- Joined
- Sep 16, 2008
- Messages
- 46,096
- Likes
- 35,220
- Points
- 113
Multnomah is subsidized and still struggles to make ends meet.
But yeah... Keep drinking the lead in the water.
Is Multnomah county subsidized?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Multnomah is subsidized and still struggles to make ends meet.
But yeah... Keep drinking the lead in the water.
Is Multnomah county subsidized?
I would be interested in seeing the data on that, if there is any.
barfo
Is Multnomah county subsidized?
Multnomah is not subsidized, but yes, it has all kinds of financial problems due to various things, including bad decision-making.
barfo
Anything with a shortfall that continues to operate is subsidized, one way or another. The citizens always pay for it.
This report is pretty good, though there are some holes.
http://sos.oregon.gov/audits/Documents/2016-11.pdf
Yes. You're right. Stupid, over-generalized statement. Not unlike your comment about Portland subsidizing for everyone else. Cuz that was just dishonest bull.
This graphic gives a solid indication of the counties doing well. If you're on the positive of every graphic, your county is probably doing pretty well.
Not unlike your comment about Portland subsidizing for everyone else. Cuz that was just dishonest bull.
Overall, taxpayers in 46 metropolitan counties paid 82.5 percent of the taxes, or $11.3 billion, and received 76.7 percent, or $10.5 billion in expenditures, the study said.
I'm sorry if that offends you, but it's the truth. People in the Portland Metro pay more in taxes, and receive less in services, per capita. It's the same all over the country.
For example, here's Indiana (happened to be the first thing listed in the google search). There are lots more like that.
barfo
I'm sorry if that offends you, but it's the truth. People in the Portland Metro pay more in taxes, and receive less in services, per capita. It's the same all over the country.
For example, here's Indiana (happened to be the first thing listed in the google search). There are lots more like that.
barfo
There are several legitimate reasons for this.
1) Jobs pay more in the city than in rural areas, therefore more income tax is collected. Example, a local rural hospital is now advertising to hire Registered Nurses. The top pay they offer is about 60% of what RNs makes in Portland, according to my cousin that is an RN in Portland.
2) Many services are provided by volunteers in small communities. Example, salaries for firemen take up a large part of Portland’s budget. In small communities we have volunteer firemen. What is amazing, when we have a local forest fire, our volunteer firemen are the first to respond, and the last to leave. They often work very long hours, for weeks, without pay. Locals do a lot of volunteer work to maintain public lands, such as local parks, that cities pay high salaries to maintain..
3) Property taxes are much higher in the city, because the cost/value of land is much higher.
You keep comparing apples to oranges.
There are several legitimate reasons for this.
1) Jobs pay more in the city than in rural areas, therefore more income tax is collected. Example, a local rural hospital is now advertising to hire Registered Nurses. The top pay they offer is about 60% of what RNs makes in Portland, according to my cousin that is an RN in Portland.
2) Many services are provided by volunteers in small communities. Example, salaries for firemen take up a large part of Portland’s budget. In small communities we have volunteer firemen. What is amazing, when we have a local forest fire, our volunteer firemen are the first to respond, and the last to leave. They often work very long hours, for weeks, without pay. Locals do a lot of volunteer work to maintain public lands, such as local parks, that cities pay high salaries to maintain..
3) Property taxes are much higher in the city, because the cost/value of land is much higher.
You keep comparing apples to oranges.
A sample of districts in what the State provides per student in addition to their local funds.
Bandon 3751
PPS 3441 (Portland Public Schools)
It looks to me like your high density residential areas with in the urban growth boundaries that are doing most of the sucking.
Gotta figure out a way to pay for all that unnecessary infrastructure. Simply because you pay more for living in town doesn't mean you're subsidizing other cities.
This effect actually reduces the need for tax money - but rural people get more in tax supported services despite having these volunteer services.
barfo
Correct, but that's not what we are discussing. The situation is that rural people get more in state and federal services than they pay in in taxes. That's a subsidy.
barfo
Or maybe smaller communities get more services for their money because they have less government (which costs money) and have people spending the money more wisely. And we have a higher percentage of people willing to give back to the community. There's a big difference, too, if we're talking smaller city Oregon versus smaller city Oregon Coast. For a number of reasons, the coast is generally more expensive.
MarAzul's graphic doesn't show me a whole lot, to be honest. it's rather all over the place. Look how much money is being spent in Beaverton, West Linn, Oregon City schools per student. And you've got a lot of money flowing into those areas (especially West Linn - we were paying $11K/year in property taxes before leaving).
In general, property taxes are Oregon cities' single biggest revenue stream. If that's true, which is what several Oregon websites would indicate, including the "State of the Cities" report, I have a hard time believing I'm being subsidized by the granola-munchers of Multnomah County.
Your words: "By being subsidized by Portland taxpayers, like the rest of the state."
The way small towns most commonly receive big subsidies are for infrastructure projects (like the Newberg/Dundee bypass). Which, for those living out in Yamhill County, very few wanted. It's been pushed upon us (mostly by the city folk). That's like me being pissed when some of my tax dollars went to the Sellwood Bridge, or the tram on the waterfront.
So yeah.... if that's your context of Portlanders subsidizing small towns, then by all means, you would be correct. The city folk pushing a project upon us so that they can have an easier commute to the coast.
Many big corporations pay less in state income taxes than low income families do. Two independent reports, one by Ernst & Young and one by the Anderson Economic Group, found that Oregon has the country’s lowest business taxes.
I work for a small company that pays nearly 40% income taxes. Oregon has the lowest effective business tax rate in the country. Only 7% of Oregon's income tax revenue come from corporations, and it's been well-publicized that many of Oregon's biggest companies pay far less than their fair share of tax revenue, and are often subsidized (hello Nike and Intel).
By that rationale, I would say we small folk are subsidizing many of you Portlanders.
I was living in Mult Co. at the time the Sellwood project plans were being wrapped up or I wouldn't have used that example, not that you'd have known where I was at the time (I don't think a lot of state funds went into that, and didn't Clackamas County refuse to contribute?).
I've only been out in small town USA for about 8 months. Had to leave because of the traffic, and the hipsters, and the lack of community.
I'm not following you. If business taxes are a small portion of the overall pie, then the business taxes that you are paying can't be much of a subsidy for anyone.
barfo
Companies like Nike and Intel receive subsidies and special tax breaks. Every taxpaying individual in the State of Oregon is technically subsidizing them. And we're subsidizing the individuals who work for those companies.
Yes, that's true (at least the first part - I think the individuals do have to pay their own taxes so I don't see how we are subsidizing them. If they didn't have those jobs they'd be paying less tax, not more). But where are the taxpaying individuals in Oregon that are subsidizing Nike? Mostly in the Metro area.
barfo
