Note that "help the homeless" and "reduce homelessness" are two different goals and they are often at odds with each other.
Seattle passes smaller ‘head tax’ on big companies after impassioned debate
51–60 of 103 posts
Re: Seattle passes smaller ‘head tax’ on big companies after impassioned debate
#52The amount of dumb things I hear coming out of Seattle lately blows my mind. Every other city that wears it's "progressive"-ness on its sleeve should take a wait and see approach to what Seattle does, so that when these terrible policies do nothing to fix their problems and exacerbate others (like blaming tech companies for housing shortages in SF) they can hopefully avoid it.
Re: Seattle passes smaller ‘head tax’ on big companies after impassioned debate
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the long term, I can’t see how the east side could possibly fail to attract more businesses. Growth is already increasing in those areas, and there’s so much room for more. The quality of life is also arguably better over there. The more anti-business Seattle is becoming can only hasten this.
The east side is the San Jose of the Seattle area. It isn't hip and happening like the city is. Ya, the rent is cheaper (though not much anymore), houses are bigger, it has a very nice clean suburban feel, you don't trip over needles or homeless people, but many young people find the east side to be too boring. Course, Microsoft has a bunch of buses they use to move engineers from Seattle to Redmond, but like Google…
Yeah, that's a fair point. It is certainly less edgy than downtown Seattle. That said, living in Seattle and commuting east is far more doable than the other way around (although that could be subject to change). I also imagine that the east side is more desirable to employees with families, though I have no idea how much of the workforce that actually makes up.
Preferences aside though, the one thing the east has that Seattle City doesn't is abundant space.
Re: Seattle passes smaller ‘head tax’ on big companies after impassioned debate
#54So let me see if I understand this. Companies hire people, they become successful and make their employeees successful (at least their non warehouse, non call center employees) making the city and population at large successful; growing the economy. For that good they get taxed more? It’s no wonder AMZ for one is looking for an HQ2 location. I know it makes people feel good, but honestly, the only answer to homelessn…
There's not a good way to get more revenue to cover the infrastructure needed as companies hire more employees. We don't have income taxes here. If we did, as you hire an employee you'd get more revenue to cover the fractional cost of bus service, etc. A head tax is a way to do that. Are you against income taxes? They could accomplish the same thing.
Re: Seattle passes smaller ‘head tax’ on big companies after impassioned debate
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where exactly do you expect business to go?
In the case of Seattle, Kirkland and Bellevue are host to quite a few small and large tech companies already. The office space is plentiful and cheap on this side of Lake Washington, and there is less of a worry of being hit with poorly planned taxes and regulations that Seattle is, at this point, infamous for enacting. With the way the housing market is going, and the upcoming King County property tax hike, I wouldn…
redmond has a head tax, they seem to be doing okay. maybe that microsoft company will move somewhere else. /s
Re: Seattle passes smaller ‘head tax’ on big companies after impassioned debate
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the case of Seattle, Kirkland and Bellevue are host to quite a few small and large tech companies already. The office space is plentiful and cheap on this side of Lake Washington, and there is less of a worry of being hit with poorly planned taxes and regulations that Seattle is, at this point, infamous for enacting. With the way the housing market is going, and the upcoming King County property tax hike, I wouldn…
The north and east side are the worst places to live in the Seattle area, however, if you are young and without a family. It is very much like comparing San Jose to San Francisco (I say this living in Bellevue and having grown up in Bothell).
i think the east side is the best place to live, the worst place is sodo.
Re: Seattle passes smaller ‘head tax’ on big companies after impassioned debate
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the case of Seattle, Kirkland and Bellevue are host to quite a few small and large tech companies already. The office space is plentiful and cheap on this side of Lake Washington, and there is less of a worry of being hit with poorly planned taxes and regulations that Seattle is, at this point, infamous for enacting. With the way the housing market is going, and the upcoming King County property tax hike, I wouldn…
90% agree (homes don't look to cheap on the east side). I was recently team matching with google for the seattle area and my girlfriend and I were more interested in the kirkland office over fremont/soon to be SLU because of this.
you don't want to work in downtown seattle for google because of a 275 dollar tax? that's ridiculous. google probably doesn't even have any software engineers working for less than a 100k, and you think about $25 / month?
Re: Seattle passes smaller ‘head tax’ on big companies after impassioned debate
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
Going to Vancouver with its far higher taxes to protest a $20m tax on a $xxxbillion company seems like a poor idea to me. Local government need not grovel to those that take advantage of its amenities to attract talent.
The cost of living is less in Vancouver than Seattle, and by extension salaries are lower. This is what has been moving tech companies further up the west coast, so yes it does make perfect business sense. You also have things perfectly backwards. These companies are what is driving growth in Seattle, not the other way around. These companies are responsible for more than doubling local government revenue in the past…
except housing is about the same as seattle, with much much lower salaries. moving to vancouver doesn't make sense in terms of finances.
Re: Seattle passes smaller ‘head tax’ on big companies after impassioned debate
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where exactly do you expect business to go?
If I knew I'd be moving there. The only thing keeping my friends and I in the bay area are each other and the lack of a clear alternative. If another locations starts to get serious traction I'd expect a phase transition.
in my experience, 90+% of software companies with 100 people have an office in seattle, every job i've looked for for years has an office here.
Re: Seattle passes smaller ‘head tax’ on big companies after impassioned debate
#60This seems a little silly - it's an irritation, but it's not big enough to amount to anything really. If anything, it hurts lower-end positions more than any other, since it's a flat head tax. If you're counting the beans closely, it starts to make sense to hire 9 people with the salary you might have allotted to 10, and so forth. All this would really seem to do is piss off Amazon and Microsoft and the other big pla…
It certainly seems negligible, but it's still makes it more expensive to employ people. Seems like this kind of stuff helps raise the unemployment rate.