Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Seattle passes smaller ‘head tax’ on big companies after impassioned debate

geekwire.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 103 posts

Re: Seattle passes smaller ‘head tax’ on big companies after impassioned debate

#91

Post by AmericanChopper »

taurath wrote: post #90
AmericanChopper wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the industry is going to pick up and leave Seattle, but it undoubtably puts more pressure on businesses that are already finding better places to operate elsewhere. It's these companies that have generated the revenue boom that the Seattle City Council has experienced over the past decade. If it wants more revenue and more jobs in the city, then it shouldn't make it harder for businesses to operate nor…

I honesty don’t think the city should be concerned with revenue and jobs at this point. The unemployment rate is incredibly low. It should be focused on housing affordability and amenities to make it more livable for everyone who lives there, not just the new upper class who are experiencing all of the benefits already. A place where more people can have security and opportunity. And guess what, that makes for a much…

That’s great, but what you’re describing is jobs and growth. Housing is another area where Seattle has failed to manage its resources, so I’m not going to argue that affordability isn’t a problem. But you won’t solve it by stifling growth, which is literally what many in Seattle are advocating. But that security and opportunity you’re talking about, that’s jobs and growth. You can’t argue that the free market has been so successful at creating jobs that you don’t need to worry about it any more. The market forces that brought jobs and booming growth to Seattle can just as easily take them elsewhere.

Re: Seattle passes smaller ‘head tax’ on big companies after impassioned debate

#92

Post by seanmcdirmid »

NotSammyHagar wrote: post #78
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know many young people that agree with that. Families, sure, east and north side is better for schools and such, since it is basically suburbia. Most of Sodo still isn't zoned for residential.

I have a family and live in the east side :-) I've seen it a million times, people move to seattle, get an apartment, then couple up and buy a smaller condo, have kids, need space, move to the evil eastside.

Well, who knows what it will be like in the future. Seattle isn’t losing population, some more suburban part of Seattle (e.g. West Seattle) are booming also. It is possible that millenials will stay put and not migrate to the east side.

Re: Seattle passes smaller ‘head tax’ on big companies after impassioned debate

#93

Post by mrep »

taurath wrote: post #75
mrep wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not at all. I'm against taxes that cost me more money on the homeless problem while disproportionally effect me more than others. Spending more money locally on the homeless giving them handouts is only going to attract more worsening the problem. My girlfriend was recently assaulted downtown by a homeless person which is why we liked kirkland when we checked it out because there seemed to be less of them in kirkland…

The lack of empathy for those being displaced by huge tech companies moving in and eclipsing everyone else's salary in this thread is incredibly stunning. Not to say that homelessness is entirely caused by this, but its definitely a factor. 91% of the homeless in Seattle are from the greater Seattle region. Home prices have doubled in 10 years, and tripled if you count the bottom of the great recession. Renters have…

> 91% of the homeless in Seattle are from the greater Seattle region

Don't know where you are getting those numbers but only 20% were born or grew up in king county according to the most recent report: http://allhomekc.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/2017-Count-U...

And I would be fine spending 10 times this money if there were any indication that it would fix the problem so my girlfriend could actually feel safe walking around downtown without getting assaulted again but it does not seem that way.

Re: Seattle passes smaller ‘head tax’ on big companies after impassioned debate

#94

Post by whb07 »

NotSammyHagar wrote: post #85
whb07 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Florida and Texas do not have income tax and yet they appear to not suffer from the same ailments that the city of Seattle and SF are suffering from. In a couple of years the city council will move to raise the head tax, stating that their new record tax receipts are not enough to implement their working solution. It is easy to spend money that isn't yours. The city of Seattle has had record tax receipts for the past…

Saying Seattle has record revenue is just a completely misleading thing to say, without enough information. Your comment doesn't clarify anything about whether Seattle is spending money poorly or wisely. Seattle's costs have been going up, partly because lots more people have been moving here, and we don't have income taxes, and businesses can hire more people without that leading to increased tax revenue. The city h…

As you can see from the data[0] the city itself raises tax through a variety of channels. The largest being property, business, and retail taxes. As you can imagine, when the city grows all those enumerated taxes grow accordingly. As you can see in data[1] the tax receipts for the years 2000 is roughly $600ish million. For the 17-18 fiscal years, according to data[0] Seattle had receipts of $1.1-1.2 billion.

So tax revenues for the city are close to 100% increase. If you see the Census for the year 2000, the population of Seattle is at 564k. For the year 2016, the population is at 750k or so. So a 100% tax revenue increase and a 50% population increase. I'd dare say the city council is just belligerent with other people's money.

Also, there is a legitimate far left socialist on the board. You should watch the Shapiro debate against the Seattle $15 min wage. She's full of ideas with no substance to back it up.

[0]https://sccinsight.com/2016/10/03/understanding-the-seattle-...

[1]https://www.seattle.gov/financedepartment/0102Adopted/City%2...

Re: Seattle passes smaller ‘head tax’ on big companies after impassioned debate

#95

Post by pteredactyl »

taurath wrote: post #75
mrep wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not at all. I'm against taxes that cost me more money on the homeless problem while disproportionally effect me more than others. Spending more money locally on the homeless giving them handouts is only going to attract more worsening the problem. My girlfriend was recently assaulted downtown by a homeless person which is why we liked kirkland when we checked it out because there seemed to be less of them in kirkland…

The lack of empathy for those being displaced by huge tech companies moving in and eclipsing everyone else's salary in this thread is incredibly stunning. Not to say that homelessness is entirely caused by this, but its definitely a factor. 91% of the homeless in Seattle are from the greater Seattle region. Home prices have doubled in 10 years, and tripled if you count the bottom of the great recession. Renters have…

I hear you. But as as society we need to make hard choices.

As a society do we value homeless or contributors ( taxpayers ) more?

When you enact policies and taxes like this you reward being homeless and push out people who contribute. You say, 'yes, it's ok to shit on my sidewalk and leave needles everywhere and accost my children as they're walking to school.' And yes, that's an extreme, but it happens everyday in SF. And, to me, it's unacceptable. It's unacceptable that we allow that.

In short:

You: "But, What about the homeless people?" Me: "What about my children who have to step over their shit on the way to school?"

Re: Seattle passes smaller ‘head tax’ on big companies after impassioned debate

#96

Post by pteredactyl »

NotSammyHagar wrote: post #77
taurath wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The lack of empathy for those being displaced by huge tech companies moving in and eclipsing everyone else's salary in this thread is incredibly stunning. Not to say that homelessness is entirely caused by this, but its definitely a factor. 91% of the homeless in Seattle are from the greater Seattle region. Home prices have doubled in 10 years, and tripled if you count the bottom of the great recession. Renters have…

I agree that it does feel like a terrible self-centered choice to be so against this. I'm actually working in Seattle at a smaller software company where I will have to pay that tax. I used to work at Google in Seattle, so I would have had to pay it there too. There's a tremendous problem here with homeless people. I can believe that rich techies coming in and raising prices by increasing demand must have helped push…

"Feeling bad" as you call it is exactly what exacerbates the problem. And I would argue is why we have so many homeless in the first place.

Yes, feel bad. But we need to be tough too. If you accost my kid on the way to work, you should not be allowed to be on the street. Even if you're homeless. When did homeless become a protected class?

There's 'I want to better myself and get back on the right track' homeless and 'Fuck you, eat my shit kid' homeless. I support the former. And believe the latter should not be allowed on our streets.

Re: Seattle passes smaller ‘head tax’ on big companies after impassioned debate

#97

Post by pteredactyl »

taurath wrote: post #81
NotSammyHagar wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that it does feel like a terrible self-centered choice to be so against this. I'm actually working in Seattle at a smaller software company where I will have to pay that tax. I used to work at Google in Seattle, so I would have had to pay it there too. There's a tremendous problem here with homeless people. I can believe that rich techies coming in and raising prices by increasing demand must have helped push…

I agree with all of this as well. I am saddened that most of the time it is the rich techies (along with existing landed wealthy people) that come in and prevent any additional housing from being built - I live in an area well known for its NIMBYism. If they raised everyone's taxes on my pay scale and above by 2%, and un-restricted building in much of the city, it would go a million times further to make it a more li…

"Rich techies" built this internet you are typing on. I loathe your condescension and resentment toward people seemingly more successful than you.

You think the "rich techies" are out to get you? That they want to displace you? No. 98% of them are just trying to live, just like you and everyone else.

But if we just "raise taxes" everything will be better. Look at our current political, at all scales, system. When recently has giving money to career politicians actually made our infrastructure, education, and healthcare better?

People look to the government as this panacea. I truly don't get it.

Re: Seattle passes smaller ‘head tax’ on big companies after impassioned debate

#98

Post by taurath »

pteredactyl wrote: post #95
taurath wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The lack of empathy for those being displaced by huge tech companies moving in and eclipsing everyone else's salary in this thread is incredibly stunning. Not to say that homelessness is entirely caused by this, but its definitely a factor. 91% of the homeless in Seattle are from the greater Seattle region. Home prices have doubled in 10 years, and tripled if you count the bottom of the great recession. Renters have…

I hear you. But as as society we need to make hard choices. As a society do we value homeless or contributors ( taxpayers ) more? When you enact policies and taxes like this you reward being homeless and push out people who contribute. You say, 'yes, it's ok to shit on my sidewalk and leave needles everywhere and accost my children as they're walking to school.' And yes, that's an extreme, but it happens everyday in…

You’re saying it’s all or nothing. Contributors will always be valued more in society, but the cycle of poverty at the bottom has very few exit points. Clearly we can do both - I was offering a counterpoint to the person saying they don’t want to live in an area with homeless people. I don’t either, and wealth inequality being closer to the Middle Ages than the 1970s is the largest factor in that

Re: Seattle passes smaller ‘head tax’ on big companies after impassioned debate

#99

Post by taurath »

pteredactyl wrote: post #97
taurath wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with all of this as well. I am saddened that most of the time it is the rich techies (along with existing landed wealthy people) that come in and prevent any additional housing from being built - I live in an area well known for its NIMBYism. If they raised everyone's taxes on my pay scale and above by 2%, and un-restricted building in much of the city, it would go a million times further to make it a more li…

"Rich techies" built this internet you are typing on. I loathe your condescension and resentment toward people seemingly more successful than you. You think the "rich techies" are out to get you? That they want to displace you? No. 98% of them are just trying to live, just like you and everyone else. But if we just "raise taxes" everything will be better. Look at our current political, at all scales, system. When rec…

I’m a rich techie. I’m loathing the society we have that makes it seem that we can’t actually do anything about it. We created the interstate highway system and roads and bridges and all of our institutions. We could organize and fund an army of people and resources to solve poverty, but we choose not to.

Re: Seattle passes smaller ‘head tax’ on big companies after impassioned debate

#100

Post by NotSammyHagar »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #92
NotSammyHagar wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a family and live in the east side :-) I've seen it a million times, people move to seattle, get an apartment, then couple up and buy a smaller condo, have kids, need space, move to the evil eastside.

Well, who knows what it will be like in the future. Seattle isn’t losing population, some more suburban part of Seattle (e.g. West Seattle) are booming also. It is possible that millenials will stay put and not migrate to the east side.

my kid is almost finished with school, I might move to seattle after that.
Post reply on HN