wage in the country down our throats and now they want to tax us for the employees we hire. When will it stop?

By: wetone

wetone — Wed, 09 Jul 2014 22:32:13 +0000

onion, good comment, I agree Licata, Sawant and others want to hit the businesses as it is much easier for them to collect from without any voting involved. Forcing businesses to be the ones to raise their prices and pay their new taxes along with keeping current on more paper work. Just one more reason for small business to leave the area. If only these people would work this hard on their cost overrun issues and bad management of city/state projects we wouldn’t need these constant tax increases. But instead they will let the city infrastructure fall apart, cut bus service, not improve our police department and so much more until they can black mail us for more money instead of running a tight ship and making better choices on their no worry spending/cost overrun mentality

By: wetone

wetone — Wed, 09 Jul 2014 21:05:45 +0000

By: Before Scuba

Before Scuba — Wed, 09 Jul 2014 19:51:40 +0000

Posting before Scuba Frog! :)

By: onion

onion — Wed, 09 Jul 2014 19:28:24 +0000

I rarely use transit (working either at home or odd hours on the far east side), but I support it nonetheless because I believe it reduces traffic snarls and gridlock even for people who need to drive their own cars. Having said that, I think all of the proposed solutions are appropriate — including higher fares, more efficient operations, less generous labor contracts, and additional tax revenue. Since the state and regional governments won’t come to the rescue, then additional local revenue is needed.

I favor the current majority proposal, which is a modest uptick in the sales tax, rather than Licata and Sawant’s proposed options, because parking is too narrow a target and the increased head tax puts the burden on small businesses, which already need to absorb increases in the minimum wage.
As usual, Licata and Sawant believe that hitting businesses is the solution to all revenue problems. They can’t be voted out of office soon enough.

By: sittingbird

sittingbird — Wed, 09 Jul 2014 18:37:56 +0000

We can’t raise fares, it will hurt the poor.

By: Jim

Jim — Wed, 09 Jul 2014 18:37:54 +0000

My sense is that the public transportation issue in Seattle is not so much about moving commuters to and from work as it is about redistributing money to people who cannot afford cars.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/07/07/why-cars-remain-so-appealing-even-in-cities-with-decent-public-transit/

By: Gene

Gene — Wed, 09 Jul 2014 18:25:31 +0000

Yes a fare increase is scheduled for next year- how about increasing it to much closer to what it actually costs to ride?
Discounts for students & low income- fine- but bring the fare closer to reality.
Villagegreen- a state income tax has been talked about for years & years & years- doubt it will happen in my lifetime.
I think the complaining is more about accountability – waste.
Joe – so glad you can park at your office for $8-9 a day- many are not so fortunate. Many also just don’t want the hassle of driving- but the bus fares have got to come closer to what it actually costs to ride. It’s all about choices- if you commute & decide to drive you’re choosing to tolerate traffic, pay for gas & pay for parking- there’s also the convenience factor that goes into that choice . If you decide to take transit then a realistic fare must be part of THAT choice.

By: Rick

Rick — Wed, 09 Jul 2014 18:23:58 +0000

Love the “you people”.

By: Villagegreen

Villagegreen — Wed, 09 Jul 2014 17:36:42 +0000

You people are hilarious. When you’re bitching about paying taxes for basic services like bus service I can’t wait to see how you freak out about a state income tax when it’s implemented. The current back-*ss-wards tax system in this state is not sustainable, as we’re now seeing.

By: timing

timing — Wed, 09 Jul 2014 17:34:59 +0000

The issue with metro is the money tied up in executive salaries, union contracts and no oversight into this government organization. Until people stop blindly defending them and their actions the problem will continue to grow with the riders and region suffering.

“Question Authority”? I say “Question Metro!”