Comments

1. 

   Steven

   June 20, 2005

   There’s a good insider article with Goldman about McEachin.

   ~ the blue dog

   Log in to Reply
2. 

   Anonymous

   June 20, 2005

   I just saw this http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=12349236&postID=111928420659567760 anyone have any ideas??

   Log in to Reply
3. 

   Will Vehrs

   June 20, 2005

   Probably another candidate with a loose dog in his past …

   Log in to Reply
4. 

   Ray Hyde

   June 21, 2005

   EMR and I have had our differences here, but I have to say his recent article is almost palatable.

   I particularly liked his comment “The problem in the past has been that the leaders of the two-party dictatorship have conspired to avoid any specifics so voters have no basis for choice beyond platitudes.”

   And also his comment about property tax that “It was useful when 95 percent of the households were non-urban and owning land was not just the primary measure of wealth, it was the resource that was used to earn money.”

   To my mind, this is the crux of the matter: in the end, you can only tx income; not cars, property, or even gross receipts. You can only pay what you can afford to pay, and that depends on your perceived needs.

   Log in to Reply
5. 

   Ray Hyde

   June 21, 2005

   But then there is this:

   “An unearned profit levy when the increase in property value is directly related to public investment: e.g. building an interchange or extending a shared-vehicle transit system.”

   This I don’t understand. If the owner makes a profit as aresult of public investment in or near his property, then why shouldn’t the public benefit? Likewise, if the public takes away a benefit formerly conferred (presumably for the public benefit) then why should the owner not be compensated?

   Log in to Reply
6. 

   Ray Hyde

   June 21, 2005

   And this is more like what I consider to be vintage EMR.

   “but the “carbon tax” idea might better be an “oxygen tax.” “

   In fact, in one of my previous posts I asked the question as to when he would get around to proposing a tax on breathing.

   Log in to Reply
7. 

   Ray Hyde

   June 21, 2005

   Finally, here is where we disagree.

   “This means moving the focus of control–revenue to support government and management–down from state and up from municipality to the regional scale.”

   Moving up from the local scale can only mean less access for the citizens, slower response to changes, and less responsive government.

   A primary underpinning of our society, with all it’s warts, is competition. Moving up to a regional scale reduces competition and moves it farther from the individual.

   This is a very bad idea.

   Log in to Reply