They already have some of the highest sales and property taxes in the nation:

In other headlines,

'US makes plea to other countries, Please don't give Vernon back.'

believe it or not..my brother who lives in oregon is a card carrying liberal....
(yeah I know...and he thinks IM the black sheep)
and I called him that day to congratulate him on ponying up MORE money to live there...

and THE real thing to watch here is that if IM not mistaken, they have also brought the "RICH LINE" down to 85,ooo a year....

Well, maybe the companies will stay in Oregon for other reasons, like

#1......uhhhhh....

or possibly

#2.....hmmmm

i can't quite think of a reason right now, but all the companies say that their employees are their #1 priority, so surely they won't leave because of a hostile tax environment, what with their loyalty to the workers and all.....

The next step will be for California and Oregon to merge, and drive almost all the jobs away from the West Coast. The Washington legislature is trying desperately to find ways to raise taxes, too. Nothing like killing the job base during a recession with the unemployment rates already high.

Moving from Oregon to Chicago is like sending back your turd sandwich, and asking for one with extra vomit. Who would do that.

But there are a whole lot of other states in between OR and IL--Nevada, Wyoming, Montana, Colorado--we'll take those jobs too.

Well, maybe the companies will stay in Oregon for other reasons

They'll stay, for the same reasons they always stay.

1. Quality of life.
2. Access to a highly trained, literate workforce
3. Excellent coffee. (No wait, that's Seattle)

Anyway, one and two, especially one.

In reality very few companies, if any will move. Most jobs are created by small business, and those are not likely to leave their home. What happens, then, when their taxes go up? What does that do to their ability to expand and hire? Sucks to be them.

"What does that do to their ability to expand and hire?"

Makes it relatively cheaper, and more attractive to reinvest in the business versus taking out profits.

Dan, while your answer sounds simple and plausible, it doesn't hold water. Increasing costs to businesses does not improve their ability to expand. These are often partnerships and LLCs with flow-through profits/losses. Increasing their taxation does not give them additional monies in which to reinvest. Obama also argues for a $5000 tax credit to hire new employees. But that assumes the business has $50K+ to hire someone. Their new payroll taxes will consume the credit, and they still have to pay the wages and benefits. Whoever is advising these morons need to go back to undergrad and take a few economic courses.

"while your answer sounds simple and plausible, it doesn't hold water"

Nice try, but you're dead wrong.

"Increasing their taxation does not give them additional monies in which to reinvest."

True, but it does makes it more advantageous to reinvest rather than remove profits from the company. Look at it this way: If the marginal rate is 20%, the business owner is going to end up with $800 of the last $1000 he makes. That also means a $100 purchase for the business will cost him, out of pocket, $80. If the rate goes up to 40%, that out-of-pocket $100 expense, be it supplies or workers, will only be a difference of $60 to him. I'm not endorsing a hike like this, merely pointing out what business owners go through in determining whether to invest in the company or take profits out.

#11

Danforth, you have to understand that you can't just implement a tax code to force reinvestment. It is a slippery slope politically and Obama knows it.

Business owners invest into jobs when it makes sense based on their specific situation and I'm sure you will agree that nobody likes doing something with a gun to their head.

I agree that if it is punitive to take income then, if it isn't a huge loser, it makes sense to go ahead and invest into more equipment, employees etc..

but recognize that if the environment is right.....business owners will do that anyway.

And I am not talking about uberwealthy folks but rather folks with incomes under $500K and assets under $10 million (who I primarily work with)

"you have to understand that you can't just implement a tax code to force reinvestment."

I agree. I was merely pointing out the view from the business owner. And it's hard to deny an increased tax rate makes it relatively cheaper, as compared to the old rate, to reinvest via equipment or workers.

"if the environment is right.....business owners will do that anyway"

Also agreed. But, for example, all other things being equal...in a year where we end up in the lower bracket, I'll wait to purchase business items until the start of the following year. If we're in the higher bracket, we load up on expensible items by Dec 31st.

Well, maybe the companies will stay in Oregon for other reasons
They'll stay, for the same reasons they always stay.
1. Quality of life.
2. Access to a highly trained, literate workforce
3. Excellent coffee. (No wait, that's Seattle)
Anyway, one and two, especially one.
#7 | Posted by silver_ironist at 2010-02-02 01:27 PM

Seattle's best is Portland's worst.

Ethiopia Sidamo Maduro Organic $15.00
Exquisite shade-grown coffee, with lots of chocolate and rose petals and just a little pineapple

I remember finding Tanzanian Peaberry in Portland that was awesome.

Man, I miss that city.

Seattle's best is Portland's worst.

I found the roaster, but at $22.50/lb I can't afford it any longer. Totally worth it to my tastes.

From your linked site:

Aromatic with hibiscus, leather, minerals, black currants and orange peel. With flavors running from dark chocolate, honey and caramel, to concord grapes and hazelnuts

There's nothing better than good, black coffee. No sugar, no cream, and no orange peel or concord grapes.

"Seattle's best is Portland's worst.
I found the roaster, but at $22.50/lb I can't afford it any longer. Totally worth it to my tastes."

From your linked site:
Aromatic with hibiscus, leather, minerals, black currants and orange peel. With flavors running from dark chocolate, honey and caramel, to concord grapes and hazelnuts
WTF? I guess I'm one of those weirdos who thinks coffee should taste like coffee, not caramel, or hazelnut, or chocolate -- certainly not like leather! And this is Portland's best?
There's nothing better than good, black coffee. No sugar, no cream, and no orange peel or concord grapes.
#17 | Posted by goatman at 2010-02-02 04:28 PM

My favorite roast is more or less just that - excellent, rich coffee. These aren't necessarily "flavored" coffee - that might be easy to mistake from the descriptions, these are overtones, and until you've had a good roast, you've never had real coffee.

I don't use anything but heavy cream, no sugar.

I also make an incredible mocha with that 22.50/lb bean - naturally the chocolate and milk are excellent quality as well. Hummus, tomatoes, feta and fresh pita with brew is my ideal morning.

In my travels to Seattle and up and down the Northern U.S. Pacific coast, there are many better nominees for 'The City That Never Sleep' than NYC. Coffee Coffee everywhere. Nice.

I've never met a person from Oregon who did not love living there. Can't think of a single other State where that holds true.

Oregon's a beautiful place. I love that drive from Portland to Seaside, especially that one spot you can see Mt. St. Helen's and Mt. Olympia appearing to be the same size because of distance. 24 hour coffee on that winding 2 lane highway too. LOL Works for me!

I've never met a person from Oregon who did not love living there. Can't think of a single other State where that holds true.

You certainly aren't very imaginative. But then again, hatred rules your life, so I guess it makes sense you can't understand someone liking something.

I would say most people like the state they are from. I've rarely met anyone who said they didn't like where they were from. I know I've never met a Texan who said they didn't like the place.