Sound Politics: Democrats Propose 100% Income Tax

April 01, 2008

Democrats Propose 100% Income Tax

Read it and weep. This is the latest proposal headed for ballot initiative in the fall. Who would've thought the Washington Democrats could make Oregon look good in comparison?

AN ACT Relating to abolishing the federal income tax for Washingtonians; adding a new title to the Revised Code of Washington to be codified as Title 666 RCW; creating new sections.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:

NEW SECTION. Sec. 101 INTENT. It is the intent of the people in adopting this title to provide the necessary revenues for the support of vital state services on a more stable and equitable basis.

NEW SECTION. Sec. 201 INCOME. All income of residents of the state of Washington, and all income of nonresidents earned in the state of Washington, shall be given to the state of Washington.

NEW SECTION. Sec. 301 CODIFICATION. Sections 101 through 201 of this act constitute a new title in the Revised Code of Washington, to be codified as Title 666 RCW.

--- END ---

Posted by pudge at April 01, 2008 07:36 AM | Email This

Comments

1. Good one Pudge! & a likewise Happy AF Day to you. :)

Posted by: Duffman on April 1, 2008 07:41 AM

2. Just be glad they can't tax more than 100% of income.

Posted by: Politically Incorrect on April 1, 2008 07:42 AM

3. Damn it! For a second, I thought you were serious. I mean, I knew the 100% part was a joke, but I wasn't sure about the income tax initiative part till I realized it was April 1st.

I was like "Oh please, please, please let them put an income tax on the ballot in 2008! It'll increase R turnout SIGNIFICANTLY all by its self.

Posted by: Cliff on April 1, 2008 07:43 AM

4. Very funny. : )

Posted by: NW Denizen on April 1, 2008 07:44 AM

5. When must I report to the collective farm, Komred Khristine? Or will it be the dreaded salt mines for all conservatives?

Posted by: Saltherring on April 1, 2008 07:56 AM

6. Someone needs a lesson in the Constitution as the "Supreme Law of the Land". Washington State, even on April Fools Day, can't amend the Constitution unilaterally.

And does the reference to Title 666 mean what I think it does?

Posted by: kmort on April 1, 2008 08:14 AM

7. On a 'somewhat' related note Is It Really Gonna Get This Bad?

Posted by: Duffman on April 1, 2008 08:25 AM

8. At first I thought it was a joke too, but then I thought it might be Eric Oemig getting creative again.

Posted by: kaotmar on April 1, 2008 08:25 AM

9. kmort, how do you mean? You mean "abolishing the federal income tax?" The Constitution was not amended. You see, the state taxes us at 100%, and on our federal return we claim that tax paid as an exemption, which is significant enough to reduce our federal tax liability to 0.

It's genius, really!

Posted by: pudge on April 1, 2008 08:28 AM

10. Duffman, yes, that Independent story is a far funnier April Fool's joke than mine.

Posted by: pudge on April 1, 2008 08:30 AM

11. April Fool's Day is 365 around here.

Posted by: ivan on April 1, 2008 08:38 AM

12. ivan: yawn.

Posted by: pudge on April 1, 2008 08:54 AM

13. April Fool's Day is 365 around here.

Yep and the head fool is (IVAN) LOL

Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on April 1, 2008 09:20 AM

14. I would have expected no less.....just look at at all the unemployed posters over at HA, and you'll see just why they have no problem with an income tax. Have to work to pay taxes generally.

Posted by: Mark1 on April 1, 2008 09:35 AM

15. And a happy April Fools Day to you too!! :)

Posted by: Mark1 on April 1, 2008 09:36 AM

16. Very Funny...I loved it...but please stop giving those guy's ideas!!!

P.S. My Footbal coaches always told me 100% is not enough...my guess is the powers to be will still want more!!!

Posted by: Pacific Grove Phlash on April 1, 2008 09:44 AM

17. Gore-Nickels '08

after Rove finishes off Hillary & Barack, the joke's on HIM.

Finally, we get serious on global warming.

Posted by: storsie on April 1, 2008 09:51 AM

18. Ah, Pudge, from your post #9 - wouldn't a more accurate headline be "Democrat proposal eliminates Federal Taxes"

Posted by: BA on April 1, 2008 09:54 AM

19.
Politically Incorrect is wrong! (See comment number 2 above.)

They can tax more than 100%, here's how: they will just change the name of the illusory capital gains that they guess you have on your house as "current income", even though it is not realized through a sale.

After all it's not much of a stretch, we get property taxed on an "assessment" (nothing more than a guess by political hacks what your house may be worth if you were to sell it) even though there may not be any change to your property otherwise other than degradation from weather, time, deer, mold and carpenter ants.

A tax on illusion - novel concept huh? We could tax Hollywood for trillions based on the concept.

Posted by: Deryl McCarty on April 1, 2008 12:23 PM

20. And the dems are reading that thinking "damn...why didn't we think of that?"

Posted by: PC on April 1, 2008 01:26 PM

21. Laugh at it now.

Don't be deceived: The libs are out for every cent they can tax, fine, or impose a fee on.

The correct spelling is Komrad with a K.

Posted by: Sam Adams on April 1, 2008 02:34 PM

22. Look at today's Seattle Times and tell me these School districts need more money

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/education/2004321668_perks02e.html

Northshore administrators enjoy perks

They make on average $103,000 per year, and the Times is reporting that

"Administrators in the Northshore School District have bought big-screen TVs, camcorders, home-theater equipment and iPods for personal use, all with taxpayer money. What's more, if the employees leave the district, they get to keep the equipment."

Remember that when you are voting for their School Levies next time!

No wonder this state has no money for teachers!

Posted by: GS on April 2, 2008 04:57 PM