Friday Open Thread

“What is grand is necessarily obscure to weak men.”

–William Blake


31 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. DavieDavie says:

    Well, this is one way to finally prove all those GOP Quackonomists right!  They had been predicting for the last 10 years that hyperinflation was just around the corner due to reckless spending by Obama for infrastructure, jobs, healthcare, etc.

    They of course have gone silent now that *rump and McConnell have given us trillion dollar deficits for the foreseeable future, with the lost tax revenue mostly going to stock buybacks and bond purchases (notice how interest rates are dropping again?).

    Effective June 10, the president intends to impose a 5 percent tariff on every good coming from Mexico, White House officials said. The tariffs would then increase by 5 percent on the first day of each month, starting July 1.

    Mexico exported $346.5 billion of goods to the United States last year, from vehicles to fruits and vegetables. And many manufactured goods cross the border several times before they are sold to U.S. consumers.

    So unless Congress somehow manages to rein *rump back in on his emergency powers, we can look forward to not just an escalator ride in the cost of Mexican products, the recirculating supply chain across the border means price acceleration leading, for example, to auto prices skyrocketing far beyond a mere 5%.

    One way or the other, *rump and his willfully ignorant Council of Quackonomic Advisors are determined to Happy-Talk us into a world wide recession.


  2. Gray in Mountains says:

    Individual-1 would be proud to be the first single person to cause a global recession. No one else has ever done it

  3. itlduso says:

    If I was a Denver resident/voter, I would have asked the mayoral and council candidates why Denver charges an Occupational Privilege Tax of $5.75/month or $69/year, regardless of the taxpayer's income.

    Our 25 year old daughter is a preschool teacher of special needs children.  She earned $28,000 in 2018 working nearly full-time (by which I mean 12 months @ 40 hours/week, not the typical 9 month teacher year).  That is, she earned nearly the $15/hour minimum wage which is the holy grail for Democrats. 

    News flash: A single person cannot live on $28,000 per year in Denver.  That's especially true when you recognize that her Federal, state and local income taxes totaled 9% of her $28,000 salary.  That's not even counting FICA (Social Security and Medicare).  Something should be done at the Federal and CO level like lowering taxes on low income earners.  Good luck with that given barriers like Tabor and a ballooning federal deficit. 

    But, Denver should institute a refund provision allowing low income workers to get back the $69 tax (the same amount of tax that Phil Anschutz pays on his W-2).  It's not a lot of money — to me.  But, that represents filling her Kia's gas tank two or three times which is significant to her.

    It's (past) time Democratic politicians actually do something to help low and middle income taxpayers.


    • VoyageurVoyageur says:

      Denver relies on that tax to help cover the cost of services for the many suburban residents who work in denver but don't live here and thus don't pay property taxes.

      • itlduso says:

        Yes, V, I know what the tax is for.  That is not my point that I tried to make so even a 74 year old could understand.  (Apparently, 74 is the new 94.)

        My point is that Denver charges that tax regardless of income.  They should offer a refund to those who are low income workers.  That should apply to even suburban workers, even though my daughter is a Denver resident.

        • VoyageurVoyageur says:

          Well, if you want to play the insult game, itlduso, I would note that my age, and your IQ , are both 74.  But my age will continue to increase and your iq will continue to drop, so the coincidence is only temporary.

          In effect you want Denver to levy a graduated income tax.  I don't think the state constitution allows municipalities to do that.  And no city in the state does, if my research is correct.

          LIKewise, your demand that the tax be refunded to suburban and denver residents alike would defeat the whole purpose of having people who work in Denver but don't live here pay part of the cost of the services they require.

          Taxing only workers who live in the burbs but work in denver would clearly be unconstitutional, so the bill mcnichols administration adopted this compromise a long time ago.

          • davebarnesdavebarnes says:

            Sadly, my IQ will never catch yours unless you die a few years before I do.

            In spite of having a lower IQ, I will strive to drive you crazy on a sporadic basis.

          • MADCO says:

            OPT has been adjudicated not an income tax and any home rule municipality that can adopt one – can set it anyway they choose.

            I don't currently reside in Denver- but I do own property and I pay plenty of taxes.

            regressive taxes are bullshit and grossly unfair.

          • itlduso says:

            Well, my insult at least got you to consider my point.

            What a great "compromise" you note — since we can't tax just nonresidents, we'll tax everyone!

            Like Madco(w) says, "regressive taxes are bullshit and grossly unfair." I would go so far to say they are immoral. And, he/she notes that an OPT tax can be set any way a locality wants.  This should have been an issue in this and past elections.

            • VoyageurVoyageur says:

              Oh ye of tiny IQ, the whole point of an OPT is to bill suburbanites for some of the costs they impose on the city.  So when you demand that suburbanites be exempted, you are demanding that the burden of serving them be switched to Denver residents.
              Good luck running for office on that platform in Denver! The Aurora residents cheering you on can’t vote for you!

              Tell me, when does your daughter get a rebate on the sales tax she pays on her Big Mac?

              And what is she doing eating Big Macs?  Didn't you teach her anything about nutrition?

              And if she is really such a lousy manager that she can't manage $5.75 a month, why don't you skip one martini every two months and pay it for her?

              Btw, a key reason the occupational privilege tax was adjudicated as not an income tax is that it is NOT based on a percentage of income.  Making it proportional as you demand might imperil that status.

              But inconclusion, it's fair to say that a tax is not inherently unreasonable just because you are too dumb to understand its purpose.

              So next time you want to ask a reasonable question, don’t overlay it with a Trumpian belch of insult and blatherskite pomposity.

              Burma Shave.

              • Conserv. Head Banger says:

                "A single person cannot live on $28,000 a year in Denver….."

                Easy solution for that = better job. Or different arrangements. Example: I know a young woman in her mid-20s who shares a 4 bedroom house in Denver with three other young women. Her rent is pretty cheap considering that it is Denver.

                • itlduso says:

                  Wow.  I assume you read that she is a preschool teacher of special needs kids and that didn't mean anything to you.  Even if she got a different "better" job, someone else would need to do that work.   Not even addressing your other "solution" to room with three other people, you don't answer the fact that Denver taxes her regardless of income, which is wrong and immoral.

                  • VoyageurVoyageur says:

                    Don't tax you and don't tax me.  Tax that fellow behind the tree.

                    The tax in question is one fourth of one percent of your daughter's income.

                    the horror, the horror!

                    I wish my tax bill was so immoral.

                    $5.75 a month!

                    so slip her  $20 every three months, cheapskate!


                    • itlduso says:

                      Says the senior citizen who happily pockets his $24,000-$48,000 EXCLUSION from CO income taxes for his retirement income, which BTW is also regardless of gross income.  That equals between $1,111 and $2,222 (depending on spousal retirement income) in tax avoidance benefiting you because… you're old? 

                      And, this post isn't only about my daughter, who we are extremely proud of her overcoming lifelong learning disabilities, but every low income worker, a-hole. 

                    • VoyageurVoyageur says:

                      Hey, whining bigot, let me teach you how to play the insult game. You lose because you attack people for things they can't control — their age, their sexual orientation.

                      when did you tell your mother to conceive you, anyway?  Did you use the same form you did to apply for white privilege?

                      I win because I attack you for things you can control: your bigotry, your stupidity, your cheapness, your dedication to the designated hitter rule and your firm belief that bathing is petty bourgeois behaviour.

                      Okay, to be fair, you can't really control your stupidity.  But you don't have to advertise it.

                      you have not only insulted every one over 50 on this board, you've offended people who t hink ag eist bigots like you suck.

                      You 'd be smart to apologize for your hateful bigotry and try an actual argument.  Or at least an insult not rooted in things your target can't control.

                      Over and out, ageist bigot.

                      You lose!

              • itlduso says:

                What a jerk you are.  As mama and others have found on this site, it's nearly impossible to respond to the absurd comments you just vomited.  Big Macs? My martinis? They are not worthy of a response, I just feel sorry for you.

                To the actual point, it was noted that cities can implement the OPT any way they want.  This flat tax hits low income workers disproportionately.  Note that many of these workers have several jobs to make ends meet — they are hit by the $5.75/month tax on every one of their W-2s.  The City of Denver should find some compassion and help low income workers.

                • VoyageurVoyageur says:

                  Or you could stop whining and help out your kid for $5.75 a month!

                  Just because you are a crappy father, you don't have to insult people who take care of their families.

                  And it was NOT noted that opts could be proportional.  The court found the opposite–the fact that it is a flat fee is why it is Not an income tax.

                  I challenge you to cite a Colorado Supreme Court decision to that point.

                  Next time, do five minutes of research before making a fool of yourself.

                  Fyi, the Colorado Supreme Court Library is free and open to the public. Its staff is courteous and helpful. And you can even get a free hour on Westlaw.

  4. Genghis says:

    Congrats to the New Hampshire state legislature, which yesterday overrode the governor's veto and thereby did away with capital punishment in that state. That's 21 states with no death penalty, including (I think) all the New England states. Pockets of civilization exist, even here in Stankistan.

  5. DavieDavie says:

    Bitter end to the week thanks to *rump.  Maybe this will bring some small comic relief

    Politico cartoon

  6. RepealAndReplace says:

    Thoughts and prayers time……

    11 dead should bring out Negev to remind us that if only there was a good guy with a gun there.

  7. MichaelBowmanMichaelBowman says:

    After another week of gaslighting, ending with cascading markets and 11 more souls succumbing to our freedoms, a court has ordered the Feds to revisit the scheduling of marijuana.  The opinions of our poster child for misfiring synapses aside, this is long overdue. 

    P.S. Up yours, Tricky Dick. 

    Federal Appeals Court Rules DEA, Federal Govt. Must 'Promptly' Reassess Marijuana's Illegality

    A federal appeals court has re-instated a case against the federal government over the Schedule I status of cannabis.

    The challengers, Super Bowl champion Marvin Washington; Dean Bortell (parent of underage medical cannabis patient Alexis Bortell); U.S. Army veteran José Belén; Sebastien Cotte (parent of underage medical cannabis patient Jagger Cotte); and the Cannabis Cultural Association, originally sued the U.S. federal government, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and its administrator, and then Attorney General Jeff Sessions, back in 2017. They argued that cannabis’ Schedule I status under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) represented a risk to patients’ health and perpetuated economic iniquities in the U.S.

    According to the DEA's CSA, the Schedule I category is reserved for drugs with "no currently accepted medical use in the United States, a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision, and a high potential for abuse," including heroin and LSD. Under this regime, drugs like Fentanyl and Oxycodone, often considered the main drivers of America's opioid crisis, are basically considered to be less dangerous than cannabis.

  8. Gray in Mountains says:

    Re the OPT: lower income employees are contributing more than they take. Denver would be unable to replace all those workers if they left. Expecting adults to have roommates is simply surrender, most adults would not choose to have roommates; I guess the wouldn't have more than one car either.

    Keep the OPT. Make it apply to all who make $100K

    • VoyageurVoyageur says:

      If you think the Occupational Privilege Tax, $5.75 a month, is what forces people to have roommates, Gray, then pray tell me: Where can I rent an apartment for $11.50 a month?  And does that include utilities?

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account

You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.