‘Why are we exporting billions of dollars around the state?’ The coming showdown over Seattle’s money (Snohomish: income, tax)

[jabogitlu]

Originally Posted by Seacove

So Seattle should continue sending 3 BILLION to 33 other counties, thus underfunding themselves but they shouldn’t be allowed to increase any tax or toll and not be able to increase mass transit funding and infrastructure. That’s some magical thinking. The odds of Amazon putting tech workers in Renton are beyond slim. The downtown buildings are codependent and no one wants to live in Renton. Even less so since Renton doesn’t support Sound Transit funding and will be consistently behind the rest of King County.

I do not support King County giving Pierce a half a billion dollars a year only to have them spit in our faces. King County needs to find the funding to increase infrastructure and support of mass transit. That helps everyone including vehicle drivers. And the funding exists, it’s right there. The problem is it’s going to 33 other counties instead of King County. The same people screaming “I don’t want to pay for Seattle!” Are suddenly all “we need to support each other!”. I used to feel that way until the latest election. Now I say keep King County money in King County.

I feel your frustration. We are a one-car household and live in a tiny studio apartment so we can afford to be close to the existing light-rail line. We have seen the huge benefits that light rail brings to a community and are willing to continue paying the costs for this network to be expanded region-wide. We are also hustling hard to be able to afford additional living space in this super high cost of living area so we can expand our family in the next few years.

For the first few days after the election, I felt much the same way as you do. However, once I started looking at this from a climate and social equity lens, my feelings changed. Our perspective on the truth of this situation is that:

1) we need light rail to continue expanding in the areas where people drive the MOST, which is what we consider the lowest hanging fruit. If we can conceivably hold congestion on I-5 at what it is *right now*, even as areas in Pierce County such as Frederickson, Puyallup, etc. continue their growth, then we must try to do so. We have to limit carbon emissions in order to continue to survive as a species, and that argument goes way beyond who voted for what in little tiny Washington State.

and 2) the folks who need transit the most often don't vote. The undocumented immigrants, the poor folks who are working 2-3 jobs to try to survive, the young and unborn, etc., all of whom did not vote in this election. If we rescind these transit benefits for these folks now, our social equity lens is truly out of focus, no matter what the idiotic middle class Pierce and Snohomish County voters attempt to decide on their behalf.

Seattle and King County are successful because we are educated and able to think regionally, nationally, and globally. I am not calling rural voters stupid (I myself grew up in an ULTRA-rural part of the U.S.), but they have an entirely different perspective based on their own economics. For the entire region to be successful, sometimes the most successful areas have to continue sucking it up and moving forward to act in the best interests of everyone. That is what we should be doing now.

[Seacove]

Originally Posted by jabogitlu

I feel your frustration. We are a one-car household and live in a tiny studio apartment so we can afford to be close to the existing light-rail line. We have seen the huge benefits that light rail brings to a community and are willing to continue paying the costs for this network to be expanded region-wide. We are also hustling hard to be able to afford additional living space in this super high cost of living area so we can expand our family in the next few years.

For the first few days after the election, I felt much the same way as you do. However, once I started looking at this from a climate and social equity lens, my feelings changed. Our perspective on the truth of this situation is that:

1) we need light rail to continue expanding in the areas where people drive the MOST, which is what we consider the lowest hanging fruit. If we can conceivably hold congestion on I-5 at what it is *right now*, even as areas in Pierce County such as Frederickson, Puyallup, etc. continue their growth, then we must try to do so. We have to limit carbon emissions in order to continue to survive as a species, and that argument goes way beyond who voted for what in little tiny Washington State.

and 2) the folks who need transit the most often don't vote. The undocumented immigrants, the poor folks who are working 2-3 jobs to try to survive, the young and unborn, etc., all of whom did not vote in this election. If we rescind these transit benefits for these folks now, our social equity lens is truly out of focus, no matter what the idiotic middle class Pierce and Snohomish County voters attempt to decide on their behalf.

Seattle and King County are successful because we are educated and able to think regionally, nationally, and globally. I am not calling rural voters stupid (I myself grew up in an ULTRA-rural part of the U.S.), but they have an entirely different perspective based on their own economics. For the entire region to be successful, sometimes the most successful areas have to continue sucking it up and moving forward to act in the best interests of everyone. That is what we should be doing now.

We’ve been doing that already for years. The recipients don’t appreciate the billions of dollars they get from King County taxpayers and hate us all the more. There have been plenty of interviews with these people. There’s no point and the solution is obvious. We solve our own mass transit issues by keeping King County tax revenues in King County. They can have their $30 license registration but lose $3 billion in tax revenue while we fix Seattle’s traffic issues. Everyone wins.

[jabogitlu]

The thing is, that doesn't fix Seattle and King County's traffic issues, many of which originate in Snohomish and Pierce Counties. And in the process, it makes our air quality much worse, and further degrades the global environment.

[Rombus]

Geeze! Is there a Russian troll here trying to further dived and separate us?
They are very good at what they do.

[Seacove]

Originally Posted by Rombus

Geeze! Is there a Russian troll here trying to further dived and separate us?
They are very good at what they do.

Really? Who wrote this?

"As somebody who is paying through the nose for light rail, yet lives in an area where it won't arrive for several decades and then will still be miles from my house, I have to say that Seattle is sucking up the available transit funds to serve itself. The cities surrounding Seattle are getting screwed, paying the higher property taxes. sales taxes and car tabs, so people in Seattle can get around easier. Seattle has got to big for its britches."

The truth is quite the opposite.

[CrazyDonkey]

Originally Posted by Seacove

Really? Who wrote this?

"As somebody who is paying through the nose for light rail, yet lives in an area where it won't arrive for several decades and then will still be miles from my house, I have to say that Seattle is sucking up the available transit funds to serve itself. The cities surrounding Seattle are getting screwed, paying the higher property taxes. sales taxes and car tabs, so people in Seattle can get around easier. Seattle has got to big for its britches."

The truth is quite the opposite.

Yep, King County voted to not increase transit funding to meet a shortfall, after which Seattle voters stepped up and voted to tax themselves to increase transit in the City. If County voters feel underserved by transit, they've only got themselves to blame.

Ultimately, because so many County residents ride buses in Seattle, it is Seattle that is subsidizing the County, not the other way around.

[Mossa]

Originally Posted by jabogitlu

I feel your frustration. We are a one-car household and live in a tiny studio apartment so we can afford to be close to the existing light-rail line. We have seen the huge benefits that light rail brings to a community and are willing to continue paying the costs for this network to be expanded region-wide. We are also hustling hard to be able to afford additional living space in this super high cost of living area so we can expand our family in the next few years.

For the first few days after the election, I felt much the same way as you do. However, once I started looking at this from a climate and social equity lens, my feelings changed. Our perspective on the truth of this situation is that:

1) we need light rail to continue expanding in the areas where people drive the MOST, which is what we consider the lowest hanging fruit. If we can conceivably hold congestion on I-5 at what it is *right now*, even as areas in Pierce County such as Frederickson, Puyallup, etc. continue their growth, then we must try to do so. We have to limit carbon emissions in order to continue to survive as a species, and that argument goes way beyond who voted for what in little tiny Washington State.

and 2) the folks who need transit the most often don't vote. The undocumented immigrants, the poor folks who are working 2-3 jobs to try to survive, the young and unborn, etc., all of whom did not vote in this election. If we rescind these transit benefits for these folks now, our social equity lens is truly out of focus, no matter what the idiotic middle class Pierce and Snohomish County voters attempt to decide on their behalf.

Seattle and King County are successful because we are educated and able to think regionally, nationally, and globally. I am not calling rural voters stupid (I myself grew up in an ULTRA-rural part of the U.S.), but they have an entirely different perspective based on their own economics. For the entire region to be successful, sometimes the most successful areas have to continue sucking it up and moving forward to act in the best interests of everyone. That is what we should be doing now.

This! And not just about transportation and Washington state. This approach - about almost every other aspect of economy and infrastructure countrywide. It's not about petty, your county - my county, your street - my street and who hates or loves who. It's about efficiency, development and future as a nation. You have to think long term and wide, not short term and close to each particular chest. Because while you don't, other nations will. And the consequences of that difference in approach will come back to roost on everyone's perch, localist individualists included. We can't just continue to live off the advantages created by long gone generations. We have to contribute and move things forward as well, as a nation. Otherwise it is a road to nowhere, literally.

[oregonwoodsmoke]

Has anyone yet pointed out that the greater metropolitan area of Seattle contains 51% of the population of Washington state? Eastern Washington can not outvote Seattle on any subject. So a percentage of the Seattle and near Seattle voters didn't vote as OP thought they should. It wasn't Eastern Washington, at all.

[Seacove]

Originally Posted by oregonwoodsmoke

Has anyone yet pointed out that the greater metropolitan area of Seattle contains 51% of the population of Washington state? Eastern Washington can not outvote Seattle on any subject. So a percentage of the Seattle and near Seattle voters didn't vote as OP thought they should. It wasn't Eastern Washington, at all.

That is discussed in this thread. Counties like Pierce voted for Eyman's bill even though they receive over a half a billion dollars from King County each year. That's why it makes sense to put Pierce County first in line but transportation project cuts followed by Yakima. If they don't want to pay, they shouldn't get the projects. King County would be able to fund their own projects if they weren't sending $3B to 33 other counties.

[pnwguy2]

The Washington State economy works in harmony with its different regions. It isn't us against them, or them against us. Both sides provide benefits for each other. Seacove seems to think he/she is getting screwed, when in truth the whole State benefits from both sides. Relax, Seacove.

https://crosscut.com/2017/01/busting...wo-washingtons

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qh123TonnOc