SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the with-the-power-to-tax-comes-the-power-to-destroy dept.
Amazon fails to unseat pro-tax city council members in Seattle
Amazon has suffered a setback in its own backyard as several candidates for Seattle's City Council won election despite a $1.5 million campaign by business groups to defeat them. That included Kshama Sawant, an incumbent and socialist who has been a thorn in Amazon's side in recent years. The vote was held last Tuesday, but the results only became clear in recent days.
The result is significant for Amazon because last year Seattle's city council passed a $275 per employee tax on large employers. Amazon, Starbucks, and other large Seattle businesses blasted the law and funded a ballot measure to overturn it. Facing the threat of having their law overturned by voters, the city council itself repealed the measure a month after it passed.
If business groups had defeated pro-tax candidates in last week's election, it would have made the city council very reluctant to consider taxing employers again. Instead, the election results have emboldened supporters of an "Amazon tax."
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 13 2019, @06:47AM
The cost of Seattle is already being borne by quite a few large businesses there. This hasn't prevented the city from finding every hook and crook available to tax yet more people in more ways. Classic example, which shows precisely how many flaming shits they give for the little guy:
They want(ed) money for their vast, extremely expensive, and incompetently run transit plans. Remember, this is the city that was supposed to have all its viaduct replacement tunnel project done long ago, and only recently actually tore down the more-or-less last of the viaduct itself.
But anyway, they needed more cash for more transit (they already have bus, light rail, tram, commuter rail, and the godforsaken monorail, as well as a substantial investment in bicycling, and chasing cars out) so they pushed hard for a regional car tab tax on the grounds that it would benefit the whole region.
Then, instead of making it a flat car tab rate, they based it on the price of the vehicle. Makes sense, right? So Bob the apprentice mason driving a second-hand Civic doesn't pay much. Makes sense, right? Right?
Too much sense. They based it instead on MSRP.
I mean, never mind depreciation. Never mind second-hand status. It was one of the biggest bait-and-switches pulled on an electorate in the interests of sticking it to the little guy that I think I can remember.
By avowed progressives. Socialists, even, some of them.
You can't make this shit up.