Seattle Socialists Strangle Golden Goose

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

Which failed policy?

Ah. My bad. I was under the assumption you had read the thread. Carry on. Everyone's a whiner.

Amazon, Starbucks and 50+ businesses pledge money to repeal Seattle head tax
http://q13fox.com/2018/05/23/amazon-sta ... -head-tax/

Even Amazon is an entitled whiner, who should just move to wherever Amazon goes . . . oh, wait . . . that makes no sense.
Back to the dumb idea drawing board.

It seems if they have money to spend on repealing the head tax, that means they have money to spend on the head tax, no?

[DBTrek]

It seems if they have money to spend on repealing the head tax, that means they have money to spend on the head tax, no?

I’ll just let that stand as both a testament to your worldview and a shining example of entitlement thinking.

“If they have money to spend for their interests then clearly they have money for us to seize and spend on our interests”

[DBTrek]

Hugo House first occupied a 16,206-square-foot (1,505.6 m2) Victorian house originally built in 1902. Previous occupants of the building included New City Theater and before that the Bonney-Watson mortuary and funeral home.

In addition to administrative offices, the House included:

an 88/150 theater
a cabaret stage and cafe
three multipurpose rooms
a conference room
an art gallery
private meeting spaces
In June 2016, the organization moved to a temporary space adjacent to the Frye Art Museum on First Hill. The original house on Capitol Hill was razed and replaced with a six-story residential building that will also house the Hugo House beginning in 2018.

You ever been to the original Hugo House? Was a really awesome place.



And then



Keep up the campaigning, DB, you're going to win.

Liberals jack our major employers for “affordable housing”, then act victimized when their hipster house is replaced by 6-story apartments.

It’s a lesson in irony that they never learn, and the rest of us pay the costs for. Progressivism- not even once.

[Kath]

Which failed policy?

Ah. My bad. I was under the assumption you had read the thread. Carry on. Everyone's a whiner.

I read the thread.

Still not seeing the problem.

Using taxpayer money in the most inefficient and ineffective way possible is a good thing? They spend millions upon millions to get more homeless people and this is a good thing?

You're literally defending people who use other people's money to make a problem worse.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

It seems if they have money to spend on repealing the head tax, that means they have money to spend on the head tax, no?

I’ll just let that stand as both a testament to your worldview and a shining example of entitlement thinking.

“If they have money to spend for their interests then clearly they have money for us to seize and spend on our interests”

I thought the problem was about golden geese, and their strangulation, not about the morality of a tax.

If you just want to say 'tax is theft,' then just title the thread, "Geese doing fine, but, by the way, tax is theft."

/shrug

[TheReal_ND]

Anti Hipster is code for Anti White

[DBTrek]

It seems if they have money to spend on repealing the head tax, that means they have money to spend on the head tax, no?

Again,

“If they have money to spend for their interests then clearly they have money for us to seize and spend on our interests”


That’s what you believe. Own it. Stop deflecting. Stop running from what you are. Embrace your entitled whiner-ism.

[Kath]

I thought the problem was about golden geese, and their strangulation, not about the morality of a tax.

If you just want to say 'tax is theft,' then just title the thread, "Geese doing fine, but, by the way, tax is theft."

/shrug

If the taxes IMPROVE the situation the money was intended to fix, you'll get no complaint from me. The money was used to make the problem worse. They could have kept the situation as is without spending any money. Is this hard to understand?

Choices:

1. We can keep our situation as is for free
2. We can make our situation worse for millions.


Why is choice 2 the better option, in your opinion?

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

Ah. My bad. I was under the assumption you had read the thread. Carry on. Everyone's a whiner.

I read the thread.

Still not seeing the problem.

Using taxpayer money in the most inefficient and ineffective way possible is a good thing? They spend millions upon millions to get more homeless people and this is a good thing?

You're literally defending people who use other people's money to make a problem worse.

This is why I asked "which failure."

I was talking about whether or not a head tax was a proven failure vis chasing out the job creators, which hasn't happened yet, and, even if it did, Seattle ain't some Comp'ny Town built from the ground up by Amazon. She's a proud and beautiful burg that pre-dates Amazon, and I am sure would survive the break up.

Shit's by the door in a box marked Bezos.

[jediuser598]

Liberals jack our major employers for “affordable housing”, then act victimized when their hipster house is replaced by 6-story apartments.

It’s a lesson in irony that they never learn, and the rest of us pay the costs for. Progressivism- not even once.

I wish artists charged more for their work. The cost of having to remind tech workers that they're human is going up.

Then again there is heroin, cocaine and other drugs. Probably cheaper than retaining/maintaining a city's artistic soul.