Is the pot tax really our only hope in adequately funding education for future generations (and avoiding being held in contempt)? Our hail Mary is a sin tax on recreational weed, for which we don't even have revenue data as it just hit the market less than a year ago. Can't we do a little better to fund our students?
Tax revenue ideally ought to be non-regressive and fungible. if there were an unexpected grave social need going unmet then i wouldn't want funds earmarked for road repair being inaccessible to our elected officials. accepted that these are republicans and so likely can do no good, i still prefer having budgetary freedom; all the better that the electorate may judge our politicians powers to decide. for instance, if the goal of constraining revenue for education is to force an state income tax initiative in Olympia then i'd rather that was an open goal and voted on. ("well you're just a $@!n naive pollyanna dipshit!" ...yeah, i know)
Delightfully refreshing to read about liberal progressives complaining about taxes.
Okay, can we agree that it's weak tea to try to argue 'will of the voters' about this issue? 'Will of the voters' works with the assumption that of the 56% yes vote on 502, all voters gave equal credence to two factors: legalization and use of taxation. Wouldn't it be more likely that the former was more heavily favored than the latter? It also assumes that there exist a % of no-voters who voted no, not because they weren't okay with legalization, but because they disagreed with the use of expected tax revenue.

I need to do more research before I could decide how I feel about the Republican attempt to reappropriate the taxation, but I agree with @2 that funding education needs to be done with tax revenue that is fungible. Colorado expected $118 million in tax revenue and only got $69 million. From the report today that a gram's down to half of what it was last summer and there's a possible surplus on the horizon, the revenue the state does take in is gonna vary on huge margins.
@3: They're not complaining about the taxes, you reading impaired dolt, the complaint is about how the tax revenue should be used. One can be totally pro-tax and staunchly opposed to certain uses of that tax money at the same time. I know it's difficult for you to hold two ideas in your head at the same time, but not everyone has that problem.
@3 Like adults, we're discussing what we should tax and how it should be appropriated. We're not like the toddlers who scream "No Taxes! No Taxes!" whenever the subject comes up, and keeps repeating it like insane infants, playing make believe that they can participate in adult conversation.
@5 - Correct, thought afterwards "complaining" wasn't the right word. Nevertheless, vigorous debate over taxation healthy for a free society.
State Supreme Court cares nothing for the Legislature's excuses.

Full funding or kiss your tax exemptions for corporations good bye
The will of the voters was to have legal pot. Please provide polling data that says otherwise.

To infer the "will of the voter" beyond the simple and limited choice that appears in the mail is kind of a reach?
@3/@7 its almost like you have absolutely nothing to contribute to the conversation.
@10 - No, I talked about taxation - you bitched off another slogger - who contributes more?

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.

Add a comment

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.