Fascinating little bit of hypocrisy from Light Heels Lou this a.m.

First, let me say at the onset that I don't care about Dry-Cleaning-gate.

Charging off dry-cleaning bills has been a benefit for members for decades.  Even when I was up there, it was legal.

To me, it's like any union benefit that the public finds out about: horrifically high pay, disgustingly high retirement pay, and so on.  It's one of the spiffs of the job.

This whaling and gnashing of teeth by Brancaccio (he's SUCH a drama queen) is the kind of thing he loves.... when he's aiming it at others.

But you know what I have yet to see?

I have yet to see a column condemning the ongoing B&O tax break the newspapers all got while most of the rest of small business experienced a 20% increase in that same tax to help make up for it.

Tuesday, January 17, 2012

So, the newspapers are at it again: effort under way to lower THEIR B&O tax, while raising most everyone else's.

Here's the scam:

2012 Senate Bill 6201: Concerning the business and occupation taxation of newspapers and local interest web sites

[Comments on this legislation] [Post new comment] [Text and Analysis] [Add to Watch List]

[Previous] [Next]

•Introduced by Sen. Sharon Nelson, (D-Vashon) (D) on January 12, 2012, changes the rate of business and occupation taxes for newspapers and local interest web sites from 0.403 percent to 0.383 percent beginning July 1, 2013. The bill also defines "local interest web site" as an internet web site that is normally updated more than once a day and which is substantially dedicated to local interests tailored to a general circulation area of a county or smaller.

◦Referred to the Senate Ways Means Committee on January 12, 2012. There's an irony here.

How many times have we seen the words printed in newspapers across this country generally, but certainly the democratian where they tell us that WE should raise OUR taxes.

So.... what's up with this?

Why do THEY rate a tax CUT, while our taxes keep going UP?

I'm sure tomorrow's editorial locally will condemn such an obviously unfair and unconscionable revenue cut since the state is in such a huge deficit situation.

(Remember: repeat after me - a reduction in an increase is NOT a deficit.)

And now, Light Heels, who is directly benefiting from this tax cut while the rag he runs circles the drain, makes a big deal out of a legal benefit of being elected?

Here's a clue:  Don't like the rules?  Then get them changed.  But don't bitch when someone does something you don't like just because you don't like it.