Jobs... (economy, great, products)

[Metlakatla]

What Leiseturn actually said was that he makes closer to 10K a year than to 60K.

[aroseinrain]

interesting....

Top Oregon Business, Intel, Seems A-Okay with High-Earners’ Income Tax | PubliCola - Seattle's News Elixir
Top Oregon Business, Intel, Seems A-Okay with High-Earners’ Income Tax

By Josh Feit, Wednesday, October 20, 2010 at 1:06 PM
21 Comments and 0 Reactions
I-1098, this year’s initiative to institute a high-earners’ income tax—5 percent on individuals making over $200,000 and couples making over $400,000, and 9 percent on individuals making over $500,000 and couples over $1 million—has been criticized by opponents who say it will scare off businesses.

However, the pro-1098 camp is hyping this news today, Intel is doing a $6 billion to $8 billion expansion at its operations in Oregon and Arizona.

Why is this significant? Both states have an income tax. And in fact, Oregon just bumped their rate on high-earners to 11 percent (with an effective rate of over six percent.) The effective rate on top earners in Washington State will be 4 percent.

The Economic Opportunity Institute has a study that breaks down where Washington State will fall when compared to other states with income taxes when it comes to effective rates on top-income earners. Washington would be 26 out of 44.

Arizona would rank 37th, with an effective rate just below three percent.

[Ryant]

Moderator cut: orphaned material removed

TDNY

You, coming from NY tell us "portland NEEDS to attract businesses and people with money". It's like your saying Portland NEEDS to be one of the biggest cities.

There is a saying here that is something like come for a visit but don't stay. Things are changing here already and it's kind of sad. People used to (and still kind of do) park on the side of the interstate and go hiking/fishing but now they're cracking down on it.. They're also cracking down on where we can camp.. I loved the freedom before and ease of getting out of the city but anyone who has lived here for awhile can tell you it's changing : /

[davefr]

Originally Posted by Metlakatla

So why don't you explain differently then, instead of being profane?

Your wish is my command (source SIP2005 Program):

For both agreements (1999 and 2005), the county also required Intel to pay the equivalent of full taxes on all land and buildings associated with each SIP project. The 1999 and 2005 agreements allowed for property tax savings to Intel for investment in machinery and equipment used for semiconductor manufacturing. Due to the advancement of technology in this industry, capital investment is continuous, intensive and necessary as equipment can become obsolete within two to three years.

A 2005 ECONorthwest study estimated that the company's potential investment under the 2005 SIP agreement would yield an annual average of 4,500 new jobs through 2024, add an estimated $115.2 million in revenues to Washington County government and schools, and result in no significant increased demand for public services or infrastructure.


As far as this silly claim of 80% outsourcing in China try page 7 for starters:

http://www.intc.com/intelAR2009/comm...9_Business.pdf

[davefr]

Originally Posted by Leisesturm

And, btw, anyone who really believes the twaddle Dave posted and believes that Intel is putting millions in Oregons coffers... ... .

H

Actually the more impressive number is not what Intel pays but what Intel's employees pay into the coffers.

Let's take a very simple example:

Assume 15,000 Intel employees in Oregon
Assume an average salary of $50,000/yr.
Tax Revenue to the state is $67.5M/yr based on a 9% rate

Now let's assume that each of those employees rents or owns an average home with a tax assessment of $3k/yr. That results in another $45M/yr. ($100M/yr - that's no exactly chump change)

My assumptions may be off a little but they're in the ballpark. I'm also not factoring in the resulting secondary economic affects.

What our state needs to be doing is everything possible to lure more companies like Intel to set up shop here. However these days the competition in not California or Washington. The competition is China, Viet Nam, Ireland, Mexico, etc, etc, etc. These countries are much more competitive with regard to tax policy, regulations, better educational infrastructure, transportation, etc.

There's almost no advantage left in extablishing business in the US.

[Nell Plotts]

Originally Posted by TDNY

Nell, when I move next year I plan on buying or starting a business. I plan on buying a house within a couple of years. I'll have my children in schools and be a consumer of various things.

Fantastic! Running a business isn't easy and when you have employees life can get complicated.

Economic growth comes from doing something that isn't being done as well by others, or hasn't been done at all.

[Ryant]

Yeah, good luck, it's a good place to raise kids.

[Leisesturm]

Originally Posted by davefr

Actually the more impressive number is not what Intel pays but what Intel's employees pay into the coffers.

Let's take a very simple example:

Assume 15,000 Intel employees in Oregon
Assume an average salary of $50,000/yr.
Tax Revenue to the state is $67.5M/yr based on a 9% rate

Now let's assume that each of those employees rents or owns an average home with a tax assessment of $3k/yr. That results in another $45M/yr. ($100M/yr - that's no exactly chump change)

My assumptions may be off a little but they're in the ballpark. I'm also not factoring in the resulting secondary economic affects.

What our state needs to be doing is everything possible to lure more companies like Intel to set up shop here. However these days the competition in not California or Washington. The competition is China, Viet Nam, Ireland, Mexico, etc, etc, etc. These countries are much more competitive with regard to tax policy, regulations, better educational infrastructure, transportation, etc.

There's almost no advantage left in extablishing business in the US.

You are right to backpedal from your outburst in support of Intel Inc. Here is a quote from this article : "Intel enjoys tremendous tax advantages in Oregon, which exempts the company's manufacturing equipment from the property taxes other businesses pay. That saves Intel close to $40 million a year. Changes in how Oregon calculates corporate income taxes, first approved in 2001, cut Intel's Oregon income tax bill by at least as much." Ok, I exaggerated earlier to make a point. Sue me! But please, don't add insult to injury and tell us about the tax contributions of Intel's employees to Oregon's tax revenue! If people making over 50K/yr do not have the good sense to hire qualified accountants that can get them out of at least half of what taxes they are 'supposed' to pay then I for one would have no sympathy. As it is, I am sure they are doing just that. So, no, our state does not need to do more to attract leeches like Intel to set up shop. If anything our state needs to be more like that economic wet noodle, Delaware, and simply charge companies for the right to incorporate here but actually build their eyesore, polluting and social fabric bursting corporate behemoths in someone else's front yard.

I'll eat my chachkas without any Tabasco sauce right in front of you if you can prove that a single, native born Oregonian is a recipient of a job in Intel's new facility. China, Viet Nam, etc. are totalitarian governments that have ordered their citizens to work for slave wages in national sweat shops in order to unfairly compete internationally. The rising middle class is at the expense of a monumental underclass. We should emulate this?? Why? It's telling that you avoided mentioning Germany or The Netherlands or any of the Scandinavian countries with low GINI indexes.

H

[TDNY]

Originally Posted by Nell Plotts

Fantastic! Running a business isn't easy and when you have employees life can get complicated.

Economic growth comes from doing something that isn't being done as well by others, or hasn't been done at all.

I've run a business before, both on my own, like I am now, and as a part of a larger company.

It's a good thing I know so many actual real people in Oregon who don't share the anti business, anti capitalistic tendencies of so many people on this forum, or I might think everyone was like that.

I especially like the whole idea that if I think income taxes are too high in the state (after all, they are the highest in the US), that means I'm a greedy money loving miser. I've also learned that I'm a right wing conservative on this forum. My right wing conservative aquaintances would most surely disagree with you on that.

While I cherish everyone's right to have an opinion, apparently not everyone feels the same. I get told to go to California for speaking my mind because "they love money." So pleasant.

I have no interest in having Portland be some huge metropolis. One of the reasons I like it is because it's not big. My whole point here is that the fact is that Portland has less jobs now than 13 years ago, and UO's business index for the Portland metro area is lower now than it was in 1998. People are making less money than they were then, even as housing costs have risen substantially. This isn't even treading water, it's drowning. That means that the economy never really recovered from the recession of the 2000-2002 time period.

When something is broken, it needs to be fixed. That's how societies move forward. Pretending that you can just hike taxes ad infinitum while changing nothing else is a guaranteed losing proposition.

The governor -elect has said that the state is in a "death spiral" economically and needs to look at new ways of doing things. I agree, as I'm sure most reasonable people do.


On another note, some good news:

http://www.bizjournals.com/portland/...-strength.html

[Dual Citizen CA-OR]

Originally Posted by TDNY

...When something is broken, it needs to be fixed. That's how societies move forward. Pretending that you can just hike taxes ad infinitum while changing nothing else is a guaranteed losing proposition...

That’s a valid point, but you’re ignoring the fact that it’s also a problem from the other direction.

Pretending that you can just cut taxes ad infinitum while changing nothing else is a guaranteed losing proposition too.