Chicago Mayor Tries to Poach Oregon Companies because of Measure 66

[BLAZER PROPHET]

repped.

Nike belongs in Chicago.

Phil Knight is a morally bankrupt, child-enslaving leech who has never paid his way in Oregon through taxes or employment opportunities.

He should be in prison, but I'd settle for Chicago.

Yes, but how do you really feel about Nike?

 

[barfo]

So basically just take it and not complain?

What's the point of complaining?

So when the Blazers don't make a trade . . . no complaining, no whining because I'll always be a Blazer fan so what is the point of complaining?

Now you are getting it.

I thought this was an OT board to discuss things like taxes. I didn't know that one needs to complain about all taxes when complaining about the recently passed tax measures.

Not just all taxes. I need to you complain about everything equally. Singling out taxes for special treatment is what I'm complaining about here. Yes, I'm allowed to complain about particular things. I purchased a $500 complaint license from the state, so I'm allowed to.

And it's not like I'm taking some small obscure point and making a big deal out of it. As I already mentioned, this is such a big deal that the Oreogn election was being watched nationally and now being critized by some credible politicians out there.

I didn't mean to say that you personally were making a big deal of it. People generally make a big deal of it, including those credible politicians. I'm saying everyone complains about taxes too much.

barfo

 

[The_Lillard_King]

IPeople generally make a big deal of it, including those credible politicians. I'm saying everyone complains about taxes too much.

barfo

I must be getting old because that used to be my philosophy . . . but what a wrong time to raise taxes. Small, large . . . it doesn't matter, to raise taxes because of public employees during these times is just wrong . . . but there I go whining again.

I'll shut up and pay the man . . . "thank you sir can I have another" . .. better?

 

[yakbladder]

I must be getting old because that used to be my philosophy . . . but what a wrong time to raise taxes. Small, large . . . it doesn't matter, to raise taxes because of public employees during these times is just wrong . . . but there I go whining again.

I'll shut up and pay the man . . . "thank you sir can I have another" . .. better?

It's a recession, what a horrible time to raise taxes.

It's a boom economy, we can't raise taxes or it will slow us down.

A) Yes, I agree, it was a horrible time and horrible emotional effect to raise taxes.

B) The amount was piddly, it hasn't been raised since the 30's, so suck it.

I was actually against the tax until I saw the ludicrous arguments being made against it. Then I just cast the "spite" vote.

 

[Paxil]

You can't blame Chicago for trying... but I think he is probably a little misinformed about the numbers.

How cheap is electricity there? Water?

 

[MrJayremmie]

Did you guys see Oregon's response to this? Oregon's Economic Director destroyed this guy.

http://www.oregonbusiness.com/robin/2985-editors-note-portland-takes-on-chicago

Dear Honorable Mayor Daley:

On behalf of all Oregonians, and in particular state business development officials such as myself, I want to thank you for your recent remarks about Oregon's business climate. We truly appreciate your good sportsmanship and sense of humor when you said the recent vote by Oregonians to raise business and certain income taxes was good news for the Windy City. In fact, you went as far as to vow to visit our state to snag a few unhappy Oregon companies and bring them back to the Land of Lincoln.

Let me welcome you by letting you know about a few things you might find upon your arrival. First, in case you have forgotten, we have no sales tax here in Oregon. Second, our property taxes, in particular those on commercial properties, are some of the lowest in the nation. Finally, I am sure you know that the Tax Foundation's recent 2010 Business Tax Climate report found Oregon to be the 14th best state in the nation in which to do business. And, yes, that was after our voters passed the tax increases.

Before you arrive, perhaps you can verify for me some facts about the business climate in your neck of the woods. Illinois ranks 30th in the same 2010 Business Tax Climate report, correct? You have some of the highest property taxes in the nation (12th) and a state sales tax (6.25%) that ranks as the 10th highest in the nation. Of course, Chicago has the highest sales tax (10.25%) of any major U.S. city and parts of Cook County levy an 11.5% sales tax. Illinois also has the 5th highest unemployment insurance tax in the U.S. I just want to make very sure I have my facts straight when Oregon business leaders ask me about the advantages they will enjoy when they join you in Illinois.

We here in Oregon want to thank you for highlighting our state's positive business climate. Did you think Oregon business owners would not realize how much more expensive it would be to operate in Chicago? We are happy to have you draw even more attention to the fact that Oregon is home to more solar manufacturers than any place in North America and was 4th in the nation last year in adding new wind energy capacity.

I look forward to meeting you and buying you a tasty Oregon beer during your visit (yes, the Portland metro area has more breweries than any place in the world) and telling you more of the many reasons why Oregon is a great place to live and to do business.

All the best,
Tim McCabe, Director
Oregon Business Development Department - Business Oregon

LOL! Epic. Definitely have a new respect for our state.

 

[maxiep]

(My replies are the bold statements.)

Your replies are lies and nonsense.

 

[maxiep]

So in exchange for saving millions upon millions of dollars they had to pay..what...maybe 5-20K at most? Please.

I'm pretty sure Intel has hired more than five to twenty employees.

 

[maxiep]

Did you guys see Oregon's response to this? Oregon's Economic Director destroyed this guy.

http://www.oregonbusiness.com/robin/2985-editors-note-portland-takes-on-chicago



LOL! Epic. Definitely have a new respect for our state.

Once again, if our state is such a great place for business, why is our economy in the shitter, even compared to other states?

 

[The_Lillard_King]

It's a recession, what a horrible time to raise taxes.

It's a boom economy, we can't raise taxes or it will slow us down.

A) Yes, I agree, it was a horrible time and horrible emotional effect to raise taxes.

B) The amount was piddly, it hasn't been raised since the 30's, so suck it.

I was actually against the tax until I saw the ludicrous arguments being made against it. Then I just cast the "spite" vote.

What is funny is there was so much propaganda and money spent during this election, it was hard to distinguish who was saying what. The campaign tatcis were ugly and unethical.

For instance, you say the ludicrous arguments swayed you. I suspect they swayed others, especially the ludicrious arguments made in the phamplet for reasons to vote against the measures. Here is the kicker, did you know those ludicrious arguments were written by the union who was in favor of passing the measures. You may have fell for a cheap gimmick by the campaign in favor of the taxes. Suck that idea for a while.

 

[BrianFromWA]

It's a recession, what a horrible time to raise taxes.

It's a boom economy, we can't raise taxes or it will slow us down.

A) Yes, I agree, it was a horrible time and horrible emotional effect to raise taxes.

B) The amount was piddly, it hasn't been raised since the 30's, so suck it.

I was actually against the tax until I saw the ludicrous arguments being made against it. Then I just cast the "spite" vote.

Well done. "Spite" Votes on policies/taxes/measures that you know are wrong, but you make into a law anyway, are a shining beacon of civic responsibility and pride. Thanks. Honestly, I can't fathom that someone would do something that fucking stupid and irresponsible. I hope you're just pulling a Punk'd on me, and everyone's laughing that I took the bait. But if not, that's a horrible fucking thing to do, much less be proud of enough to publicize it.

(Note: Not that I specifically care, b/c my relatives in Oregon have jobs or are retired already, and I live in WA. But I have a feeling that you're not unique in this)

 

[Paxil]

Goodness... Chicago has a 10.5% SALES TAX!!! Wowsers... that'd be $75 a Costco trip for my fam... two trips that would be = to the min business tax for the state.

Since we make a trip every 2 weeks we'd pay $1800 more in sales tax just at Costco! Count me in! But wait... I have to drive too... average of say 15,000 miles per year on our two cars at ~20 MPG, ~1500 gallons... (Chicago as 75c per gallon gas tax compared to 43c in Oregon) = another 480 bucks just in gas tax... so now we are up to another $2280... not to mention if I move I have to give up the beach... the mountains... forests, the high desert... the amazing summers... and trade them annoying bugs, humidity, a lightning pole on my house, nightmarish traffic and a charismatic mayor.

If that appeals to you... go for it. Personally... I love Oregon.

 

[RR7]

Holy shit, you spend 750 dollars every two weeks at Costco?!?!

 

[The_Lillard_King]

Goodness... Chicago has a 10.5% SALES TAX!!! Wowsers... that'd be $75 a Costco trip for my fam... two trips that would be = to the min business tax for the state.

Since we make a trip every 2 weeks we'd pay $1800 more in sales tax just at Costco! Count me in! But wait... I have to drive too... average of say 15,000 miles per year on our two cars at ~20 MPG, ~1500 gallons... (Chicago as 75c per gallon gas tax compared to 43c in Oregon) = another 480 bucks just in gas tax... so now we are up to another $2280... not to mention if I move I have to give up the beach... the mountains... forests, the high desert... the amazing summers... and trade them annoying bugs, humidity, a lightning pole on my house, nightmarish traffic and a charismatic mayor.

If that appeals to you... go for it. Personally... I love Oregon.

Me too, I love Oregon.

But if you were working in Chicago, I'm guessing you would be making a lot more than in Oregon, so those extra costs you mentioned shouldn't be hard to deal with.

But you would miss all those other things you mentioned. Personally, I really love Hawaii. But the idea of finding a job in Hawaii that pays decent is very difficult. I suspect that is why many do not pick Oregon over say a Chicago . . . career wise, Chicago is the choice (taxes and all)

 

[julius]

Me too, I love Oregon.

But if you were working in Chicago, I'm guessing you would be making a lot more than in Oregon, so those extra costs you mentioned shouldn't be hard to deal with.

How do you figure he'd make more in Chicago?

And to your last point (which I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not), isn't that kind of like saying those who are rich (the businesses) should just suck it up because after all, they can afford it?

In Chicago (in your theory), someone would make more than in Oregon, so the extra costs don't matter. Well, businesses make more money than I do, so the extra costs they have to endure shouldn't matter. They have much more money than I do.

 

[yakbladder]

Well done. "Spite" Votes on policies/taxes/measures that you know are wrong, but you make into a law anyway, are a shining beacon of civic responsibility and pride. Thanks. Honestly, I can't fathom that someone would do something that fucking stupid and irresponsible. I hope you're just pulling a Punk'd on me, and everyone's laughing that I took the bait. But if not, that's a horrible fucking thing to do, much less be proud of enough to publicize it.

(Note: Not that I specifically care, b/c my relatives in Oregon have jobs or are retired already, and I live in WA. But I have a feeling that you're not unique in this)

Sorry you feel that way. Let me define it a little better.

I was on the edge between voting for or against. I was leaning slightly against because I didn't believe they should tax income vs profits. I didn't think it was wrong, just that it was addressing something that needed to be solved in a different manner. They're just trying to address all loopholes by catching the income side vs closing the loopholes on the profit side. However, once I started reading about how little the tax actually was I thought "Well, it really isn't that bad, it hasn't been changed since the 30's, it doesn't affect most small businesses at all, and for most of those that it does they are capped." So I hedged a little more. Then I started seeing ads talking about how companies would be laying off left and right due to this tax. That was utter nonsense. That was a shining beacon of stupidity. As a result, it pushed me over the edge to vote for the tax.

Next time maybe PM me before posting something so fucking stupid? Not really sure I appreciate being called a stupid fucker, but hey, way to show how classy you are. Very ironic post of yours...

 

[The_Lillard_King]

.

Next time maybe PM me before posting something so fucking stupid? Not really sure I appreciate being called a stupid fucker, but hey, way to show how classy you are. Very ironic post of yours...[/QUOTE]


But tellling someone to suck it is classy? There is irony. Check yourself sometimes . . .

 

[maxiep]

It's a recession, what a horrible time to raise taxes.

Agreed.

It's a boom economy, we can't raise taxes or it will slow us down.

It's a bit more complicated. Sometimes you want to slow the economy to keep it from overheating. The tail end of a boom can do a great deal of long term damage. You can do it by raising interest rates or raising taxes to pay off debt.

My issues isn't that taxes are too high, but that government tries to do too much. Do less, and use the residual to pay off the debt.

The problem we have with government is they have to spend in tough times for the increased social safety net. In good times, the assumption is that they will last forever and rather than paying off the debt, they find new uses for the monies received.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

How do you figure he'd make more in Chicago?

And to your last point (which I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not), isn't that kind of like saying those who are rich (the businesses) should just suck it up because after all, they can afford it?

In Chicago (in your theory), someone would make more than in Oregon, so the extra costs don't matter. Well, businesses make more money than I do, so the extra costs they have to endure shouldn't matter. They have much more money than I do.

I don't have stats about Chicago, but in CA (in general), the same professions make more in LA and SF than in Ptd. I'm pretty sure that is true with Seattle as well. I assumed that was true in Chicago, maybe I'm wrong on that.

What makes you think businesses have all this money? Again no stats, but I'm guessing over 100 businesses go down a year. Look at the resturant business alone, I see those businesses shutting down all the time. If businesses aren't going under, many are cutting back and laying off.

If starting a business was the key to automatically making a lot money, everyone would be starting businesses. It is much more difficult than some suspect to start a business and make it profitable and worth all the work, IMO.

 

[maxiep]

Goodness... Chicago has a 10.5% SALES TAX!!! Wowsers... that'd be $75 a Costco trip for my fam... two trips that would be = to the min business tax for the state.

Since we make a trip every 2 weeks we'd pay $1800 more in sales tax just at Costco! Count me in! But wait... I have to drive too... average of say 15,000 miles per year on our two cars at ~20 MPG, ~1500 gallons... (Chicago as 75c per gallon gas tax compared to 43c in Oregon) = another 480 bucks just in gas tax... so now we are up to another $2280... not to mention if I move I have to give up the beach... the mountains... forests, the high desert... the amazing summers... and trade them annoying bugs, humidity, a lightning pole on my house, nightmarish traffic and a charismatic mayor.

If that appeals to you... go for it. Personally... I love Oregon.

Any sales tax would have to also see a concomitant reduction in the income tax and property tax. The goal is not to increase tax receipts, but to make them more stable.

As for your Costco dilemma, please tell me you're an Executive Member and you have the Costco AmEx.

 

[julius]

I don't have stats about Chicago, but in CA (in general), the same professions make more in LA and SF than in Ptd. I'm pretty sure that is true with Seattle as well. I assumed that was true in Chicago, maybe I'm wrong on that.

I always assumed that was due to the COL adjustments. I might be wrong. These following #'s are based from http://www.bestplaces.net/COL/

For example, A salary of $75,000 in Portland, Oregon should increase to $86,931 in Chicago, Illinois, (to meet the same standard of living).

So that extra 9,000 (or so) might look better on paper, but doesn't mean they're really making more spendable money.

Another example, A salary of $75,000 in Portland, Oregon should increase to $128,716 in San Francisco, California (to meet the same standard of living).

A salary of $75,000 in Portland, Oregon should increase to $107,015 in Los Angeles, California (to meet the same standard of living).

A salary of $75,000 in Portland, Oregon should increase to $113,092 in New York, New York (to meet the same standard of living).

So part of the reason why some professions are paid at a "higher" rate is because those who work there HAVE to make more to live in those cities, or they wouldn't be able to live in the cities (or areas) that they work in.

What makes you think businesses have all this money? Again no stats, but I'm guessing over 100 businesses go down a year. Look at the resturant business alone, I see those businesses shutting down all the time. If businesses aren't going under, many are cutting back and laying off.

Not all businesses have tons of money, but the amount of money that goes up, compared to the amount of those who are bitching, is not equal.

Meaning, in some cases the tax "increase" they're seeing, does not equal the amount of complaining they're doing. Some, but not all, people are looking for any reason to come off as not the jack-hole who fires people because of economic down times. if you can pass of the blame onto a tax system that most people don't look into (the owners themselves) you do it.

If starting a business was the key to automatically making a lot money, everyone would be starting businesses. It is much more difficult than some suspect to start a business and make it profitable and worth all the work, IMO.

I just haven't seen any non hyperbole comments made by someone, that shows that businesses in Oregon are going to be severely taxed to the point of that being the REAL reason they've closed. It might push them over the "edge", but I don't think it's nearly the cause people think it is. As I said earlier, I might be wrong about this (and might've missed a link in this or another thread).

 

[yakbladder]

.

Next time maybe PM me before posting something so fucking stupid? Not really sure I appreciate being called a stupid fucker, but hey, way to show how classy you are. Very ironic post of yours...[/QUOTE]


But tellling someone to suck it is classy? There is irony. Check yourself sometimes . . .

Suck it is a general term, wasn't even directed at you. I also didn't talk about how fucking stupid it was to do something and then do something fucking stupid.

So, in summary, suck it != fucking stupid.

But my apologies if my post upset you. Wasn't directed at you.

 

[Paxil]

Executive Member all the way. They should pick my wife up in a limo she spends so much there. =)

RR7... $500 a trip is max... can vary between 250-500... I may have been off in my math. Think kids... diapers... wet wipes... detergent for laundry etc...

Personally... I don't like Costo... for a few reasons... you never know if they are going to always have something... they rotate inventory a lot... and a company I had to deal with them and they are a pain in the butt. You have to put their price stickers on items... put stock on pallets according to their specs, having the inventory arrive at their warehouse at a precise time etc... and then there is the fact they demand wholesale discount when they are really selling to the public... Walmart etc... all the same... evil I tell you... all evil.

 

[yakbladder]

Agreed.



It's a bit more complicated. Sometimes you want to slow the economy to keep it from overheating. The tail end of a boom can do a great deal of long term damage. You can do it by raising interest rates or raising taxes to pay off debt.

My issues isn't that taxes are too high, but that government tries to do too much. Do less, and use the residual to pay off the debt.

The problem we have with government is they have to spend in tough times for the increased social safety net. In good times, the assumption is that they will last forever and rather than paying off the debt, they find new uses for the monies received.

Ok, so we differ on the base view of how much government should do, but that aside - since the government in general isn't allowed to "save for a rainy day" during good times what other options do they have during the bad times other than to take a little more temporarily? Again, I realize you argue that the government can cut back, but at some point the government would scale back to the point where cutting anymore would destabilize society (for example if we stopped employing the FDA for a year)...

 

[The_Lillard_King]

I always assumed that was due to the COL adjustments. I might be wrong. These following #'s are based from http://www.bestplaces.net/COL/

For example, A salary of $75,000 in Portland, Oregon should increase to $86,931 in Chicago, Illinois, (to meet the same standard of living).

So that extra 9,000 (or so) might look better on paper, but doesn't mean they're really making more spendable money.

Another example, A salary of $75,000 in Portland, Oregon should increase to $128,716 in San Francisco, California (to meet the same standard of living).

A salary of $75,000 in Portland, Oregon should increase to $107,015 in Los Angeles, California (to meet the same standard of living).

A salary of $75,000 in Portland, Oregon should increase to $113,092 in New York, New York (to meet the same standard of living).

So part of the reason why some professions are paid at a "higher" rate is because those who work there HAVE to make more to live in those cities, or they wouldn't be able to live in the cities (or areas) that they work in.



Not all businesses have tons of money, but the amount of money that goes up, compared to the amount of those who are bitching, is not equal.

Meaning, in some cases the tax "increase" they're seeing, does not equal the amount of complaining they're doing. Some, but not all, people are looking for any reason to come off as not the jack-hole who fires people because of economic down times. if you can pass of the blame onto a tax system that most people don't look into (the owners themselves) you do it.



I just haven't seen any non hyperbole comments made by someone, that shows that businesses in Oregon are going to be severely taxed to the point of that being the REAL reason they've closed. It might push them over the "edge", but I don't think it's nearly the cause people think it is. As I said earlier, I might be wrong about this (and might've missed a link in this or another thread).

I thinhk we are somewhat on the same page. Without an intense analysis, I figured the taxes in a state is part of the higher cost of living, so my point was eventhough taxes are higher, same standard of living because increased salaries balance off the more you pay in taxes. Of course we can get into how much harder people work in LA or Chicago so really is it the same standard of living . . . but I'm sure there are many factors.

For the record, I have been one of the most vocal opponents to these tax measures but have never claimed it make businesses go under. I have said I don't think this helps the business climate and has futher divided business owners v. public employee union, but the most I have experienced was 2 part time layoffs (that I later conceeded is not as important as this supposed gov't shorfall).

I also conceed the bitching is high relative to the amount of tax increase. But the reason (and the part that really pissese me off) is because this was the exact wrong time to raise taxes. Business climate is a real factor in businesses. Many make decisions based on where they think the economy is going and the policies being implemented by the state. The fact the tax is retroactive pisses off business owners and the fact business owners feel like they have no real power in the legislature (the public employee union has all the real power . . they really do)

I think my final analysis on this is I sure hope the state (and PERS) really neededthe money, because these tax measures has raised a lot of hostility with the business community . . . whether justifiable or not.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

Suck it is a general term, wasn't even directed at you. I also didn't talk about how fucking stupid it was to do something and then do something fucking stupid.

So, in summary, suck it != fucking stupid.

But my apologies if my post upset you. Wasn't directed at you.

Thanks . . . I realize I'm being over sensitive about this.

I feel like I'm taking on the world in this forum over this issue and I get frustrated and over sensitive.

 

[BrianFromWA]

Sorry you feel that way. Let me define it a little better.

I was on the edge between voting for or against. I was leaning slightly against because I didn't believe they should tax income vs profits. I didn't think it was wrong, just that it was addressing something that needed to be solved in a different manner. They're just trying to address all loopholes by catching the income side vs closing the loopholes on the profit side. However, once I started reading about how little the tax actually was I thought "Well, it really isn't that bad, it hasn't been changed since the 30's, it doesn't affect most small businesses at all, and for most of those that it does they are capped." So I hedged a little more. Then I started seeing ads talking about how companies would be laying off left and right due to this tax. That was utter nonsense. That was a shining beacon of stupidity. As a result, it pushed me over the edge to vote for the tax.

Next time maybe PM me before posting something so fucking stupid? Not really sure I appreciate being called a stupid fucker, but hey, way to show how classy you are. Very ironic post of yours...

Thanks for the redefinition, and the PM's on the way. Your justification for voting for the new tax was:

I was actually against the tax until I saw the ludicrous arguments being made against it. Then I just cast the "spite" vote.

Is, imho, civically irresponsible and showed a lack of maturity. I was shocked by that and reacted viscerally. The post I just quoted is completely different in tone and reason from the first, so that even if I don't agree with you, you make a cogent point. Not once did I call you (or think that you are) a "stupid fucker". And if you think that my previous post was "fucking stupid" you have that right. Class has nothing to do with it.

 

[maxiep]

Ok, so we differ on the base view of how much government should do, but that aside - since the government in general isn't allowed to "save for a rainy day" during good times what other options do they have during the bad times other than to take a little more temporarily? Again, I realize you argue that the government can cut back, but at some point the government would scale back to the point where cutting anymore would destabilize society (for example if we stopped employing the FDA for a year)...

Of course government can "save for a rainy day". First, the debt has to be paid off and Social Security and Medicare re-funded. Clinton and Bush both ran surpluses.

As for your "destabilize society" line, we have very different ideas of where that line is.

 

[maxiep]

http://theoffice.wikia.com/wiki/Suck_It

[video=youtube;bapk460RPOM]

 

[julius]

I think my final analysis on this is I sure hope the state (and PERS) really neededthe money, because these tax measures has raised a lot of hostility with the business community . . . whether justifiable or not.

Dang it, we're not supposed to be cordial.