too little too late for yall

And would not their property taxes go down with a state income tax?

Didn't call for armed civil disobedience . . . so that's nice.

Not paying your taxes isn't "civil disobedience," it's a criminal offense. On a less positive note, the legal challenge against this tax has a good chance of being successful.

Not paying your taxes isn't "civil disobedience," it's a criminal offense.

Uh....what do you think civil disobedience is, exactly?

Let's see if police show up in riot gear.

Isn't this the same person who called in sick and went on vacation?

@7 I get the dictionary definition but, as a practical matter, charges will be dismissed for non-violent disobedience whereas the government always gets its money...

Can't believe that once upon a time, I actually trusted this woman to accurately read the news.

Just let her know that the taxes could buy a new Creationist Museum.

Plenty of people will never file and never pay. There is nothing the city will ever be able to do about it.

@7 -- Historically, "civil disobedience" refers to acts which are self-sacrificing rather than self-serving.

The tradition of civil disobedience also holds that those who disobey ought willingly bear the civil consequence (and often much worse) -- though that principle is neglected widely in recent years.

In re tax evasion, the motive seems at once self-serving, and futile -- non-payors will end up paying taxes, plus penalties and interest, without gaining appreciable public sympathy or illustrating any moral point.

Susan's idea of civil disobedience is to not pay her tab at Canlis until it reaches net 30. But she's talking to the GOP base, who are morons and have a lot more on the line when it comes to taking a stand about anything, and she doesn't care about that.

She's a lowlife thug, no respect for the law, wasn't brought up right, you know they're mostly fatherless because the baby daddy is off in jail for tax evasion or has moved on to a younger wife, so what can you really expect out of them?

Perhaps Wesley Snipes could be a spokesman for the cause?

Let's just tar and feather the rich, or maybe just hang them by the ball....

Does anyone commenting here even give two $hits that the city clowncil is going against the constitution that they took an oath to uphold?? These people should be dragged from office in handcuffs!

She’s so ridiculous.

@6 -- Haven't read your Thoreau, I take it? Might want to read one of his essays. It was called, aptly, "Civil Disobedience." Oh, and he was jailed for not paying his taxes, so there's also that.

@21: http://kuow.org/post/strange-short-story…

@25: slippery slope fallacy, and additional specious arguments. 500K income for a couple is going to dissuade how many small business owners, exactly?
even if your slippery slope BS comes true in 20, 25 years, so what? lower the property and sales taxes commensurately. graduated income taxes are less regressive than the current system.

Haven't the wealthy already been engaging in this "civil disobedience" for decades? It's no secret they reap magnificent benefits from our screwed up tax system, which has taxed them less and less over the last several generations.

@20: Cut it out!

A lot of you are sounding like that French mob in the Tale of Two Cities.

When was the last time a poor person gave you a job?

Being in favor of a different tax structure is okay. But bloodthirsty depravity is not not.

From great capital comes great things and good people.

@10, that's right; MLK's famous "Letter from just outside the Birmingham Jail where I never was but was just passing by of my own accord" is a perfect example.

@25:

Everyone knows the Rich aren't particularly edible - too stringy from all those yoga and Pilates classes, treadmill work stations, and lipo-surgeries. OTOH, IL DOUCHE and Christie look like they might have some nice marbling, so they may qualify as some tasty USDA Grade Prime long-pig.

@28:

Of the roughly 1,400 people who help pay my salary most don't make any more than I do - and quite a few probably considerably less, at least directly from the industry in which I'm employed.

@25

Why not just "EAT THE RICH". If they are so hated and despised, why not just skin them, filet them out and send the carcasses to the food bank.

That doesn't even make sense. That's a total non sequitur, isn't it? I eat salmon, but I sure don't hate or despise them?

Rich people are an expensive and useless extravagance.

@31: you're saying this income tax will be expanded to include all income levels as an argument against it. that's precisely a slippery slope fallacy.

regardless, this is all academic. it's going to the courts for years.

I think it's simply wonderful how the membership of Our Little Slog swells when something like this happens. Sure, they're all pearl clutchers with ridiculously dubious "opinions", but it's always nice to have new friends - even if they are defending the parasitic class.

Sue Hutchison: "I might be older and uglier, but at least I can be an even more worthless parasite!"

AKA "tax everyone in Seattle!"

This is going to the WaSSC and will be overturned. In the meantime, how much will that cost the city and our lawyers in defending this ? This will be a big waste of our money with absolutely nothing to show for it except some free PR for a few grandstanding council people. Why can't the city set up a fund that is voluntary and we could all donate, and the people who support this should lobby and work to change the state constitution.

Also, what are the ethical issues related to a councilmember violating their oath to uphold the WA state Constitution by approving something that they admit is unconstitutional?

BTW, I think the state should have an income tax and I would contribute money to some special fund at the city used to implement policies that deflect The horrible policies of DJT.

@41 - I'd much rather have an income tax --a progressive tax on wealth-- than regressive car tabs and sales tax.
--
I can't wait til the rich riot in the streets about having to pay a bit of money for the common good!

A state income tax has really killed California's business environment, and there's literally no wealthy people living there.

I am one of those who would be taxed under this scenario. But I am not particularly concerned as I have out of curiosity read the applicable portion of the state constitution. It is clear to my non-lawyer eyes that this will not stand, unless I suppose it is concluded that income is not property. If so, consider the implications for trial lawyers and the like, who when they sue for wrongful termination, claim that a job and the income associated with it is property of the plaintiff that they have been deprived of. If income is not property, what on earth is it? We shall let the courts decide I imagine.

It really galls me to see the envy of those who are quick to attack those who earn more, but themselves fall into the affluent class in the country let alone the world. If this tax was just, it should apply on a graduated basis to anyone earning income that would be taxed federally. Not just those with more than 250K filing singly. I am actually surprised at the surveys that showed about 65% if memory serves, being in favor of the tax. I would think it would be 100% since if someone called me and asked if I want free stuff, the answer would be obvious.

The claim that the poor pay local taxes, let alone a high rate, falls on its face if one were to net out the transfer payments they receive, including but not limited to utility subsidies, housing subsidies, WIC, school taxes for their kids, subsidized transportation, DSHS support, social service costs and interventions, Medicaid, Food Stamps, SSI. I am including some Federal benefits, but clearly a great many of the poor draw multiples of any local taxes back in benefits. How convenient to ignore this and claim they pay meaningful taxes on any level - local or national.

How exactly does the city plan on obtaining compliance from all?

I pay my freight and then some in this town. Just wrote quarterly estimated tax checks to the IRS for about 400K (or over 1.5 million per year). I pay about 30K on taxes for my Seattle home (increasing at well over inflation in the past several years). I pay tens of thousands in state B & O taxes for business at about 2% of revenue on the service business I run, considerable sales taxes on my family's proportionately high non-food purchases. And let's not forget the 200K in charitable contributions to local social service and arts institutions that serve the local community which many of the readers of this rag are able to attend at half the actual cost of production, or even less. Folks like me give back a great deal!

I have been here for decades, coming from one of those cities elsewhere in the country where the affluent have largely left in favor of the suburbs, and the place is hurting. It could happen here.

We all have social contracts and I would submit that those on the upper income scale more than fulfill their end of the bargain in supporting their community. I am quite fortunate, but have worked very hard over the years building my business weeks and evenings, and risking real money. I have more than I need and am giving back in many ways. I pay about 35-40% of my income in taxes, as well as the above noted voluntary contributions which are increasing regularly. The hate on folks like me is envy in thin disguise. I get it to a point, but also have pride and won't be abused by haters whether they are neighbors or elected officials. We are paying the price now for arrogance and ignorance by our leaders in the form of an increasingly inhospitable city, and class warfare fanned by the likes of Sawant, Herbold and our pitiful mayor.

When this tax is overruled, as it most likely will be, we will remember how it almost came down. Some will double down in their rhetoric, some will move out and take their money, ideas, sense of community and businesses with them. And some like me will just carry on.