Seattle goes socialist and hits up rich to save poor

OPINION:

Seattle, home of far leftists, environmentalists and annoying coffee snobs, has gone Robin Hood on its residents and decided the best way to provide for its poor is to snatch from the rich.

That’s right. Seattle’s City Council is moving toward implementing a new tax that only strikes the rich.

And right again. That is indeed called socialism. Hear that? It’s the boot of big government marching through the Seattle streets.

Council members voted just this week to impose a 2.25 percent tax on the highest earners — those whose personal income surpasses $250,000. Or, if you’re married filing jointly, the tax doesn’t kick in until income for the couple reaches $500,000.

The constitutional challenges are sure to be both swift and successful. Note to council: You can’t be taxing people at different rates, punishing some, sparing others, distributing at will to still others.

And yet — they did. All of ’em. The entire nine-member team of the City Council voted unanimously to pass the targeted tax.

“[[They’re] going to unanimously adopt an illegal income tax that has no hope of taking effect and will waste taxpayer resources on litigation the city is sure to lose,” said Jason Mercier, with the Washington Policy Center, to CBS News.

Doubtless, council members are crying for cash, decrying a 1984 state law that prohibits localities from levying taxes on net income of residents.

“We have an increasing affordability gap between the haves and have nots,” said Councilmember Lisa Herbold, who co-sponsored the tax package. “And one of the reasons is our outdated, regressive and unfair tax structure.”

Or, as another might say: One of the reasons is an overburdensome, ever-growing and expensive government.

Here’s the problem with Seattle’s mindset on this: When government coffers dry up, the solution isn’t to look for refills among the rich. The solution is to stop spending so much.

That’s a principle that all governments should keep in mind, whether local, state or federal.

Lesson number one: It’s not the proper role of government to provide for the poor at the expense of the rich. And lesson number two: If government finds itself with dwindling resources, the solution is to curb government expenditures — not to tap further into the pockets of taxpayers.

Let’s hope Seattle’s council members are nipped in their socialist buds and curbed by a court with capitalistic sympathies — and fast, before the idea spreads like a cancer to other cash-starved, leftist-leaning communities.