Legislators shaking in their boots?
Thank you Prof. James N. Gregory for your informational commentary on Tim Eyman [“Rejection of Eyman empowers reform of state’s finances,” Opinion, guest commentary, Nov. 18].
I had no idea how much power Eyman had over our state government. In the past five years just two of his five amendments passed, and evidently these amendments have caused our legislators to shake in their boots.
Whether I agree or disagree with Eyman, at present this is still a free country and we still have free speech and choice. Evidently we have not elected the right legislators to resolve our tax problems despite the Tim Eymans of the world.
Who can we blame next?
— Malva Anderson, Covington
Keep your day job, Gregory
According to James N. Gregory, “Most state revenue comes from sales tax, meaning that those with small incomes pay a greater percentage of it in taxes than those with large incomes.”
It doesn’t mean that at all, and it is fortunate that Gregory is a professor of history and not of math.
One critical item that he left out was that food is not subject to sales tax.
Since those with small incomes pay a much greater percentage of their income on food, it is very likely that those with very small incomes actually pay a smaller percentage of their income on state sales taxes than those with larger incomes.
The actual percentage of sales tax per income is based on what percentage of one’s income is spent on taxable items. The extreme example would be a person on subsistence income that pays 100 percent of their income on tax-free food and therefore they would pay zero percentage of their income on sales tax.
In that example, every other person that spent any money on a taxable item would pay a greater percentage.
If a person spends a greater portion of their income on taxable items than another person then they pay a greater percentage in taxes than the other person regardless of the amount of the incomes.
This is a math question, not a sociology question.
— Richard C. Shell, Woodinville