August 09, 2013
Is Jay Inslee "focused like a laser beam" on jobs?

During the 2012 campaign, Jay Inslee repeated often his promise to be "focused like a laser beam" on creating jobs in Washington, citing his nebulous "75 point plan" he called Building a Working Washington and declaring that "my top priority is job creation."

At the Vancouver debate: "I've focused like a laser beam to get people back to work..."

At the Yakima debate: "I'm focused like a laser beam on jobs."

He described his jobs plan to Parent Map magazine as "75 very specific proposals."

To the Everett Herald, he said attracting businesses to Washington "means doing smart things like the 75 proposals that I've proposed..."

In the News Tribune's voter guide about his top legislative priorities: "I will immediately work to implement my jobs plan..."

To the Puget Sound Business Journal: "We need a governor with both the experience and the vision to help grow this economy and who will focus like a laser beam on that task."

So what does the Inslee administration have to show for his laser-like focus on jobs? It's interesting what Inslee listed as his top three priorities for the first special session this year, after a regular session that did very little to help Washington's economy. "We've gotta focus like a laser beam on those top three priorities," Inslee told the press. What were those priorities? A budget compromise, a new transportation revenue package and a tougher drunk driving bill, with the DREAM Act and the Reproductive Parity Act as additional hoped-for accomplishments.

Those are normal priorities for a Democratic governor to have, but a laser-like focus on jobs they're not, and people are taking notice. Richard Davis of the Washington Research Council noted in the Everett Herald this week, "[In Washington], regulatory overreach puts thousands of family wage jobs at risk. Controversial proposed water quality regulations (based in part on estimates of fish consumption) would raise local government utility costs and threaten major industries. Then the Inslee administration decides the environmental review of a coal export terminal should consider the climate change effects of burning coal in China. Construction, transportation and trade jobs take a back seat."

But the piece that really got people talking was Wednesday's editorial in the "excellent" [Crosscut's description] Longview Daily News, titled "Where's the 'Working Washington' Inslee promised?" The paper, clearly frustrated with Inslee, set the tone at the start: "Even though he's only seven months into a four-year term, some of us have already seen enough of Jay Inslee as governor of Washington."

They rapped him for his performance in the legislative session, saying it "exposed Inslee's inexperience and inadequacies" and added that "when the Legislature finally adjourned after two extra sessions, both Democrats and Republicans took pains to point out that Inslee had very little to do with the final compromises."

What really got the paper's editorial board in a dander, though, was Inslee's performance on job creation. Inslee's decision to include incredibly broad criteria for the environmental impact statement of a bulk commodity terminal at Cherry Point was described as "so demanding that it makes us wonder if the state has any intention of ever granting another shoreline permit to anyone." They concluded:

Thirdly, and most seriously, the plan is a potential roadblock for anyone wanting to do almost any sort of business in Washington that requires raw materials to be brought in from elsewhere. The new guidelines could be applied to a grain terminal or just about any facility handling bulk commodities. With one spectacularly wrong-headed move, the governor has handed anyone with an anti-development agenda a powerful new weapon.

In addition, he seems determined to deny this economic development to two counties -- Whatcom and Cowlitz -- that badly need it. This is the same Jay Inslee whose campaign slogan was "Building a Working Washington" and who promised to create "thousands of jobs today" while making the state "a leader in the industries of tomorrow."

Based on events of last week -- which also saw Boeing announce the departure of more than 300 highly skilled jobs from King County to California -- Inslee and his team don't know how to do one or the other.

On the same topic, another labor organization has publically aired its grievances with Inslee's decision regarding bulk commodity terminals. Herb Krohn, writing for the United Transportation Union (who noted that the terminals would be good for "blue-collar folks" who "voted for [Inslee]") said the Inslee administration was applying different environmental standards to the terminals than is applied to Boeing. He continued:

What we don't applaud is the governor's inconsistent approach to job creation. He takes a different approach when it comes to building trade and transportation jobs that would be created by the proposed new export facilities. There he wants a comprehensive review (read delay) of the effects the items being exported have on the world's climate.

Inslee's request caters to those who want to not just delay, but kill these projects and deny thousands of people construction employment as well as the many hundreds of permanent good middle-class working class jobs they will create.

Posted by Adam Faber at August 09, 2013 09:03 AM | Email This
Comments
1. Adam Faber, you lousy HACK!

How many words did you use in this meandering attempt to flak for coal?

ps. Any chance you'll leave eveeel Inslee run Washington to take a "permanent good middle-class working class job" in the clean Coal Industry?


Posted by: MikeBoyScout on August 9, 2013 10:18 AM
2. .
"permanent good middle-class working class jobs" in Coal

Chronic Illness Linked To Coal-Mining Pollution, Study Shows

According to Hendryx, the data show that people in coal mining communities
* have a 70 percent increased risk for developing kidney disease.
* have a 64 percent increased risk for developing chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) such as emphysema.
* are 30 percent more likely to report high blood pressure (hypertension).
[...]
Hospitalization rates in these communities also were studied. Data show the risk of hospitalization stays for
* COPD increases 1 percent for every 1,462 tons of coal.
* hypertension increases 1 percent for every 1,873 tons of coal.

How dare Governor Inslee "deny" the people of Washington all those health care jobs taking care of the ever increasing amount of chronically sick people caused by coal!

Posted by: MikeBoyScout on August 9, 2013 10:37 AM
3. You're right MikeBoyScout, let's shut down all the coal mines in Washington...oh, wait.

Posted by: FCR is a big deal on August 9, 2013 10:49 AM
4. Asshats like Inslee are not focused on anything besides the statism and their own elite status. Witness Obama in the Vineyard.

Supporters of alleged leaders like Obama, Gregoire and Inslee are just too stupid with minds addled by years of Marxist pablum to have any sense of life, decency or respect for their fellow human beings.

People that the left claims to help, are just useful tools that they keep carefully guarded on an inescapable virtual reservation fueled by small carrots of wealth transfer and doe eyed promises.

They are the change they believe in.

Posted by: Leftover on August 9, 2013 12:11 PM
5. You are correct it is about coal..ans. SO WHAT!? HAcks like you rely on flawed data and even more flawed liberals to brainwash ya..

Posted by: jeff on August 9, 2013 12:22 PM
6. So what did voters and unions expect from this dolt? I can't recall a single coherent and complete sentence he made in all of the debates. His "secret sauce" solution to jobs and the budget is typical liberalnomics, more taxes, spending, and government expansion of public sector jobs and unions to bolster their unholy alliance. I had a barber shop debate waiting for a hair cut with this tool after he made his sandbagger move from his home in Yakima where he got tossed from Congress in one term, to the 1st district in Seattle's N end. I nearly made him cry, and my barber told me she would never vote for him after his stammering jibberish responding to my issue challenges.

Posted by: Michael Bednarz on August 9, 2013 12:39 PM
7. @6 Michael Bednarz on August 9, 2013 12:39 PM,

You must be absolutely correct. Had voters instead elected Rob McKenna we would have been graced with the coherence of Adam Faber as Policy Director. Faber is clearly better qualified than anybody the winner of the election has to explain jobs policy.

How else do we explain McKenna getting spanked by Inslee and Adam Faber being bumped upstairs to blogging for free here at (un)Sound Politics for an audience of ...???...dozens?

Hell, no doubt this coherent laser focused (un)SP post of Adam Faber's is going to ignite a political firestorm in WA and across the nation bringing about "thousands of ... construction employment as well as the many hundreds of permanent good middle-class working class jobs".

Nobody writes like that! Most clowns use 'several hundred' or 'thousands'. Adam lights up your neurons as you read "as well as the many hundreds" because he took the time to think, and rethink and edit and reedit this very coherent and powerful thought before publishing it!! The shear music of the phrase as well as the many hundreds"; Poetry!


PS. You're one helluva political organizer yourself. Yours and your barber's votes left McKenna only 59,661 votes short of victory!
Legalization of pot in WA seems to have gone to your head Michael. Or maybe you've been snorting coal dust?

Posted by: MikeBoyScout on August 9, 2013 01:49 PM
8. Inslee and the Democrats, and almost the entire business community in this state, all pushed for the House's transportation package, which would have created a lot of jobs. The Senate Republicans killed it. The right wing blames Inslee regardless. We're supposed to listen to what they say, and not watch what they do.

Posted by: Ivan on August 9, 2013 02:21 PM
9. Most of the private sector in this state believes that this project will create jobs, and therefore favors it. But I guess you know more than they do.

Posted by: Ivan on August 9, 2013 08:42 PM
10. OK Ivan, outline the actual costs to the working poor who need their vehicles to get to work and how they will be disproportionally impacted by the draconian increases in owning and operating a car due to the make work program that they will not benefit from.

It may create some jobs, but it will not offset the losses to those on the margins.

Posted by: Smokie on August 9, 2013 08:58 PM
11. What would you expect from a special sauce Governor and a Vashon Island living Democrat Central committee member.

Posted by: Smokie on August 9, 2013 09:01 PM
12. The concerns of right-wingers for "those on the margins" is so touching, so quaint. Aren't all you lot supposed to say that wealth will trickle down?

Explain the near-unanimous support of all the state's major industries for this transportation package. Go ahead, I'm waiting.

Posted by: Ivan on August 10, 2013 02:02 AM
13. Decline is a choice. The choice Democrats make.

Posted by: Leftover on August 10, 2013 06:18 AM
14. Still waiting Ivan, why do the Democrat elite such as yourself hate the working poor so much?

The reason the Transportation Bill failed is that the Government, Trade Union, Law Firm coalition, could not assure the electeds would survive the fecal fallout from the huge increases in taxes and fees. Or maybe they just wanted to help Governor Inslee keep his no new taxes pledge.

Posted by: Smokie on August 10, 2013 07:14 AM
15. Yeah, we hate the working poor and you love them. Tell us another one, Pinocchio.

Business understands what Tea Party retards like you, and utter buffoons like Don Benton and Ann Rivers, don't understand -- to make money, you have to spend money. It's called investing. The taxes and fees that would have funded the roads package were an investment in infrastructure, which is proven a thousand times over to help the economy. That's beyond debate.

I'm still waiting for an answer. Why did Boeing want this roads package? Why did every port in the state want it? Why did even the Farm Bureau admit that they needed the roads?

You can't answer. And we all know why. It's because you're a pack of greeedy, selfish, stingy pricks, and you would rather see the economy of the entire state fail to grow, just so not one more nickel comes out of your pockets.

Well guess what Smokie? We're going to expand those highways, one way or another, and you're going to pay for it, just like all the rest of us are. Bet on it. Move the hell out of the state if you don't like it.

Why am I so certain of this? Because businesses want to make more money, and they need highways to do it. And they don't give a rip if you're a greddy, selfish, stingy prick.

Posted by: Ivan on August 10, 2013 09:29 AM
16. Yeah, we hate the working poor and you love them. Tell us another one, Pinocchio.

Business understands what Tea Party retards like you, and utter buffoons like Don Benton and Ann Rivers, don't understand -- to make money, you have to spend money. It's called investing. The taxes and fees that would have funded the roads package were an investment in infrastructure, which is proven a thousand times over to help the economy. That's beyond debate.

I'm still waiting for an answer. Why did Boeing want this roads package? Why did every port in the state want it? Why did even the Farm Bureau admit that they needed the roads?

You can't answer. And we all know why. It's because you're a pack of greeedy, selfish, stingy pricks, and you would rather see the economy of the entire state fail to grow, just so not one more nickel comes out of your pockets.

Well guess what Smokie? We're going to expand those highways, one way or another, and you're going to pay for it, just like all the rest of us are. Bet on it. Move the hell out of the state if you don't like it.

Why am I so certain of this? Because businesses want to make more money, and they need highways to do it. And they don't give a rip if you're a greedy, selfish, stingy prick.

Posted by: Ivan on August 10, 2013 09:29 AM
17. "The taxes and fees that would have funded the roads package were an investment in infrastructure, which is proven a thousand times over to help the economy. That's beyond debate."

That's a Statement, not a fact. We already have one of the highest Gas taxes in the Country, why aren't we already seeing the "thousand times over" help to our economy? Could it be the people on charge of spending the money being sent to Olympia? The Same folks who steal the money form the PWTF ( Public Works Trust Fund) annually to balance the State Budget? How many jobs and investments in infrastructure does that cost?

You have a big mouth for an old fat liberal who hasn't seen his own toes since the Carter administration.

Let's see if we can judge the quality of your commentary by your language shall we? "Retards", Really? you should be accused of a hate crime. "Stingy pricks", you mean fiscally responsible but you lack the vocabulary.

Since you live on a Island served by the Ferry service, can we assume you are already preparing to pay the actual costs of providing you and all of the other island residence your "highway"?

Posted by: Smokie on August 10, 2013 11:31 AM
18. It's a FACT that ferry riders pay the HIGHEST percentage of operating expenses of any mode of transit in this state. That's IN ADDITION to the gas and road taxes we already pay. So when you're ready to pay the same percentage of the cost of YOUR mode of transportation as I'M paying, maybe I'll take that line of argument seriously.

All you are is an anti-taxer. Your way leads to economic stagnation. Your argument is a dead loser, your transportation solution is a dead loser, and so are you.

Posted by: Ivan on August 10, 2013 02:40 PM
19. It's because you're a pack of greeedy, selfish, stingy pricks,, and you would rather see the economy of the entire state fail to grow, just so not one more nickel comes out of your pockets. - Posted by Ivan at August 10, 2013 09:29 AM

*You know, liberalism constant demand of FORCED charity through mandatory and coercive taxation makes me think they have a very poor opinion of others ...and themselves.*

OK loud lefty, How much? How much should come out of our pockets, federal, sales, "fees", property...? Be a man and give us a percentage. 40%? 60%? 70% - how'd that work out for France? 85%.

Put a NUMBER where your loud mouth is. It's easy to blame in broad generalities, isn't it? ESPECIALLY with other peoples money.

How's that working out in Barry's America?

Yeah, yeah,"Faux" news. Rinse. Lather. Repeat. - when you haven't the COURAGE to actually watch:

When the safety net becomes a hammock

Nope, just liberalism writ large - actions:consequences: " Mind blowing. "

" A relatively simple deep dive into these numbers, though, reveals something inconvenient to the "recovery" narrative. "

Nothing, however, undermines the "recovery" narrative more than these stubborn food stamp numbers. You can't spin or cheat numbers attached to something as vital to human survival as food, and these numbers stubbornly continue to prove that all this talk about "growth" and "recovery" is nothing more than government and media-generated propaganda.

" Like clockwork we hit a new all-time high in food stamps use month after month. "

" Wanna see what that looks like to Excel? ... I knew you did: $46,500,000,000,000. "

" This isn't just a statistic: It's the falling pulse rate of the U.S. economy. "

The bleak reality is that the Obama economy, which was growing at a snail's-pace in his first term, is slowing down even more in his second.

Wishing that on WA are you?

In the meantime:

And NOT the no choice charity by the involuntary taxation heralded by liberalism

Norway ponders conservatism and the future of the welfare state

This sense of realism and worry about the future seems to be spreading across the region, and ... a great analysis of current events in Norway, where conservatives seem poised to take control of the government there for the first time in ages.

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on August 10, 2013 03:16 PM
20. @19 RagnarDanneskold on August 10, 2013 03:16 PM

how'd that work out for France?

Pretty damn good. Why do you ask?

You want a proposal for tax rates? Sure, I can give you one.

What's your argument against the marginal tax rates used in 1958?

Posted by: MikeBoyScout on August 10, 2013 03:22 PM
21.

What's your argument against the marginal tax rates used in 1958?

OK now we know the confiscatory loud lefty's want a combined TOTAL tax rate of every government tax and fee to be NINETY ONE PERCENT of earnings.

Really, good luck with that. We already have high unemployment - what do you think (you do think don't you?) when people no longer realize any benefit from working? Bye Bye entitlement society.

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on August 10, 2013 04:09 PM
22. Speaking of Inslee, he is an influence on the CRC. See the following link from Steve Duin to follow the saga on this Light rail on this bridge ? hogwash !

http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/steve_duin/index.ssf/2013/08/steve_duin_they_always_have_a.html#incart_m-rpt-2

Posted by: KDS on August 10, 2013 04:58 PM
23. The simple reason the loud leftists want light rail is because of Agenda 21. To hell with Agenda 21 ! There I said it.

Posted by: KDS on August 10, 2013 05:02 PM
24. Think of the jobs Gov Inslee's traffic plan would create. Who are we to deny those jobs to the unemployed who want to work? Who are we to let our own transportation and communications systems get run down and left in shambles for our heirs? My vision for Washington involves creativity, leading edge technology, and world class schools on both sides of the Cascades. I prefer growing a bright and prosperous future, addressing all issues head-on rather than in mean characterizations. Or am I being naive?

Posted by: Aarghmac on August 10, 2013 09:42 PM
25. You are really starting to slip Ivan. So your argument is that you and your fellow Island bound travelers and ferry users are paying more than your fair share because you are being charged for use as well as capacity in the highway system?

"Your argument is a dead loser, your transportation solution is a dead loser, and so are you."

Right back at you Ivan. Intellectually, you have been a "Dead Loser" for years.


Posted by: Smokie on August 11, 2013 07:25 AM
26. Wow! I guess you told me! Why don't you beat your chest and roar, or whatever else you do to celebrate your cheap bellicose triumph over pixels on a computer screen?

You still haven't said a single thing that would even rebut, much less refute, what I said about the highway package creating jobs. It will, and the Democrats would get the credit, and the stupid Republicans would look like the dorks that they are for having stood in the way. That's what you lot really can't stand.

And to Adam's stupid red herring about the coal port: It's BS. It's just the same old cheap Republican "blame the Dems" spin, when the FACT is that the Lummi have killed the Bellingham port because of their treaty rights, and even if Inslee had pushed for Bellingham, the Lummi treaty rights would have trumped anything the state did.

If you don't believe that, ask the Corps of Engineers. That's what THEY said. Go argue with them if you don't like the outcome.

Longview is a separate issue, and I have nothing to say about Longview, one way or another. Longview at least does not require 18 coal trains a day snarling traffic around the ports of Tacoma, Seattle, Everett, and Bellingham, and all places in between -- which would mean a hit to other segments of the economy.

Why don't you lot face the facts. You would rather hinder the state's economy, and kill jobs, than pay another nickel more in taxes. That is exactly your position. If you think it is a winning platform for 2014, please, please keep pushing it.

Posted by: Ivan on August 11, 2013 09:04 AM
27. @23 KDS on August 10, 2013 05:02 PM,

Yes, you did say it!
We "loud leftists" want light rail because we're part of the secret worldwide Agenda 21 U.N. plot to steal all our golfs.

No, you're not nuts. Not at all.

Posted by: MikeBoyScout on August 11, 2013 09:53 AM
28. @Ivan,

Why do WA Republicans oppose Washington State business?

Association of Washington Business - Transportation 2013 Legislative Objectives

Problem

Current state transportation funding sources are proving inadequate to meet current needs, address project backlogs, and build new capacity. Federal funding sources cannot be counted to fill the gap, given the uncertainties created by efforts to address the nation's budget deficit. Alternative source are neither ready for implementation nor adequate to fully fund major projects.

The 2003 and 2005 transportation revenue packages made significant progress in catching up with congestion improvement projects but did not address the growing problem of system-wide maintenance and preservation. Now that construction is nearing completion on the projects included in those packages, the 14.5 cents gas tax revenues are nearly all committed to debt service on bonds used to accelerate project construction.

The state's transportation system assets - roads, bridges, ferries - will suffer continual deterioration at current funding levels of maintenance and preservation. Bridge weight restrictions and safety concerns will impede commerce. Continued road deterioration will increase safety hazards, vehicle damage, congestion, and commute times. Aging ferries may see a repeat of Coast Guard intervention that led to removing vessels from the water.

If limited transportation resources are concentrated on patching the existing assets, new improvements and partially completed projects will be stalled. Critically important major projects such as I-405, SR 520, SR 167 and SR 509, I-5 at the Columbia River Crossing, the North Spokane Corridor and I-90 over the Cascade summit are billions of dollars short of the funding needed to complete them. Other projects that are crucial for the economic health of local areas around our state have not even began to receive design funding.

Solution
AWB believes that our state's transportation infrastructure is critical to our state's business climate and economic future. We support a statewide effort to prioritize additional transportation investments, identify viable funding strategies that will not have a detrimental impact on job creation, freight mobility and commerce, and increase accountability for results among all elements of the transportation system. Specifically, AWB supports:
1) Development and adoption of a comprehensive transportation package by the 2013 legislature.

Yes, Republicans like Adam Faber, HACK, and now notorious Coal Industry Flack, are so very, very, concerned about "jobs".

If you believe that, I've got a bridge to sell you. Hurry, before it collapses due to inadequate funding.

Posted by: MikeBoyScout on August 11, 2013 10:13 AM
29. @21 RagnarDanneskold on August 10, 2013 04:09 PM,

It is truly sad that you blindly believe the old Republican nutjob canard that there is any correlation between higher marginal tax rates and unemployment.

What was the unemployment rate in 1959 with the 1958 marginal tax rates?

And let's not forget what Republicans told us in 1993 when the Clinton administration, without a single congressional Republican vote, got a tax increased passed.

Rep. Newt Gingrich (R-GA), February 2, 1993: We have all too many people in the Democratic administration who are talking about bigger Government, bigger bureaucracy, more programs, and higher taxes. I believe that that will in fact kill the current recovery and put us back in a recession. It might take 1 1/2 or 2 years, but it will happen. (Congressional Record, 1993, Thomas)

Your side is still saying the same thing 20 years later, despite repeated evidence to the contrary.


Sad really.

Posted by: MikeBoyScout on August 11, 2013 11:24 AM
30. "You would rather hinder the state's economy, and kill jobs, than pay another nickel more in taxes. That is exactly your position. If you think it is a winning platform for 2014, please, please keep pushing it."

And you Ivan would rather tax the working poor into poverty to satisfy your unionist Democrat masters. 10 cents a gallon increase to 47 cents a gallon gas tax, and MVET that would be hundreds of dollars per vehicle, per year. Non voted TBD tab fees, Increased weight fees. All of those working poor contributing more so that you and your buddies can make $50 dollars an hour driving a dirt truck. Tolls will rise and Tolling will expand to be system wide on all major roads, highways and bridges.

What good does it do to have improved infrastructure if nobody can afford to use it..right? Why don't you ask your friends at Boeing to give up their tax exemptions and put the money into the infrastructure you say they are screaming for?

Why would you give additional tax revenues to group of Democrats who have failed to deliver value for the taxpayers? They have been in control for nearly three decades and they are directly responsible for the current state of the Transportation infrastructure in Washington State.


Posted by: Smokie on August 11, 2013 12:13 PM
31. Dear BS, nice canard you have there ("marginal tax rates in 1958"). There were TWENTY FOUR DIFFERENT TAX RATES in 1958 - today there are six. Further the late 50's were a time of great manufacturing expansion - ever heard of plastic? - today, President Incompetent has all but killed manufacturing - yep. even though they have their golden parachute unemployment benefits Boeing employees are STILL laid off.

BS says It is truly sad that you blindly believe the old Republican nutjob canard that there is any correlation between higher marginal tax rates and unemployment.

BS wants 1958 91% tax rate.
Show of hands: how many of you will work for 9% of your current income?
Show of hands: How many of you can LIVE on 9% of your current income?
Show of LOUD LEFTY hands: How many of you will suck at the tit of government benfits instead of living on 9% of your income? Mikey likes it!

Wholesale Inventories' Decline Longest in Nearly Four Years

Yeah, yeah, it's those greedy conservative business owners refusing to invest. Wash, rinse, REPEAT. Blah, blah, blah.

The parasite and the host can't both survive.

There's a name for this problem: Detroit

Hey BS - how's that 'war on poverty' going? Oh. Yeah. Multiple government nanny tits hasn't reduced it ONE IOTA. In FACT it has increased it. Congratulations. It pays to be unemployed tit-sucker instead of a producer in the loud lefty land. You built that!

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on August 11, 2013 12:17 PM
32. Rags,
Thanks for making it perfectly clear that you don't have the foggiest idea what marginal tax rates are AND don't have the slightest inclination to find out before you blabber on with the same old bullshit.

Posted by: MikeBoyScout on August 11, 2013 01:44 PM
33. You're flailing at the air, Smokie. I oppose all tolls, except those that pay only for the highway being tolled, and that sunset when the construction or repairs are paid for.

And spare me your sympathy for the working poor. You lot oppose all raises in the minimum wage, right? In fact, most of you don't support a minimum wage at all. So as my dear friend Pudge might say, you're a liar.

We're going to pass this package. We're going to get it all. We're going to jam light rail right up the a**es of the dumb gomers in Clarklahoma. The economy will grow, the Democrats will get the credit, and the GOP (Greedy Old Pennypinchers) will get the blame for opposing it.

In other words, sucks to be you. But I knew that to begin with.

Posted by: Ivan on August 11, 2013 03:00 PM
34. BS - simply search "marginal tax rates 1958 - see what YOU come up with.

Oh.

Wait.

I know.

A pretty red herring to avoid a direct question.

"Thanks for making it perfectly clear " that you're a coward and/or unable/unwilling to answer a DIRECT question.

OK loud lefty, How much? How much should come out of our pockets, federal, sales, "fees", property...? Be a man and give us a percentage. 40%? 60%? 70% - how'd that work out for France? 85%.
Put a NUMBER where your loud mouth is. It's easy to blame in broad generalities, isn't it? ESPECIALLY with other peoples money.

Liberals never fail to reveal EXACTLY who they are. Thanks!

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on August 11, 2013 03:10 PM
35. @30 RagnarDanneskold on August 11, 2013 12:17 PM,

The parasite and the host can't both survive.

Did you learn to call people "parasite" in the Roman Catholic church today?

Oh, wait... Today's Gospel reading in the Roman Catholic liturgy is from Luke 12:32-48. What was read today?

'Sell your possessions and give to those in need.

Sorry Rags, I'm just not familiar with the part of your faith that thinks its okay to refer to people in need as "parasite". Are "parasites" entitled to the sanctity of life?

re @34, I proposed the marginal tax rates of 1958, and you don't understand what marginal tax rates are and refuse to find out. oh well.
No one has ever claimed you were either wise or diligent.

Posted by: MikeBoyScout on August 11, 2013 03:26 PM
36. You lot oppose all raises in the minimum wage, right? - Posted by Ivan at August 11, 2013 03:00 PM

RIGHT!

Because they raise prices, eliminate jobs and depress hiring.

Minimum Wage's Discriminatory Effects

A Minority View: Higher Minimum Wage

Minimum Wage, Maximum Folly

While there is a debate over the
magnitude of the effects, the weight of research by academic scholars points to the conclusion that unemployment for some population groups is directly related to legal minimum wages.The unemployment effects of the minimum-wage law are felt disproportionately by non-whites. A 1976 survey by the American Economic Association found that 90 percent of its members agreed that increasing the minimum wage raises unemployment
among young and unskilled workers. It was followed by another survey, in 1990, which found that 80 percent of economists agreed with the statement that increases in the minimum wage cause unemployment among the youth and low-skilled.

Minimum Wage Escalation

The minimum wage law addresses a serious social problem, but creates no new options for dealing with it. In fact, it simply reduces the set of existing options available to the parties--employers and employees--who must voluntarily agree if there is to be a job. Trying to make people better off by reducing their options seems questionable even as a theory. In practice, what has happened is that fewer transactions (less employment) have taken place when there were fewer options open to the parties. It would be very surprising if it were otherwise.

Thomas Sowell on the tragedy of the minimum wage

"It would be comforting to believe that the government can simply decree higher pay for low-wage workers, without having to worry about unfortunate repercussions, but the preponderance of evidence indicates that labor is not exempt from the basic economic principle that artificially high prices cause surpluses. In the case of the surplus of human beings, that can be a special tragedy when they are already from low-income, unskilled or minority backgrounds and urgently need to get on the job ladder, if they are ever to move up the ladder by acquiring experience and skills."

Update: Here's another challenge to proponents of the minimum wage based on Thomas Sowell's quote above, and this related quote from Milton Friedman: "The effects of the minimum wage have been concentrated on the groups that the do-gooders would most like to help. The people who have been hurt most by the minimum wage laws are the blacks. I have often said that the most anti-black law on the books of this land is the minimum wage law."

The unintended consequences of the minimum wage

Economists have recognized for decades that minimum wage laws result primarily in increased unemployment among the most vulnerable sectors of society, specially poor unskilled teenagers of racial minorities.

The amount of evidence to back this is huge, but still people refuses to accept that just because it sounds like a good idea to magically give poor workers a raise it doesn't mean that it actually works this way.


"Living wage" kills jobs

Since there have been minimum wage laws for generations, not only in the United States, but in other countries around the world, you might think that we would want to look at what actually happens when such laws are enacted, as distinguished from what was hoped would happen.

Neither the advocates of this new minimum wage policy nor the media -- much less politicians -- show any interest whatsoever in facts about the consequences of minimum wage laws.

Most studies of minimum wage laws in countries around the world show that fewer people are employed at artificially higher wage rates. Moreover, unemployment falls disproportionately on lower skilled workers, younger and inexperienced workers, and workers from minority groups.

The Minimum Wage

Racist White Labour Unions in South Africa used the Minimum Wage to keep Blacks out of the workforce. The Minimum Wage creates unemployment. Listen to the discussion between these erudite gentlemen and learn some economics you won't hear from politicians.

And spare me your sympathy for the working poor. - Posted by Ivan at August 11, 2013 03:00 PM

Loud lefty's don't actually want to help anyone, they just want adulation of the masses by SAYING they want to help everyone ... consequences be damned. Two different things.

It must really suck to be so utterly wrong on ... everything.

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on August 11, 2013 03:40 PM
37. Did you learn to call people "parasite" in the Roman Catholic church today? - Posted by MikeBoyScout at August 11, 2013 03:26 PM

I was making a factual scientific statement. How you interpreted it says volumes ABOUT YOU. Thanks!

Please don't pretend you understand Catholic anything because you conveniently 'forgot' the REST of that reading:

32 "Fear not, little flock, for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom.
33 Sell your possessions, and give alms; provide yourselves with purses that do not grow old, with a treasure in the heavens that does not fail, where no thief approaches and no moth destroys.
34 For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.
35 "Let your loins be girded and your lamps burning,
36 and be like men who are waiting for their master to come home from the marriage feast, so that they may open to him at once when he comes and knocks.
37 Blessed are those servants whom the master finds awake when he comes; truly, I say to you, he will gird himself and have them sit at table, and he will come and serve them.
38 If he comes in the second watch, or in the third, and finds them so, blessed are those servants!
39 But know this, that if the householder had known at what hour the thief was coming, he would not have left his house to be broken into.
40 You also must be ready; for the Son of man is coming at an unexpected hour."
41 Peter said, "Lord, are you telling this parable for us or for all?"
42 And the Lord said, "Who then is the faithful and wise steward, whom his master will set over his household, to give them their portion of food at the proper time?
43 Blessed is that servant whom his master when he comes will find so doing.
44 Truly, I say to you, he will set him over all his possessions.
45 But if that servant says to himself, `My master is delayed in coming,' and begins to beat the menservants and the maidservants, and to eat and drink and get drunk,
46 the master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he does not know, and will punish him, and put him with the unfaithful.
47 And that servant who knew his master's will, but did not make ready or act according to his will, shall receive a severe beating.
48 But he who did not know, and did what deserved a beating, shall receive a light beating. Every one to whom much is given, of him will much be required; and of him to whom men commit much they will demand the more.

You loud lefty's always confuse confiscatory tax grabbing with voluntary giving. The Lord knew the difference

In biblical times the tax collector was considered by the Jews to be a traitor and very probably a thief.

"While Jesus was having dinner at Matthew's house, many tax collectors and 'sinners' came and ate with him and his disciples. When the Pharisees saw this, they asked his disciples, 'Why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and "sinners"?' On hearing this, Jesus said, 'It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. But go and learn what this means: "I desire mercy, not sacrifice." For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners'" (Matthew 9:10-13).

Because the Pharisees hated the tax collectors and sinners, they thought that Jesus should too. The fact that Jesus sat and ate with what was considered the dregs of society was an act of grace that the Pharisees could not comprehend. This passage is the answer to how Jesus treated the tax collector and sinner. He called them to repentance and grace. Christ had mercy upon the tax collector and sinner and He always received them because that was why He came. Luke 19:10 says, "For the Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lost."

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on August 11, 2013 04:36 PM
38. @37 RagnarDanneskold on August 11, 2013 04:36 PM,

It is sad you are incapable of understanding that the "tax collectors" during the time of Jesus represented a conquering empire (Rome) and that the tax collectors in the country that you live in represent the people in a representative government.

Very sad.

Posted by: MikeBoyScout on August 11, 2013 06:29 PM
39. @27 wrote:

We "loud leftists" want light rail because we're part of the secret worldwide Agenda 21 U.N. plot to steal all our golfs.

Did you pull that one out of your rectum ? It is clear that you feign ignorance about Agenda 21 and exhort liberal fascism.

Posted by: KDS on August 11, 2013 08:09 PM
40. Dear BS - I know full well who they represented. and I didn't find it necessary to look it up. It doesn't matter who they represented, they were tax collectors. He called them to repentance and grace. You might heed that call.

That you think confiscatory taxation represents the will of the people is not only ideological bullsh*t, it's down right frightening. But let;s give you that - so how much extra did you send the IRS last year? You eschewed all the deductions, right?

Oh. I notice you still haven't given us a NUMBER. Golly, gosh, gee, whiz! Now why is that?

I know, big man.

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on August 11, 2013 08:31 PM
41. Oh. You know what else I call MikeyBS on? President Incompetent and his sequester whining. He who invented the sequester plays you sycophants like a fine tuned fiddle.

the "tax collectors" during the time of Jesus represented a conquering empire (Rome) and that the tax collectors in the country that you live in represent the people in a representative government. - Posted by MikeBoyScout at August 11, 2013 06:29 PM

SNORT! You don't even see the irony! Laughing @ YOU!

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on August 11, 2013 08:35 PM
42. Dear Mikey BS, since you're oh so excited to attempt to use this week reading against me, I thought I'd attempt to educate you. Every week I receive an email from Regnum Christi which contains daily meditations on the reading of the day.Let's take a look at the interpretation of today's reading, shall we?

Luke 12: 32-48 Jesus said to his disciples, "Do not be afraid any longer, little flock, for your Father is pleased to give you the kingdom. Sell your belongings and give alms. Provide money bags for yourselves that do not wear out, an inexhaustible treasure in heaven that no thief can reach nor moth destroy. For where your treasure is, there also will your heart be. Gird your loins and light your lamps and be like servants who await their master´s return from a wedding, ready to open immediately when he comes and knocks. Blessed are those servants whom the master finds vigilant on his arrival. Amen, I say to you, he will gird himself, have them recline at table, and proceed to wait on them. And should he come in the second or third watch and find them prepared in this way, blessed are those servants. Be sure of this: if the master of the house had known the hour when the thief was coming, he would not have let his house be broken into. You also must be prepared, for at an hour you do not expect, the Son of Man will come." Then Peter said, "Lord, is this parable meant for us or for everyone?" And the Lord replied, "Who, then, is the faithful and prudent steward whom the master will put in charge of his servants to distribute the food allowance at the proper time? Blessed is that servant whom his master on arrival finds doing so. Truly, I say to you, he will put him in charge of all his property. But if that servant says to himself, ´My master is delayed in coming,´ and begins to beat the menservants and the maidservants, to eat and drink and get drunk, then that servant´s master will come on an unexpected day and at an unknown hour and will punish him severely and assign him a place with the unfaithful. That servant who knew his master´s will but did not make preparations nor act in accord with his will shall be beaten severely; and the servant who was ignorant of his master´s will but acted in a way deserving of a severe beating shall be beaten only lightly. Much will be required of the person entrusted with much, and still more will be demanded of the person entrusted with more."

Introductory Prayer: Father, I believe in you with all my heart. I trust in your infinite goodness and mercy. Thank you for so patiently guiding me along the pathway to everlasting life. I love you and offer all that I have and all that I do to you, for your glory and the salvation of souls.

Petition: Lord Jesus, keep me vigilant and committed in doing your most holy will.

1. Occupations and Preoccupations: We are often so preoccupied and anxious about the things of this world that we forget about pursuing the treasure of the next, "an inexhaustible treasure in heaven that no thief can reach nor moth destroy." In working so hard, we fall into another trap of pursuing every little entertainment and escapism to compensate such dedication. All the while, we easily forget about our real purpose and the real relationship we ought to be fostering each day with God our Father who loves us and "is pleased to give you the kingdom." What are the best excuses I use that prevent me from having a deeper committed relationship with God? Do I give as much dedication, money and time to loving God and serving my neighbor as I do to pursuing entertainments?

2. Pleased to Give You the Kingdom: Am I convinced God is truly "pleased to give you the kingdom," that he loves me and is interested in me? Why don't I always want what God wants for me? What things and activities in my life are emptying me and distracting me from developing a better relationship with Christ? In order to maintain a healthy spiritual life, we must often reassess our attitudes and change our priorities so as to safeguard our hearts from being swindled and robbed of our true treasure, which is God. Do my priorities and decisions reflect to those around me that Christ is the true love of my heart, my true treasure?

3. The Devil's Strategy Revealed: Once upon a time, Satan called an end-of-the-fiscal-year meeting to go over the year's results. He was not pleased, and he demanded to know what new strategies he could employ to guarantee success in moving men's hearts away from their Creator. Sending men distractions in prayer and contemplation came just ahead of tempting men to greed and lust. Infiltrating and corrupting the music industry increased the numbers. Developing the multibillion-dollar pornography industry brought in great results. Yet, Satan was still not satisfied. Then one suggestion was brought to his attention: "We must convince the men of earth that they have a lot of time!" We all tend to think we will continue in this earthly life for many years to come. This may not be the case, for we know not the day or the hour. We must awake from our slumber, for "blessed are those servants whom the master finds vigilant on his arrival."

Conversation with Christ: Lord, strengthen me in times of temptation and distraction, so I may never sell my inheritance for a bowl of lentils (see Genesis 25:34). Help me, Lord, to rededicate my life to you in a more committed way that builds your kingdom in me and in those around me.

Resolution: I will do a good examination of conscience to see what more I can do to keep Christ and his interests at the top of my priorities and in the allocation of my time.

Hmmm. Do you offer your pro-bort ways for the glory of God and the salvation of souls, MikeyBS?

How's that whole "doing His holy will" going?

Oh wait. That's right (well, WRONG actually) you belong to the Pelosi-Gregoire-Kennedy-Murray-Cantwell-Kerry-Dowd-Cuomo et.al. CAFETERIA of convenience and moral relativism church.

Want/NEED a heads up on tomorrows reading, MikeyBS? I have it right here in my email.


Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on August 11, 2013 08:54 PM
43. Oh, sh*t, Ragnar, get a life, will you? Every stupid conservative you quote about the minimum wage has been debunked so many times, by real economists, that it isn't funny. I mean, quoting Thomas Sowell? Seriously? Who is more credible, a liar for hire like Sowell, or Henry Ford, who said words to the effect that "Raising the minimum wage creates an ever widening cycle of buying."

Posted by: Ivan on August 11, 2013 09:59 PM
44. "We're going to pass this package. We're going to get it all. We're going to jam light rail right up the a**es of the dumb gomers in Clarklahoma. The economy will grow, the Democrats will get the credit, and the GOP (Greedy Old Pennypinchers) will get the blame for opposing it.

In other words, sucks to be you. But I knew that to begin with."

As usual with your generalizations and foul mouthed rhetoric, You are closer to being dead than being right.


Posted by: Smokie on August 12, 2013 06:48 AM
45. Washington state's minimum wage is $9.19/hour, which is higher than Oregon's ($8.95/hr), and much higher than Idaho's ($7.25/hr, same as federal minimum wage). Yet Entrepreneur Magazine had Seattle as the only place in all three states on their list of best places to start a business.

Rags, the next time you're in Seattle, how about asking the Washington Policy Center why the state with the highest minimum wage was also home to the best place to start a business?

Posted by: tensor on August 12, 2013 10:55 AM
46. For every Larry Craig, there's a dozen Filthy Filners, Spitzers, & Wieners. Democrats are loose morality people. This is what happens when you run around with a sense of life based around hedonism, drugs, sex, rock 'n roll, abortion and anything goes. The bar is low. The Left lives in the gutter.

Posted by: Leftover on August 12, 2013 12:11 PM
47. Did that little rant make you feel better? I notice you failed to mention the boy-chasing Mark Foley; when the House pages complained, the Republican leadership ignored them.

Liberals want real solutions to real problems, not feel-good rhetoric from ambitious politicians. Worry about your own morality; that's what an adult does.

Posted by: tensor on August 12, 2013 01:37 PM
48. "hedonism, drugs, sex, rock 'n roll, abortion and anything goes"

Geez, it's only Monday and now I've got Friday on my mind.

Posted by: Doctor Steve on August 12, 2013 03:19 PM
49. @45 tensor on August 12, 2013 10:55 AM,

Those are eveeel facts! How dare you raise them? Idaho is a paradise of FREE MARKETS!

But is does raise the question why Rags and the WPC folk just don't drive a few hours east to the paradise they crave and live there.

Posted by: MikeBoyScout on August 12, 2013 05:22 PM
50. MikeBoyScout -- yes, it's truly impressive, the number of excuses our local right-wing friends can confect to explain why they continue to reside in the reliably-liberal Seattle area. According to their predictions, Seattle should have long ago descended into an unlivable hell-hole, yet here we are, a thriving environment for private-sector job creation. (I wonder if even fake think tanks, like the grifters at WPC, locate here because of our favorable business environment. They have offices in Seattle and Olympia, a mere sixty miles apart, and their annual dinner is here this year. For a "business" whose "product" is blog posts and position papers, all based on fake research, they seem to need extensive physical infrastructure.)

Posted by: tensor on August 12, 2013 05:38 PM
51. It looks like somebody did something about the spam. Now if they could just filter out comments containing more than 500 words or fifty links.

Just pulling your leg, Rags! I'm sure we all have our own idea of what the next level of spam filtering should be and it wouldn't have to be left or right. For instance, if we had an arrested development filter and were to set it at the age of 12, we'd probably lose Leftover, poor guy! Hell, we'd likely get the same result with an IQ filter set at 12. Sad for Leftover.

Posted by: Doctor Steve on August 12, 2013 09:55 PM
52. GOV JAY, is focused on jobs...yeah right. Maybe jobs like refining mortgages that are Fannie/Freddie backed. He's for the government to back/thus 'own" the loans and then can just give them for free with a bailout. Remember, he said poor people weren't smart enough to read or understand mortgage contracts, so the Gov needs to take care of them. (As a WEA supporter, he knows they can't read)

He doesn't believe in personal responsibility or family (his backing of current policies to help the poor) or fiscal responsibility. So why would he really focus on jobs? Jobs are built on top of these pieces which are a part of the foundation of society.

Go Redskins!! I'm a Hawks fan, but am now rooting for the Redskins to lose to the Hawks in the NFC Championship game.

Posted by: Dengle on August 13, 2013 12:30 PM