Seattle Government Becomes 'Robin Hood': Steal From The Rich To Give To 'Homeless'

[Kondor3]

Amazon and other large companies will vote with their feet.

Buh-bye, Seattle... friggin' Progressive retards.

 

[Darkwind]

The people of the city of Seattle has passed judgment on it's own and has found that the citizens of Seattle have not been giving enough of their own money to charity the charity agreed upon by the majority....

Seattle has decided its citizens are not giving enough of their money to the homeless, so Seattle is going to SEIZE / TAKE money from its citizens and give it to the homeless....

Who needs 'pan-handling' on street corners with dirty hands out when the city of Seattle will simply take money right out of its citizens' paychecks and give it to the homeless?!

'Majority Rules'?! In every situation or just specific ones? Sorry 'Ma &Pa Soup Shop' the people of Seattle have decided you need to be relieved of some of your money to give to the homeless. 'Charity begins at home'? In Seattle if begins at the ballot box....

Seattle City Council votes 9-0 for scaled-down head tax on large employers

$20 a month? On companies that profit more than $20 million a year?

Oh the horror!!!

Maybe you should read this.

The Case Against Liberal Compassion

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the Latinate word “compassion” means, literally, “suffering together with another”—it’s the “feeling or emotion, when a person is moved by the suffering or distress of another, and by the desire to relieve it.” Note that suffering together does not mean suffering identically. The compassionate person does not become hungry when he meets or thinks about a hungry person, or sick in the presence of the sick. Rather, compassion means we are affected by others’ suffering, a distress that motivates us to alleviate it. As Jean-Jacques Rousseau wrote in Emile, “When the strength of an expansive soul makes me identify myself with my fellow, and I feel that I am, so to speak, in him, it is in order not to suffer that I do not want him to suffer. I am interested in him for love of myself.”

We can see the problem. The whole point of compassion is for empathizers to feel better when awareness of another’s suffering provokes unease. But this ultimate purpose does not guarantee that empathizees will fare better. Barbara Oakley, co-editor of the volume Pathological Altruism, defines its subject as “altruism in which attempts to promote the welfare of others instead result in unanticipated harm.” Surprises and accidents happen, of course. The pathology of pathological altruism is not the failure to salve every wound. It is, rather, the indifference—blithe, heedless, smug, or solipsistic—to the fact and consequences of those failures, just as long as the empathizer is accruing compassion points that he and others will admire. As philosophy professor David Schmidtz has said, “If you’re trying to prove your heart is in the right place, it isn’t.”

 

[Flash]

Just like that high minimum wage screwed the city out of jobs so will this stupid tax.

The idiot Moon Bats elected an extreme far Left Democrat queer Mayor so they have nobody to blame but themselves for the increased taxes.

Another great American city to be screwed by the Democrats like Detroit.

 

[Flash]

[Q

$20 a month? On companies that profit more than $20 million a year?

Oh the horror!!!

Why don't you just give $20 more a month of your own money?

Better yet why not skip the government middle man and spend your own money to feed the homeless if you are concerned about the welfare queens?

 

[Missouri_Mike]

How did this become Amazons problem? Or any other employer? Or the person that works at one of these companies who will now at a minimum lose some if not all of their raise next year? Or quite likely be informed their job is now in Texas.

 

[Crepitus]

$20 a month? On companies that profit more than $20 million a year?

Oh the horror!!!

Per employee, dipshit. How much have you given to the homeless? Parasites like you are always generous with everyone's money but your own.

Oh look, yet another foul-mouthed republican jumps straight to the name-calling. I swear the conservatives here are even more psychologically damaged than the average republican.

To your point though:. I volunteer time and donate money/supplies to the local branch of Episcopal Charities who run the Venture House homeless shelters.

And yes, I realise it's $20 per head. So what? If the business made a $20 million profit and has 100 employees that's a whopping $2000 a month, or $24,000 a year.

0.12%

Again I say "oh the horror!"

 

[Crepitus]

The people of the city of Seattle has passed judgment on it's own and has found that the citizens of Seattle have not been giving enough of their own money to charity the charity agreed upon by the majority....

Seattle has decided its citizens are not giving enough of their money to the homeless, so Seattle is going to SEIZE / TAKE money from its citizens and give it to the homeless....

Who needs 'pan-handling' on street corners with dirty hands out when the city of Seattle will simply take money right out of its citizens' paychecks and give it to the homeless?!

'Majority Rules'?! In every situation or just specific ones? Sorry 'Ma &Pa Soup Shop' the people of Seattle have decided you need to be relieved of some of your money to give to the homeless. 'Charity begins at home'? In Seattle if begins at the ballot box....

Seattle City Council votes 9-0 for scaled-down head tax on large employers

$20 a month? On companies that profit more than $20 million a year?

Oh the horror!!!

how about you open up your wallet commie cuck?

Don't live in Seattle. But if I did, and I owned a company making more than $20 million a year, I certainly would.

Why go straight to the personal insult? Is that really your default? Are you nor intelligent enough to make your point without it? Or did mommy just not hug you enough when you were Baby?

Because you say "only $20 a month" when you forget about all the other freaking taxes and fees they already pay.

it's always "just a bit more", "why are you being so greedy" and "why can't you help" being mewled by people who could never make it in the private world, and are nothing more than government leeches.

The real question is why can't these people understand basic economics. When you punish a company by how many people they employ, and in the end they want to cut costs, you make headcount a TARGET for cost savings.

So people get laid off, and you lose their income tax money, their sales tax money, you get people leaving, and thus lower property values (and thus property taxes) and then the government morons will blame the companies instead of their own greedy cocksucking selves.

And useful idiots like you cheer and applause along because you get someone else to pay for something you want.

Who's forgetting? I just sold my retail business, I know all about the taxes. I don't see this as unreasonable at all.

 

[Crepitus]

The people of the city of Seattle has passed judgment on it's own and has found that the citizens of Seattle have not been giving enough of their own money to charity the charity agreed upon by the majority....

Seattle has decided its citizens are not giving enough of their money to the homeless, so Seattle is going to SEIZE / TAKE money from its citizens and give it to the homeless....

Who needs 'pan-handling' on street corners with dirty hands out when the city of Seattle will simply take money right out of its citizens' paychecks and give it to the homeless?!

'Majority Rules'?! In every situation or just specific ones? Sorry 'Ma &Pa Soup Shop' the people of Seattle have decided you need to be relieved of some of your money to give to the homeless. 'Charity begins at home'? In Seattle if begins at the ballot box....

Seattle City Council votes 9-0 for scaled-down head tax on large employers

$20 a month? On companies that profit more than $20 million a year?

Oh the horror!!!

On companies that Gross over 20 million in the city in a year. 3% of businesses.

Now now, you aren't allowed to pull numbers outta yer ass. You don't know how many employees or what the actual gross profit is so you can't possibly know that percentage of their profit they will pay.

 

[Crepitus]

The people of the city of Seattle has passed judgment on it's own and has found that the citizens of Seattle have not been giving enough of their own money to charity the charity agreed upon by the majority....

Seattle has decided its citizens are not giving enough of their money to the homeless, so Seattle is going to SEIZE / TAKE money from its citizens and give it to the homeless....

Who needs 'pan-handling' on street corners with dirty hands out when the city of Seattle will simply take money right out of its citizens' paychecks and give it to the homeless?!

'Majority Rules'?! In every situation or just specific ones? Sorry 'Ma &Pa Soup Shop' the people of Seattle have decided you need to be relieved of some of your money to give to the homeless. 'Charity begins at home'? In Seattle if begins at the ballot box....

Seattle City Council votes 9-0 for scaled-down head tax on large employers

$20 a month? On companies that profit more than $20 million a year?

Oh the horror!!!

Maybe you should read this.

The Case Against Liberal Compassion

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the Latinate word “compassion” means, literally, “suffering together with another”—it’s the “feeling or emotion, when a person is moved by the suffering or distress of another, and by the desire to relieve it.” Note that suffering together does not mean suffering identically. The compassionate person does not become hungry when he meets or thinks about a hungry person, or sick in the presence of the sick. Rather, compassion means we are affected by others’ suffering, a distress that motivates us to alleviate it. As Jean-Jacques Rousseau wrote in Emile, “When the strength of an expansive soul makes me identify myself with my fellow, and I feel that I am, so to speak, in him, it is in order not to suffer that I do not want him to suffer. I am interested in him for love of myself.”

We can see the problem. The whole point of compassion is for empathizers to feel better when awareness of another’s suffering provokes unease. But this ultimate purpose does not guarantee that empathizees will fare better. Barbara Oakley, co-editor of the volume Pathological Altruism, defines its subject as “altruism in which attempts to promote the welfare of others instead result in unanticipated harm.” Surprises and accidents happen, of course. The pathology of pathological altruism is not the failure to salve every wound. It is, rather, the indifference—blithe, heedless, smug, or solipsistic—to the fact and consequences of those failures, just as long as the empathizer is accruing compassion points that he and others will admire. As philosophy professor David Schmidtz has said, “If you’re trying to prove your heart is in the right place, it isn’t.”

Maybe you should stop copy/pasting from rwnj websites and try thinking for yourself for a change.

 

[Mac1958]

Well, I think we all know that businesses and business owners are all rich 'n greedy 'n didn't build that 'n stuff.

 

[whitehall]

Seattle has a terrible homeless problem They blame it on the Native Indian population and that's their excuse for not doing anything. Virtually every once beautiful park is now inhabited by semi-permanent tents and camps. Kids who enjoy the parks are treated to naked men urinating anywhere they want to and the stench of unwashed drunks. The ironic thing is that an ordinary person might be arrested for violating any of the dozens of rules pertaining to state and local parks and federal land but the "homeless" alcoholics and schizophrenics are immune from adhering to common decency and the rules of society.

 

[martybegan]

The people of the city of Seattle has passed judgment on it's own and has found that the citizens of Seattle have not been giving enough of their own money to charity the charity agreed upon by the majority....

Seattle has decided its citizens are not giving enough of their money to the homeless, so Seattle is going to SEIZE / TAKE money from its citizens and give it to the homeless....

Who needs 'pan-handling' on street corners with dirty hands out when the city of Seattle will simply take money right out of its citizens' paychecks and give it to the homeless?!

'Majority Rules'?! In every situation or just specific ones? Sorry 'Ma &Pa Soup Shop' the people of Seattle have decided you need to be relieved of some of your money to give to the homeless. 'Charity begins at home'? In Seattle if begins at the ballot box....

Seattle City Council votes 9-0 for scaled-down head tax on large employers

$20 a month? On companies that profit more than $20 million a year?

Oh the horror!!!

how about you open up your wallet commie cuck?

Don't live in Seattle. But if I did, and I owned a company making more than $20 million a year, I certainly would.

Why go straight to the personal insult? Is that really your default? Are you nor intelligent enough to make your point without it? Or did mommy just not hug you enough when you were Baby?

Because you say "only $20 a month" when you forget about all the other freaking taxes and fees they already pay.

it's always "just a bit more", "why are you being so greedy" and "why can't you help" being mewled by people who could never make it in the private world, and are nothing more than government leeches.

The real question is why can't these people understand basic economics. When you punish a company by how many people they employ, and in the end they want to cut costs, you make headcount a TARGET for cost savings.

So people get laid off, and you lose their income tax money, their sales tax money, you get people leaving, and thus lower property values (and thus property taxes) and then the government morons will blame the companies instead of their own greedy cocksucking selves.

And useful idiots like you cheer and applause along because you get someone else to pay for something you want.

Who's forgetting? I just sold my retail business, I know all about the taxes. I don't see this as unreasonable at all.

LOL.

giving up your booth at a swap meet isn't owning a retail business.

 

[eagle1462010]

Reap what you sew................drive out the companies that have been favorable to you...........

Talk about shooting oneself in the foot.

 

[Crepitus]

$20 a month? On companies that profit more than $20 million a year?

Oh the horror!!!

how about you open up your wallet commie cuck?

Don't live in Seattle. But if I did, and I owned a company making more than $20 million a year, I certainly would.

Why go straight to the personal insult? Is that really your default? Are you nor intelligent enough to make your point without it? Or did mommy just not hug you enough when you were Baby?

Because you say "only $20 a month" when you forget about all the other freaking taxes and fees they already pay.

it's always "just a bit more", "why are you being so greedy" and "why can't you help" being mewled by people who could never make it in the private world, and are nothing more than government leeches.

The real question is why can't these people understand basic economics. When you punish a company by how many people they employ, and in the end they want to cut costs, you make headcount a TARGET for cost savings.

So people get laid off, and you lose their income tax money, their sales tax money, you get people leaving, and thus lower property values (and thus property taxes) and then the government morons will blame the companies instead of their own greedy cocksucking selves.

And useful idiots like you cheer and applause along because you get someone else to pay for something you want.

Who's forgetting? I just sold my retail business, I know all about the taxes. I don't see this as unreasonable at all.

LOL.

giving up your booth at a swap meet isn't owning a retail business.

Why? Is that what your version is?

 

[Missouri_Mike]

The people of the city of Seattle has passed judgment on it's own and has found that the citizens of Seattle have not been giving enough of their own money to charity the charity agreed upon by the majority....

Seattle has decided its citizens are not giving enough of their money to the homeless, so Seattle is going to SEIZE / TAKE money from its citizens and give it to the homeless....

Who needs 'pan-handling' on street corners with dirty hands out when the city of Seattle will simply take money right out of its citizens' paychecks and give it to the homeless?!

'Majority Rules'?! In every situation or just specific ones? Sorry 'Ma &Pa Soup Shop' the people of Seattle have decided you need to be relieved of some of your money to give to the homeless. 'Charity begins at home'? In Seattle if begins at the ballot box....

Seattle City Council votes 9-0 for scaled-down head tax on large employers

$20 a month? On companies that profit more than $20 million a year?

Oh the horror!!!

how about you open up your wallet commie cuck?

Don't live in Seattle. But if I did, and I owned a company making more than $20 million a year, I certainly would.

Why go straight to the personal insult? Is that really your default? Are you nor intelligent enough to make your point without it? Or did mommy just not hug you enough when you were Baby?

Because you say "only $20 a month" when you forget about all the other freaking taxes and fees they already pay.

it's always "just a bit more", "why are you being so greedy" and "why can't you help" being mewled by people who could never make it in the private world, and are nothing more than government leeches.

The real question is why can't these people understand basic economics. When you punish a company by how many people they employ, and in the end they want to cut costs, you make headcount a TARGET for cost savings.

So people get laid off, and you lose their income tax money, their sales tax money, you get people leaving, and thus lower property values (and thus property taxes) and then the government morons will blame the companies instead of their own greedy cocksucking selves.

And useful idiots like you cheer and applause along because you get someone else to pay for something you want.

Who's forgetting? I just sold my retail business, I know all about the taxes. I don't see this as unreasonable at all.

There’s no fucking way you ever had a business let alone one that would be sellable. There’s not a single successful business owner that gets by with just saying yeah it’s only 20 bucks here and there. I’m good with paying more to the government because.

Did your fictitional business also pay your employees 15 bucks an hour to sweep floors? Higher taxes are no problem? Your full of shit. You’ve never owned a business, let alone a successful one.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Seattle in a nut shell.

You have to pay people 15 bucks an hour.

Holy shit, we're losing jobs and people are homeless.

Obviously we need to tax the bigger companies more.

Soon to come. What the hell happened to our big company base? They left?

Seattle is doing their best to follow in Venezuela’s foot steps. And they are succeeding.

 

[Crepitus]

$20 a month? On companies that profit more than $20 million a year?

Oh the horror!!!

how about you open up your wallet commie cuck?

Don't live in Seattle. But if I did, and I owned a company making more than $20 million a year, I certainly would.

Why go straight to the personal insult? Is that really your default? Are you nor intelligent enough to make your point without it? Or did mommy just not hug you enough when you were Baby?

Because you say "only $20 a month" when you forget about all the other freaking taxes and fees they already pay.

it's always "just a bit more", "why are you being so greedy" and "why can't you help" being mewled by people who could never make it in the private world, and are nothing more than government leeches.

The real question is why can't these people understand basic economics. When you punish a company by how many people they employ, and in the end they want to cut costs, you make headcount a TARGET for cost savings.

So people get laid off, and you lose their income tax money, their sales tax money, you get people leaving, and thus lower property values (and thus property taxes) and then the government morons will blame the companies instead of their own greedy cocksucking selves.

And useful idiots like you cheer and applause along because you get someone else to pay for something you want.

Who's forgetting? I just sold my retail business, I know all about the taxes. I don't see this as unreasonable at all.

There’s no fucking way you ever had a business let alone one that would be sellable. There’s not a single successful business owner that gets by with just saying yeah it’s only 20 bucks here and there. I’m good with paying more to the government because.

Did your fictitional business also pay your employees 15 bucks an hour to sweep floors? Higher taxes are no problem? Your full of shit. You’ve never owned a business, let alone a successful one.

Lol, like your opinion matters fer shit. Yer justa low-life internet troll.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

how about you open up your wallet commie cuck?

Don't live in Seattle. But if I did, and I owned a company making more than $20 million a year, I certainly would.

Why go straight to the personal insult? Is that really your default? Are you nor intelligent enough to make your point without it? Or did mommy just not hug you enough when you were Baby?

Because you say "only $20 a month" when you forget about all the other freaking taxes and fees they already pay.

it's always "just a bit more", "why are you being so greedy" and "why can't you help" being mewled by people who could never make it in the private world, and are nothing more than government leeches.

The real question is why can't these people understand basic economics. When you punish a company by how many people they employ, and in the end they want to cut costs, you make headcount a TARGET for cost savings.

So people get laid off, and you lose their income tax money, their sales tax money, you get people leaving, and thus lower property values (and thus property taxes) and then the government morons will blame the companies instead of their own greedy cocksucking selves.

And useful idiots like you cheer and applause along because you get someone else to pay for something you want.

Who's forgetting? I just sold my retail business, I know all about the taxes. I don't see this as unreasonable at all.

There’s no fucking way you ever had a business let alone one that would be sellable. There’s not a single successful business owner that gets by with just saying yeah it’s only 20 bucks here and there. I’m good with paying more to the government because.

Did your fictitional business also pay your employees 15 bucks an hour to sweep floors? Higher taxes are no problem? Your full of shit. You’ve never owned a business, let alone a successful one.

Lol, like your opinion matters fer shit. Yer justa low-life internet troll.

Like you? Claiming to be a business owner with endless funds to pay in taxes? You’re a fucking moron. And I trolled your stupid ass just right.

 

[HenryBHough]

1. A company might GROSS $20,000,000/yr and still have little or no profit.

2. The tax money will not help any homeless. It will all be pissed away the logistics of renaming the city "Detroit West". Imagine the sweetheart contracts just for highway signs!

 

[Crepitus]

Don't live in Seattle. But if I did, and I owned a company making more than $20 million a year, I certainly would.

Why go straight to the personal insult? Is that really your default? Are you nor intelligent enough to make your point without it? Or did mommy just not hug you enough when you were Baby?

Because you say "only $20 a month" when you forget about all the other freaking taxes and fees they already pay.

it's always "just a bit more", "why are you being so greedy" and "why can't you help" being mewled by people who could never make it in the private world, and are nothing more than government leeches.

The real question is why can't these people understand basic economics. When you punish a company by how many people they employ, and in the end they want to cut costs, you make headcount a TARGET for cost savings.

So people get laid off, and you lose their income tax money, their sales tax money, you get people leaving, and thus lower property values (and thus property taxes) and then the government morons will blame the companies instead of their own greedy cocksucking selves.

And useful idiots like you cheer and applause along because you get someone else to pay for something you want.

Who's forgetting? I just sold my retail business, I know all about the taxes. I don't see this as unreasonable at all.

There’s no fucking way you ever had a business let alone one that would be sellable. There’s not a single successful business owner that gets by with just saying yeah it’s only 20 bucks here and there. I’m good with paying more to the government because.

Did your fictitional business also pay your employees 15 bucks an hour to sweep floors? Higher taxes are no problem? Your full of shit. You’ve never owned a business, let alone a successful one.

Lol, like your opinion matters fer shit. Yer justa low-life internet troll.

Like you? Claiming to be a business owner with endless funds to pay in taxes? You’re a fucking moron. And I trolled your stupid ass just right.

Now you are lying. Nobody said anything about "endless funds".

So you are a lying low-life internet troll whose opinion has no wieght.

Enjoy!