The Washington State Straitjacket Tightens Jan. 1

 

Many new laws will take effect in Washington State on January 1. All of them restrict the liberty of individuals and businesses in our state.

  1.  The first Income Tax (unconstitutional) will take effect, in the form of a “capital gains tax” on gains over $250,000.  The new law is in litigation now, but the state will implement it anyway.  The State Constitution prohibits any tax on income that is not equally imposed on every taxpayer.  Since the new tax only applies on capital gains over $250,000, it manifestly does not apply to every state taxpayer.  The Seattle Leftists who passed the tax are relying on the Seattle Supreme Court to deem it constitutional.“It’s estimated that the tax will bring in over $400 million in its first year. Those dollars will be used to invest in child care and early learning, among other things, as a way to balance the state’s tax code. That’s according to supporters, who insist it will impact less than 1% of the state’s wealthiest taxpayers.” (quote from article on MyNorthwest.com)
  2. The State minimum wage increases to $14.49 per hour.  The Seattle minimum wage will increase to $17.27 per hour for large companies.  For small companies, the minimum wage increases to $15.75 per hour.  How many small businesses will close because they cannot afford to pay that kind of minimum wage for work that is not worth that much?
  3. Felons released from prison will immediately regain voting rights, regardless of whether they have paid all the restitution they are liable for.
  4. Businesses will no longer be able to automatically include single-use plastic utensils with carry-out orders-the customer will be required to ask for them.  I expect numerous customers will be very surprised when their orders have no utensils, and they have already driven away from the drive-through window.  The State plastic-bag ban took effect in October.

And then, there’s the story about the Polar Bear Swim in Lake Washington on January 1.  The organizers have issued new rules, requiring swimmers to be fully vaccinated against the CCP Virus, have taken a booster shot, and wear a mask.  Yes, that includes wearing a mask in the water, which is expected to be around 43 degrees.  Madness, sheer madness.

Published in Domestic Policy
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 32 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Randy Weivoda Moderator
    Randy Weivoda
    @RandyWeivoda

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):
    Beyond the usual arguments about the minimum wage causing businesses to automate and eliminate some of those minimum wage jobs, a very high percentage of minimum wage jobs are held by people who do not rely on that job for basic necessities, and who live in relatively high income households (think teenaged children of middle and upper middle income parents).

    Yeah, I think it is something like 1% of minimum wage workers are the primary wage earner in their household.

    • #31
  2. cdor Member
    cdor
    @cdor

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):

    After previously ranting about how a volatile source of revenue like a capital gains tax is a lousy way to finance a predictable ongoing expense like childcare and early education, I will now turn to rant about how raising the minimum wage is a lousy way to help the poor, because the minimum wage is so inefficient at getting benefit to the poor.

    Beyond the usual arguments about the minimum wage causing businesses to automate and eliminate some of those minimum wage jobs, a very high percentage of minimum wage jobs are held by people who do not rely on that job for basic necessities, and who live in relatively high income households (think teenaged children of middle and upper middle income parents). So most of the benefit of increasing the minimum wage goes not to putting more food on the table of hungry families, but to pay for teenagers to have more fashionable clothes, more video games, and more bling for a car. Increases in the minimum wage go to kids’ luxuries, not to family necessities. At one time I think over half the people holding minimum wage jobs were living in households with household incomes over $60,000, but that may have changed in the last few years.

    Also, price increases caused by rising minimum wages tend to hit poor people harder than they do richer people. “Poor” people spend a higher portion of their available income at businesses that depend on minimum wage labor (fast food restaurants, discount stores) than do richer people (fancier restaurants, higher end merchants, that use a higher skill labor force and for which increased minimum wages cause less of an impact on prices). So minimum wage driven prices rise faster at the businesses used by poor people than at businesses used by richer people.

    The usual argument for increasing the minimum wage is to provide a “living wage” for a person who is stuck forever in a minimum wage job (apparently the person is stupid, or unable to learn, or congenitally lazy, so they cannot move up the job skill and wage ladder). A targeted direct subsidy would be much more efficient way to help such people. An increase in minimum wage is a subsidy to rich kids, and a lousy inefficient path to helping poor people.

    Many union contracts use the minimum wage as a guide to their own wage requirements. If the minimum wage goes up 10% then the ironworkers, for example, would get an equivalent percentage increase. An increase in the minimum wage from 10 to 15 dollars (50%) could automatically trigger an ironworker to increase from $50 to $75 per hour ( as an example). It is highly inflationary and not often part of the public discussion previous to voting on minimum wage increases.

    • #32
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.