Labor Group Demands Felony Charges Against Amazon for Opposing Seattle's Job Tax

The city's leftists are becoming increasingly unhinged in the face of broad resistance to a tax on hours worked.



In the face of widespread and heated resistance to their proposal for a literal tax on jobs, Seattle's increasingly unhinged leftists are calling for criminal prosecution of their opponents.

Seattle's city council is considering a 26-cent tax on every hour of employee work at companies grossing more than $20 million a year. The proposal, which is scheduled for a vote on Monday, prompted one of the city's largest private employers, Amazon, to pause construction on a new office tower. The move was in character for a corporate giant known to play hardball with municipalities, for good and ill. But according to the union-backed group Working Washington, Amazon's reaction is not just irritating; it's felonious.

The construction pause is "the sort of thing you might expect from a subprime mob boss lording it over a company town—and that's not just a metaphor," says an open letter from the group to Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson. Working Washington claims "there is abundant evidence" that Amazon has broken a state law criminalizing threats against public officials aimed at affecting their votes or decisions. "We urge you to investigate and prosecute Amazon for this serious crime," the group says.

Washington's law defines threat as a message communicating the intent to "harm substantially the person threatened or another with respect to his or her health, safety, business, financial condition, or personal relationships." Since the city of Seattle counts as a legal person and Amazon's construction pause harms the city's financial condition by putting tax dollars at risk, Working Washington reasons, the online retail giant is guilty of threatening a public official.

This line of thinking, as UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh noted here last night, "would criminalize a vast range of ordinary political action," including legislative horse trading, boycott campaigns, and even attempts to unseat elected officials, since losing one's government salary would constitute "substantial harm" to one's "financial condition." The legal theory advanced by this union-supported group would also make threatening to strike a crime.

Despite the uncomfortable implications of its argument, Working Washington is not backing down from its demands for criminal prosecution. When asked by the Seattle Times if the group's letter was meant to be taken seriously, spokesperson Sage Wilson said, "I am not going to pretend to you that this is a thing that normally happens…I think the un-subtlety—and I would say brutality—of Amazon's threat is also not a thing that normally happens."

Working Washington, mind you, is hardly a marginal political force in Seattle. It is backed by the state's home health care workers union, and the Times describes it as "a major player in Seattle politics, helping to secure a $15 minimum wage and other protections for low-wage workers."

That such an influential group is adopting such a sweeping and authoritarian legal theory is alarming, to say the least. It shows that Seattle's left, fresh from a string of victories on issues such as a progressive income tax, a $15 minimum wage, micromanagement of workers' schedules, and increasingly strict tenant protection laws, was not prepared for the full-blown opposition its job tax has encountered from labor, business, former mayors, and much of the local press.

Working Washington is not the only supporter of the tax to go off the rails. Kshama Sawant, the one out-and-out socialist on Seattle's city council, has employed increasingly heated rhetoric in criticizing Amazon's opposition to the plan. "We cannot take these attacks lightly!" reads a call to action for a protest hosted by Sawant. "It is important we win the tax here in Seattle, and just like the $15 minimum wage, make sure it reverberates across the country. Because accepting Amazon's extortion means an inevitable race to the bottom in all cities." Since the announcement of Amazon's construction pause, Sawant has led two rallies against the company and is planning a third for Saturday.

Despite attempts to make the fight all about greedy billionaires, a broad coalition of interest groups has expressed opposition to the job tax. The business community is solidly opposed, with 131 Seattle-based companies signing an open letter against the tax. Construction unions, which mounted counterprotests at Sawant's anti-Amazon rallies, also have voiced loud opposition, and so has former mayor Tim Burgess, a solid supporter of the city's income and soda taxes. Seattle's current mayor, Jenny Durkan, has belatedly said she is against the job tax in its current form, while stressing the need for new revenue.

In depicting this broad opposition as nothing more than corporate thuggery, Seattle's left comes across as increasingly isolated and out of touch. Perhaps this development will have a moderating effect on the crazy ideas considered by the city's government.

NEXT: Man Protests Police Department's Violation of Speech Rights, So Cops Arrest Him

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.


      This should trigger the hell out of BUCS

      1. Once I'm mayor of Phoenix, then there will be no more Tom Woods to be upset by.

        1. Didn't Tom Woods move to Florida? Are you going to close Arizona borders to Florida Man?

          1. Tom Woods' Florida Man exploits would be stealing New York Time newspapers and then cutting out the Paul Krugman columns before returning them to where he found them.

            1. Florida Man Defecates On Steps Of Federal Reserve Bank Of Florida
              Wipes Buttocks With "Fiat Currency Adorned With Evil Face Of Perpetrator Of Northern Aggression"

              1. This is why I'm not banning all Florida Men. Just Florida Woods.

          2. Sounds like you underestimate the power of Arizona.

  1. I'm sorry, but I get endless amusement out of this story. Does no progressive recognize the perverse irony that the richest whitest city in America is also the only city that currently has a self proclaimed socialist on its city council?

    Actual working people (yes, there are about ten that still live in Seattle) oppose this tax too.

    1. Nothing is going to help poor people like taxing their employers for every hour they work.

      Honestly, how can people be this stupid? It is just terrifying. The idiots behind this no doubt believe they are helping people by doing this. How can someone be that stupid?

      1. At least we'll enjoy a good laugh before we're sent off to the gulags

      2. They have college degrees. It's a learned stupidity.
        They won't be able to connect the dots when Seattle looks like Detroit.

        1. They will claim Seattle was a victim of capitalism. That is what they claim about Detroit. They are like the living dead. They destroy everything they touch and they never change and never stop. They are just relentless.

          1. These people aren't even the majority, they're just vocal and motivated. It's up to the voting public to see through the bullshit that socialism is a worker's movement.

            1. "These people aren't even the majority, they're just vocal and motivated.."

              Nassim Taleb explains why vocal minorities often win:


              1. An interesting read. But, damn, Taleb needs an editor. But he's to damn arrogant to appreciate that fact.

                1. No kidding. There was value in that, but it was almost unreadable.

          2. Detroit was a victim of Coleman Young, amongst others.

            1. The man who destroyed Detroit was Mayor Cavanaugh and his city-wide income tax

              1. Actually the Milliken busing decree destroyed Detroit.

          3. Yes, John, dehumanize those evil Others. Just don't use the z word, unless you wanna get all post-modern realize you are a character in a play.

            1. Try learning what the word "metaphor" means. I do not think they are literal zombies.

            2. ...qua qua qua qua...

          4. Yet so many of the commentariat are horrified when I suggest we will have to get tough on progressives and stop them.

      3. Honestly, how can people be this stupid?

        I blame college.

        Some ideas are just so stupid they can ONLY be spread by higher education.

      4. You'd think one of the pinkos would recognize that this is a highly "regressive" tax. Twenty-five cents is 1.7% of the $15/hr minimum wage, but it's just 0.25% of an employee with a $100/hr compensation package.

        Certainly Seattlists and their municipal representatives aren't so foolish as to think that employers ignore payroll taxes when making their staffing and budgeting decisions. Or, are they so foolish?

        1. Just about every tax except the income tax is regressive. Soda taxes, cigarette taxes, all sin taxes in fact; sales tax. social security tax, medicare etc. The proggies would deny that gas taxes are regressive because the poor can always take the bus which doesn't go where the poor need to go.

      5. Nothing is going to help poor people like taxing their employers for every hour they work.

        circular logic, needs to be filed in the circular file....

        Dontchya GETTIT? The "poor people' Seattle's eedjit rulers want to help are poor BECAUSE they never will work for Amazon or any other employer. And THAT"s part of what's got the Zon all knicker-be-knotted. Amazon make good money by hiring people who WANT to work, and are now forced by Seattle's $ min wage laws to pay them more than most are worth... and THEN here come de Citty HoohHahs and demand ANOTHER tax to feed and house the people too lazy to work anywhere.

        What Seattle need to do is get their coppers up and off their thick ends, and have them DEAL with the uncivilised behaviour these homeless continually inflict upon the rest of the city. Tear down every tent on public property. Arrest and charge those stealing shopping carts, and confiscate whatever they have in them. Make their life sonmiserable they'll all move back to Los Angeles, or Riverside or... EVERYWHERE the loca government supports the homeless, word gets out and they flock to those cities. Seattle, Portland, Eureka, feed them and they will come. Stop feeding them and make them move along, they will go somewhere else.

    2. Well that was amusing.

      Sawant, a socialist with strong ties to labor, tried to calm them down, referring to them as her "brothers," but they yelled over her.

      LOLOL, she tried the Che/Fidel/Hugo "brothers" greeting and got her ass handed to her. :popcorn:

      Among the possible options for the homeless-services portion of the money: 100 new tiny homes in two authorized encampments; 362 new beds in emergency shelters; and 97 parking spaces for people living in their vehicles.

      IOW, let's double down on all the low-impact, stupid shit we're doing now that isn't even touching the real capacity. The article later says they've got 8,700 people on a waiting list for housing. So their plans--for $50 MIL--include adding a maximum of 559 units, assuming that a parking space is a "unit" and provides a place for one person.

      So if you multiply that out, to provide 559 places for a homeless person to flop for $50 MIL means the cost of each flopping unit costs the city $89,445.44. Meaning that if they did something that provided a flopping unit for all 8,700 on the waiting list, they'd need to bleed Seattle taxpayers for $778,175,328.


    3. It's like the city of Seattle is living through the first few chapters of Atlas Shrugged. Where's Wesley Mouch? I know he's in this story somewhere.

      1. That would be Sage Wilson.

  2. So the Progressive government of Seattle will tax a business until it is no longer profitable and then charge the owners with a felony when they close down or try to move. Late stage socialism indeed.

    1. She's openly remarked that it should be taken as a public good. Her intent is obvious.

      1. These people see Venezuela as a model for good government.

        1. Sure, Venezuela only failed because Capitalists were allowed to run free. They won't make that mistake again.

          1. If only it wasn't for those damn wreckers and counter-revolutionaries, we would have had real socialism a long time ago.

      2. So, if she "City-alized" Amazon and then drove it into the ground, as would most likely happen, would people be committing felonies for no longer buying stuff on Amazon?

        1. Maybe you jest, but they do this in China. Some people are forced to buy things they don't need or want to "support the local economy" and there are government inspectors to verify you've got receipts to support your claims that you bought your quota.

          1. That is simply untrue. I have lived here for 10 years and never had that happen or heard of anyone else being forced to do it. I will also point out that minimum wage and tax as Seattle has planned do not exist either. I suppose if someone is a member of the CCP, not all Chinese people are, they might be pushed to do such things. It is not law here and actually most people work outside of the legal process anyway (they don't want to pay tax, haha).

    2. Why does progessivism sound so much like feudalism?

      1. Because that is what it is. Everything they say is the opposite of the truth. They don't want progress. They want regression.

      2. They cannot force things on you if your are free. Its Nanny-State or bust.

      3. Conservatism taken to its logical conclusion is also feudalism.

        1. No it is not. Conservatism is the total opposite of feudalism. Feudalism is nothing but an advanced form of collectivism and tribalism. And socialism is just an elaborate form of tribalism.

          1. Feudalism is nothing but an advanced form of collectivism and tribalism.

            I rest my case.

            1. And what do you think tribalism is if not socialism you fucking moron? Are you really this dense?

            2. It is strange, though, how you never hear about conservative states taxing and spending their economies into oblivion

              1. Socialism is totally not tribalism. I mean a political ideology that believes in collective guilt based on your economic class and embraces the idea of sharing the fruits of everyone's labor equally among society is anything but tribalist. Tribalism is all about individualism I guess.

                I sometimes wonder if some of the people on here didn't suffer head injuries at some point.

                1. i wonder why CMB tries to pretend he's not a progressive.

                2. Did I say socialism is not tribalism? It's funny how you assume that just because I criticize conservatism, that that means I support socialism. Both philosophies are collectivist tribalism.

                  1. No they are not. You can't seem to explain why conservatism is that way except to say that you want it to be so.

                    1. Give me your definition of conservatism first.

                    2. We have elected a man who flagrantly violates common moral principles, especially those of Evangelicals, the most conservative voting bloc. They still voted en masse for him and are one of the few groupings of Americans who solidly support Trump. I believe they are also the only one that overwhelmingly supports him.

                      The entire last election devolved into tribal name-bashing and fears of Others who are out to get us. Trump had two concrete policies on the campaign trail: kill the TPP and build a wall. Every other candidate offered more. But somehow conservatives were able to crystallize support around this man to the exclusion of all others, even as he consistently violated conservative principles and paraded ideas that ran opposite to traditionally conservative ideals.

                      And that's just the US. Conservatism in the US is far more individualistic than conservatism overseas. Consider the Middle East, China, and Japan. Conservatism in those countries focuses on ethnic/religious/national identity. Japanese conservatism is far more tribal than Japanese liberalism.

                    3. You overlook how much of the 'support' for Trump was simply profound opposition to Hillary.
                      Sometimes there really is a wrong lizard.

                    4. That only kinda works if you consider the general election. There were primaries, after all, and more than two candidates in the general election.

                      A tribe arrayed in opposition is as much a tribe as one standing in affirmation.

                    5. And none of this would excuse the fact that Trump still enjoys support from exactly the people he shouldn't, just because he pretends to be conservative.

                3. What did they do to treat yours?

              2. Oklahoma says, "Hold my beer." We already have the spending down, now we are working on the taxing.

                1. Yeah, Nebraska is having unconstitutional budget shortfalls. High spending isn't restricted to liberal states.

  3. So it should be illegal to alter behavior (or say you will alter behavior) in response to legislation? Good lord what a disastrous proposal.

    I'm also sure this crowd would love to see that standard applied to a business that threatens to stop investment in a conservative area in response to a law that's (perceived or actually) anti-gay or anti-trans.

    1. We've actually seen companies do this successfully. To the cheers of the right-thinking.

      If it weren't for double standards, they'd have no standards at all.

      1. I know, that's why I brought up that example.

    2. So it should be illegal to alter behavior (or say you will alter behavior) in response to legislation? Good lord what a disastrous proposal.

      Remember when Seattle's mayor banned city-paid for travel to NC over the bathroom bill there?

    3. "So it should be illegal to alter behavior (or say you will alter behavior) in response to legislation? Good lord what a disastrous proposal."

      So if a city increases the tax on cigarettes or the tax on soda and people smoke or drink less soda(which is what many supporters of these types of taxes say they want to happen) then it would illegal for an individual to alter their behavior by smoking or drinking less soda? Damned if you do and damned if you don't.

  4. I like it! This law would then mean any statement pro-tax is illegal and felonious because it would hurt people financially.

  5. Amazon should just pull up stakes and move to a business friendly place. I suggest Reno, NV.

    1. The whole point of HQ2 is to get one foot out the door.

      The mystery is how long it will take for HQ1 to shut down.

      1. "The mystery is how long it will take for HQ1 to shut down."

        Prediction, short odds:
        Seattle, in the person of the idiot Kshama Sawant, will introduce a new tax, required of all companies leaving Seattle.
        It will be called the "Anti-Going Out of Business Tax", un-ironically.

    2. I suggest Reno, NV.

      Ye gads, what did Reno ever do to you to deserve that?

      1. Reno has not yet become as woke as it should be, it is just kind of drowsy.

  6. Nothing keeps business in your state like threatening them with felony criminal prosecution for not bowing to their socialist demands.

    1. I imagine it will also do wonders in the way of attracting new business to Seattle.

  7. Or AG Ferguson, it might be likened to the actions of a cable customer cutting the cord following another large, seemingly arbitrary rate hike. The businesses located in Seattle are not its serfs.

    1. To the jagoff Progtards running Seattle they are most definitely serfs. Their whole "You didn't build that" mantra lays bare that claim. I'm waiting for the actual serfs (ie - working poor) to finally wise up and start taking down the Manor Lords the hard way via the noose. There is only so far you can push people before they begin to react violently. Of course, it may take Seattle residents eating out of garbage cans before that happens....

  8. I don't think this kind of militant leftism is actually in the minority in Seattle. I stopped talking to someone after she gave me her theory that Robespierre was actually a good guy because he knew those people would need to die for the health of the new French state.

    1. Robespierre was the role-model for Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, the Kims and the Castros, and our own scumbag, commie-kid.
      He just lacked enough power and a large enough population.

      1. He is my favorite example to use with Progs.

        Robespierre also thought he could control the mob.

        Everybody, eventually, learns otherwise.

    2. Speaking of Jacobins, it might not be a bad idea to set your account to hide your email, lest your co-workers see this and get you fired for belonging to a hate group.

      1. I mean, I hardly ever comment anymore about how all (insert marginalized persons flavor of the week) people must die, but better safe than sorry!

  9. "The city's leftists are becoming increasingly unhinged in the face of broad resistance to a tax on hours worked."

    See the newest scumbag over on the SCOTUS thread:
    "Karen24|5.10.18 @ 1:57PM|#
    If the unions lose this case, expect a lot more strikes. The last year has taught us that the best way to get members is to protest as loud and as long as we can. We have nothing left to lose; why not go down making all the trouble possible?"
    Yep, if lefties don't get their way, why riots and violence are the answer!

    1. Hey, it works for France. [/snark]

    2. Serious question. Labor unions were formed to provide workers safety, better wages,retirement, etc. Now that the government covers all those issues with OSHA, Social Security, unemployment, SNAP, the minimum wage, etc. etc., exactly what purpose do Unions serve?

      1. In Time Of War|5.10.18 @ 3:54PM|#
        "Serious question...."

        Here we have a question from someone who is obviously not a union official!

      2. Nor a D politico in need of campaign funds.

        1. Nor a fellow traveler of your buddy, Tony.

      3. They're basically superPACs for the Democratic Party that get their donations by force from members who have guaranteed incomes.

      4. Unions were formed to foment violent political change and usher in a socialist society, and some of them might have accidentally achieved some worker safety along the way.

        Unions are also historically hostile to all foreign labor, which is one reason why they've always fought for legislation to specifically knee cap any potential for competition to their cartels.

      5. Even in Libertopia, unions can serve an entirely useful purpose. Minimum wage laws (which of course wouldn't exist there) don't eliminate the opportunity for workers to negotiate the best wages possible, for example.

        There is nothing inherently anti-freedom about collective bargaining.

        1. I swear to FSM I only hit submit once.

          1. Squirrels.

      6. Even in Libertopia, unions can serve an entirely useful purpose. Minimum wage laws (which of course wouldn't exist there) don't eliminate the opportunity for workers to negotiate the best wages possible, for example.

        There is nothing inherently anti-freedom about collective bargaining.

        1. I agree that unions can be viable. I disagree that the government should be able to force you to join one. I agree that a company can force you to join one as a condition of employment. And I agree that collective bargaining can work in the private sector even if it habitually fucks up the public sector.

          His question was more "what is the current purpose of unions vis-a-vis the fact that most of their demands are now taken care of by the government". You're right about wages, but beyond that there seems to be very little purpose for unions?which may be why they're dying everywhere but the public sector.

        2. Until the moment just one worker decides she doesn't want any part of the collective.

      7. Unions do lots of things. They collect dues, run pension funds, lobby politicians, and negotiate work rules to create more jobs, more dues, more pension contributions, and more political influence. All of this is essential to the interests of union leadership.

    3. So, Karen is admitting she wouldn't pay for the union if she didn't have to, either.

      Good to know.

      Janus wouldn't outlaw unions. It would just remove US as their enforcement arm for dues.

  10. Not to mention that the city's payroll tax would be illegal on its face, for the same reasons as the city income tax it is intended to replace.

  11. Amazon Shrugged.

    1. Who is Jeff Bezos?

      1. The Pimp of the Emerald City, and he just brought down his gloom hand.

    2. No wonder AMZN is looking at Colorado for HQ2

  12. I guess attempting to bring criminal charges is one way to react to having math explained to you.

    1. City Councilman: "Those might be the laws of economics, sir. But we're councilmen. We can change those laws."

      1. "Antifa has helped grow our local economy. Look at all the widows they've smashed."

  13. When people like Kshama Sawant or this Sage Wilson talk, I like to imagine my favorite 90's wrestler, Sycho Sid, choke-slamming them (one-handed), followed by a brutal power-bomb. Because that would be sweet.

    1. God, that match where he broke his leg is incredibly gruesome.

      1. Yeah. That was pretty bad. That they STAYED ON THAT SHOT for a while was even worse.

  14. A search of Sage Wilson's picture brings up the exact sort of skinny-fat, punchable-faced soyboy you'd expect.

    1. I normally don't care for ad hominems, but by god you are spot on. I thought he was going to be some aging hippie in a tie-dye t-shirt...but it was worse.

    2. Oh my God, where do they find these people? Seriously, you are right that you should not make fun of people's looks, but people should also not go out of their way to look like weirdos either.

      If the company is found at fault, it's asked to pay the employee what's owed, plus 12 percent interest. The company has 20 days to comply, or the city can revoke its business license. The city will give back the business license once the worker has received the money.

      Sage Wilson is happy that the ordinance has teeth like that. He's with Working Washington, a coalition that helped pass the new Minimum Wage. Wilson says not every law comes with an enforcement mechanism.

      Had he been born in a different time and place, he would have been sticking people in ovens and whistling while he worked. God these people are hideous.

      1. Okay, he's not leading man material, but he is far from Quasimodo.

        1. No. He is just a complete doofus. He tries to look like a doofus.

  15. If threatening to stop work on a building is a threat against an elected official, then so is saying you are going to vote for the other guy in the next election. I suppose the unions would probably like that criminalized as well.

    1. Depends *entirely* on who's in office and who's challenging them.

    2. A union's entire existence is predicated on the threat to a business's bottom line. Otherwise there'd be no point.

  16. I don't see why threatening a company with a lawsuit to the point where it moves out of the city - thereby diminishing the city's tax base - wouldn't also count as a felonious threat.

    But all I can see here is the Seattle City Council dressed in black paramilitary uniforms pummeling a prostrate victim as they scream "Stop Resisting! Stop Resisting!".

  17. Wreckers! Kulak! Derpity Depry DER!

  18. Leftism - It's so great we have to criminalize our opposition.

    How are these people fundamentally different then the totalitarian socialists that kill 100 million people in the last century? Thank God for the 2nd amendment, because if they had their way....

  19. Suderman was just telling us how the Democratic Party is a party of ideas as opposed to Trumpism. So, I guess this kind of thing is okay now. I mean these people have real ideas and want to do something.

    1. Yeah, I would support a party of no idea's that just show up and do nothing over a party of people that don't care about the consequences of what they do.

      That said, I'm pretty sure both parties are shitty in that regard. I note Republicans have yet to abort the ACA, as one example.

      1. I agree. Regardless of which party you are talking about, lack of ideas is not the problem. I would love to know how Suderman manages to rationalize being Libertarian and wanting politicians and political parties to have lots of big ideas.

        1. "Hey, what's the big idea?!!"

        2. In terms of Libertarians and Republicans, their best idea's are the idea's that involve specifically doing less, and it appears Suderman is unaware of that fine difference.

  20. Reason, where muh article on the ex-Jehovahs-Witness-turned-womens-rights-advocate calling the cops on the black student for falling asleep in a student lounge at Yale? This is trending stuff!

    1. They will get to it. They have to let Sudderman finish his next article praising the "remarkable legislative achievements" of the Democratic Congress of 09-10.

      1. That's an unfair smear. Suderman is working on his follow-up article "Actually, a Centrally Managed Infrastructure Plan is Very Libertarian, Because Reasons"

        1. I stand corrected.

    2. This is trending stuff!

      Doesn't make it actually interesting. It's merely one data point in the larger issue of "living while black" incidents.

      I dream of a world in which blogs didn't post unless they have something interesting or important to say, not just to jump in on the trend of posting what everyone is talking about.

  21. Say, doesn't preventing the municipal government from stationing troops in your house have the potential to interfere with the city council's efforts to prevent capital flight if your abode happens to be situated on the city limits?


  22. Dear Seattle,

    Thanks for making us look sane, moderate, judicious and, responsible.

    Portland and San Francisco

    1. "You shut your filthy whore mouth"

      - Seattle

    2. Portland and SF are more likely to say "Hold my locally-sourced craft beer and watch this."

    3. Keep it up and we will charge you cities with felony obstruction of excessive taxation.


    1. The oldest man in America will soon celebrate his 112th birthday. Richard Overton spends his days smoking cigars, eating sweets and waving at honking cars from his porch.

      I am happy to live in a country where a man can live to 112 and spend his time smoking cigars, eating candy and waving at people from his porch.

  23. Seattle, you literally couldn't make up a dumber city.

    1. You have my deepest apologies for having to constantly grapple with it. I lived in Sammamish for three years and commuted to north Seattle daily. Save the excellent variety of dining options, I hated every moment. You must have the patience of a saint.

      1. I don't even dine out here anymore- beyond the low-brow places like Teriyaki joints etc. Even Danny Westneat is beginning to complain about the effects of $15 now. I mean, he may not KNOW he's complaining about it, but he just complained about an $18 hamburger in one of his latest Woe Seattle articles.

        When you start to lose Danny Westneat...

        1. Hey, I'm happy to pay more. And you should be to. And if Danny doesn't like it, then he should be made redundant

  24. It takes guts to piss off the union that represents healthcare workers. They can bring workplace accidents to a whole new level.

  25. Since the city of Seattle counts as a legal person

    What? That makes no sense.

    1. "Municipal corporations" used to in the same basic legal family as chartered commercial corporations, etc.

    2. Only persons can sign legal documents such as contracts.
      Thus, corporate personhood.

  26. "Since the city of Seattle counts as a legal person"

    The personhood of cities comes from the same legal history as the personhood of commercial corporations...oh, heck, never mind, if these guys tried to be consistent their brains would shut down from the effort.

  27. I wonder what sort of tax Seattle will levy to pay for the wall, the machine gun posts, and the minefields they'll use to stop people from fleeing.

    1. They'll just tax those who flee. This isn't that hard...

    2. "Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels."

  28. Seattle's current mayor, Jenny Durkan, has belatedly said she is against the job tax in its current form, while stressing the need for new revenue.

    This is as good as it gets, Seattle, throw your support behind Durkan, otherwise you get what we've had for the last 20 years.

    1. She said she was going to solve homelessness somehow. I'm sure it couldn't be as stupid as throwning more money after the problem.

  29. They should start a RICO case against all of the other people and companies that oppose the tax and any media organization that expresses doubt about the tax.

  30. This article keeps mentioning that it is union-supported, but it is only one union - home health care workers. Actual labor unions oppose this, and actually shouted down one of the council members last week!

    1. Some parasites are wise enough to care about the well-being of their host.

  31. If I were Jeff Bezos, I would not announce that I'm stopping the construction of a new building. I would quietly pack up and leave. Cut my losses and get out of that hellhole. Maybe set up new shop ten feet over the border into Idaho...

  32. meh. Any business that hasn't E and E'd Seattle yet gets what they deserve.

    1. I haven't heard that term in years

  33. Here's a big idea.

    King County needs to spend $400 million a year to solve homeless crisis, new report says

    An independent report on King County's homelessness crisis by the consulting firm McKinsey & Company finds that squeezing efficiencies out of the current system isn't enough to solve it; 14,000 units of affordable housing are needed, at least.

    They've already spent billions on this and literally made the problem worse, and now, with a straight face, they try to tell us that they need to spend even more. Fuck these people with a shaped charge.

    The report is wrong, absolutely, 100% wrong. They predicate their entire report on the idea that 100% of the homeless population will be homeless without shoving them into a house.

    1. Bzzzt, wrong. Start clearing those tent encampments, offer the people the large number of beds and shelter currently unused, and if they take it great, if they refuse, as so many homeless do, then the motherfucking instant a tent goes up, you have a crew there tearing their shit down with the same official and a clipboard offering the same shelter and services they keep refusing. Do that about 100 times and those homeless-as-lifestyle motherfuckers will finally realize a cost to their actions and either go elsewhere or get a job that they're perfectly capable of getting.

      1. I fucking hate people who choose to live on the street. I don't care what you do, but you can't live on the street. Give them all a chance at a job and a way out of their situation. If they won't take that, lock the fuckers up in work camps until decide that maybe being something besides a bum is worth doing.

        1. If not for Uncle Sam robbing people on the streets to have money to pay your salary, you'd be broke.

          Just sayin...

        2. Don't worry. If we lose our contract I'll be on the streets. No one will hire someone with government contractor on their resume. I'll be back to restaurant work. College degree be damned.

          1. *back* on the streets. I've been there before. Just not as a parent.

      2. As Don B puts it, wealth is the exception no the rule. We are all born into poverty. Because we have are born with nothing and can provide nothing. Wealth, having a place to eat and food in the fridge, is the abnormality. If not for what creates wealth, we'd all be on the streets.

        So the question is not what causes homelessness and poverty, but what causes wealth.

        Criminalizing poverty is criminalizing being human.

        1. *not*

        2. If there weren't any barriers to employment, a lot of these problems would go away.
          I wonder how many people were put on the streets by the minimum wage hike specifically.

          1. Probably not many. A lot aren't from the area. They've actually come here to be homeless.

    2. "The patient is losing blood. Quick, apply more leeches."

  34. Seattle's city council is considering a 26-cent tax on every hour of employee work at companies grossing more than $20 million a year.

    Hmm. Does Seattle count as a "company" as well as a "person"?

    1. More like a "prison."

  35. Since the city of Seattle counts as a legal person?

    Maybe they should be glad that they didn't succeed in banning legal persons from Seattle like they wanted to?

    1. Can always make a compromise. Call the homeless 3/5 ths of a person...

  36. The construction pause is "the sort of thing you might expect from a subprime mob boss lording it over a company town

    Or from a socialist government. In Bolivia a couple years ago we noticed an awful lot of half finished construction with no one working. Driver said parties in power will get a project going, then when it gets close to the election stop work and say hey, you want this project finished better vote for us.

  37. You can have it all

    my dughter's favorite song.

    1. My daughter says "Hey John! The drums aren't fancy! They are almost as boring as The Stones! You'll love this band!"

      1. Although I like the other big bands of the time period, I just don't like the Rolling Stones. They've got three or four good songs but they wrote a couple hundred.

        It's cool that they're still together and do stuff, though.

      2. Here is a Seattle based band.

        That would be Stefan Lessard on bass

        Carter Beauford drummer.

        Boyd Tinsley on violin.

        Cmon lot of great music out there. Enjoy what you like. Classic and progressive rock does it for me.

        Yes Charlie Watts was kinda boring but the Stones needed an anchor and he did it.

  38. Perhaps this development will have a moderating effect on the crazy ideas considered by the city's government.

    I believed that 200 crazy ideas ago.

  39. Amazon are no friend of the smaller businesses. Many of their policies and practices are grossly harmful to other businesses, and some are likely actionable at law. That said, they are spot on with their opposition to Seattle's newest mental flatulence. And for this labour organisation to threaten legal action against Amazon for "harm", well, I hope Amazon countersue the City of Seattle on two counts.. imposing the $15/hr minimum wage (costs Amazon millions), nd threatening this new selective and uneven tax, which purportedly will cost them some twenty millions annually.

    What is most disgusting is that Seattle are wanting a bottomless bucket of tax money to re-allocate from those who are smart and diligent enough to actually MAKE MONEY with their assets, to those who are so lazy/incompetent they cannot get out of their sleeping bags under the bridge of a morning and go find something sufficiently useful to do so as to have a few other options for where they'll lay their heads at night. Perhaps if Seattle had not bought that four or five storey apartment building on Denny and renovated it total cost upwards of $11Mn if memory serves, tp [rovide a FREE home for alcoholics....... perhaps Seattle might have a few sheckels ready to hand as a means of giving a handout to some homelessness on the streets.

  40. Seattle: Wanna-Be Detroit with flannel and coffee.

  41. RCW 9A.76.180 - Intimidating a public servant states that "a person is guilty of intimidating a public servant if, by use of a threat, he or she attempts to influence a public servant's vote, opinion, decision, or other official action as a public servant." This is categorized as a Class B felony.

    I'm late to the party (Hey, I work for a living) but it seems all AMZN has to do is PROMISE to leave Seattle. Then it is no longer a THREAT. Right?

  42. I really hope Working Washington keeps pursuing this case. I would love to see the deposition when they get asked to explain how their own advocacy actions violate their own legal theories. From the evidence on their own website, they are guilty of everything they accuse Amazon of and more.

    Of course, it's an absurd legal theory that's in blatant violation of the First Amendment but I'd really like to see them squirm some before the judge throws it out.

  43. Amazon should just leave, plenty of business friendly states down south.

  44. Good reasons to never visit that city or state. The creeping totalitarianism should end poorly as aways.

  45. "Since the city of Seattle counts as a legal person and Amazon's construction pause harms the city's financial condition by putting tax dollars at risk, Working Washington reasons, the online retail giant is guilty of threatening a public official." ?? Wtf Happened To All That Vehement Opposition To Corporations Are People, or was that a round of BS smoke and mirrors to obfuscate slight of hand efforts to make cities into legal people for power-grabs and bullying. People (the individual) are being converted into items of property, chattel, to be controlled by the cities and state. Watch the donut, not the hole.

  46. Government declares itself a person and declares amazon a person who is harming them. Does that mean that the city is a person who is harming amazon by putting a gun to their head and demanding money. Previously the thought was that amazon could always walk away, but apparently there is a kidnapping in progress with the government declaring that they are kidnapping amazon as protection against amazon.

  47. This is an interesting legal theory they're using. What's mine is theirs and if I try to abscond with "my" money then I'm harming their financial interests.
    Better not drink too much --- what if a member of the Seattle municipal council, this Sawant person perhaps, needs a liver transplant?
    By the way, is mentioning this possibility, of denying them a spare liver by drinking too much, considered a threat? Maybe now I'm really in trouble. Luckily I don't live in Seattle, but still ...

  48. Will Bezos become a conservative, or perhaps a libertarian?

    1. Bezos will become whatever the city needs him to be. Like Worf, and Christopher Nolan's Batman, he will fall upon his sword for the greater good.

      Bezosman: The Dark Bezos

    2. Bezos will become whatever the city needs him to be. Like Worf, and Christopher Nolan's Batman, he will fall upon his sword for the greater good.

      Bezosman: The Dark Bezos

  49. End compulsory union contributions for constituting "substantial harm" to one's "financial condition."

  50. You're all harming the government by not being in prison providing them with income derived from feeding, lodging, and beating. Shame on you.

  51. When can we start shipping the homeless people from my city to Seattle?

  52. The letter Amazon should send to its Seattle employees:

    "Because of the $275 employee tax we can no longer afford to do business in Seattle and will be moving our HQ to another city as soon as possible. Therefore be advised that as of a week from Friday you all are terminated from your employment at Amazon. We will give you a favorable recommendation."

  53. Another Example where the LIBTARDS (the Left) uses the power of the government against people who disagree with it... They think this is perfectly fine.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.