The 10th Man

Speechless in Seattle

June 14, 2018

Seattle is being mismanaged. Readers from Seattle probably know what I am talking about. Conservatives (I suppose you could include me in that category) would say that Seattle’s city government will send them down the path of Detroit, but I think it’s a little more complicated than that.

First of all, Seattle has pretty much been in a permabull market since the early nineties and that movie where Tom Hanks lives on a houseboat.

This $5 Trillion Market Is Just Getting Started.

Don’t miss out on the ETF revolution. Get going with this must-read report from Jared Dillian.

I lived there from 1996-1998: Starbucks was just getting going; Microsoft was in full swing. Now there is Amazon and a bunch of other stuff. The place is blessed with lots of human capital (in spite of the crappy weather and 18 hours of darkness in the winter).

You know what else it is blessed with? Zero state income taxes. So it is not surprising that Seattle has flourished for decades and has some of the most successful companies in the world.

But somewhere along the line, the politics in Seattle took a left turn. Or should I say, a red turn. Kshama Sawant has been a city council member since 2014. She is definitely a socialist, and a little less warm and fuzzy than Bernie Sanders. And it’s not like the rest of the city council is conservative.

A Curious Thing to Tax

Not too long ago, the left-leaning City Council passed a 2.25% income tax for incomes above $250,000, and $500,000 for couples.

It was the latest in a number of attempts to levy some form of income tax in the state. Such an income tax is unconstitutional, and the courts blocked it. The city is considering an appeal.

But the bigger news is that the city council recently passed a $275 “head tax”—literally a tax on every job in the city. Or at least, a tax on every full-time employee in businesses with more than $20 million in annual revenue.

The head tax was even more controversial than the income tax. Amazon, who obviously employs a lot of people in the city, stopped work on a construction project in town, imperiling a bunch of jobs.

The point of the tax was to raise revenue to fight homelessness, but if what is going on in San Francisco is any guide, those tens and hundreds of millions meant to “fight” homelessness usually only ends up encouraging it. (The Daily Dirtnap readers will recognize the principle of Costanza, where efforts to fight a thing usually result in more of that thing).

Anyway, the head tax was a failure, too—it passed unanimously, but was overturned on Tuesday by a vote of 7-2 on account of huge resistance from the business community.

Jobs are a curious thing to tax. If you tax something, you get less of it, and I can’t imagine a government body anywhere that would explicitly be against jobs, but this is Seattle—ops normal.

The Rise and Fall of Cities

Nobody wants to be Detroit, or the “new” Detroit. Or, for that matter, 1970s, Taxi Driver-era New York. I went to Milwaukee about a month ago—no fun.

Why do some cities succeed where others fail?

I’m going to answer that question with an admission—I don’t know the full answer.

We know in some cases what doesn’t work. In the case of my own hometown, Norwich, Connecticut, harassing businesses until they leave town and set up right outside of city limits doesn’t work.

In the case of old New York, spending money and bankrupting your city didn’t work.

This $5 Trillion Market Is Just Getting Started.

Don’t miss out on the ETF revolution. Get going with The 5 ETF Trading Strategies You Should Know About Before Investing, from Jared Dillian.

People like saying that liberal politics did Detroit in, but Detroit is also obviously a victim of economic forces far outside of its control. So there is a bit of luck involved, too.

Here’s a short list of what makes for a prosperous city:

  1. Few and fair regulations
  1. Low taxes
  1. Good infrastructure/transportation
  1. Smart people
  1. Stable, predictable politics
  1. Good weather (it counts more than you think)
  1. Education
  1. Low crime
  1. Clustering (where several businesses in a particular industry cluster together: like San Francisco for tech, New York for finance)
  1. Supply of housing

Notice I did not say “price of housing.” If you have a good supply of housing, the price takes care of itself.

But the number one determinant of a city’s success is regulations. Check out this great piece on former Washington D.C. mayor Marion Barry, written by the libertarian Jeffrey Tucker. Barry was famously corrupt, and when his regulators would descend on businesses with citations, the businesses would pay them a little bit to go away, and they would go away.

After Barry’s fall from grace and his successor was appointed, the city ground to a halt because the regulators actually had to enforce all the ridiculous regulations. Really amazing.

You can do a lot of damage to a city if your City Hall is full of business-hating ideologues.

Seattle probably won’t end up like Detroit. It’ll end up like San Francisco, filled with billionaires and vagrants. Costanza again—efforts to fight inequality usually result in even more inequality.

The bodega owners, the cab drivers, the hot dog stand guys—those people work really hard for not a lot of money. They are the lifeblood of any large city. If you make things difficult for them, everyone’s quality of life goes down. And people leave.

Today’s New York is an interesting case study. In the de Blasio era, quality of life has been on a slight decline the last five years, but not enough to make people leave.

No, it is the elimination of the state and local tax deduction that will make people do that.

Jared Dillian
Jared Dillian

 

Get Thought-Provoking Contrarian
Insights from Jared Dillian

Discuss This

0 comments

We welcome your comments. Please comply with our Community Rules.

Comments

briansmcdowell@gmail.com

June 14, 5:05 p.m.

Jared’s comments are on target. Conflict between core beliefs and perspective on human nature. Collectivist vs. Communal. Liberal vs. Conservative. With historical events; reality; policy results; demonstrated toll on impacted segments of humanity or society; and broad arrays of prosperity measures to choose from, I am amazed we have any significant amount of collectivist thoughts that are taken seriously. Not sure how these folks think they are creating a different trajectory and end point. Economic results, human conditions, and quality of life are terrible in *all* collectivist regimes when compared to more communal and republican forms of economic and political systems.

roy_liu@yahoo.com

June 14, 12:22 p.m.

Interesting, Jared, but I think your opening statement applies even more here: “...it’s a little more complicated than that.”

3. Good infrastructure/transportation
Well, who pays for that? Is it a completely private or public good, or some mix of the two?

7. Education.
Hmmmm, who pays for that? Is it a completely private or public good, or some mix of the two?

8. Low Crime.
Hmmmm, who pays for that? Or is low crime just a secondary effect of when all the other good things are in sync? Is it a completely private or public good, or some mix of the two?

johnmcdowell8@gmail.com

June 14, 11:41 a.m.

Shouldn’t that be a “blue turn” instead of a “red turn” for Seattle or am I missing something.


Use of this content, the Mauldin Economics website, and related sites and applications is provided under the Mauldin Economics Terms & Conditions of Use.

Unauthorized Disclosure Prohibited

The information provided in this publication is private, privileged, and confidential information, licensed for your sole individual use as a subscriber. Mauldin Economics reserves all rights to the content of this publication and related materials. Forwarding, copying, disseminating, or distributing this report in whole or in part, including substantial quotation of any portion the publication or any release of specific investment recommendations, is strictly prohibited.
Participation in such activity is grounds for immediate termination of all subscriptions of registered subscribers deemed to be involved at Mauldin Economics’ sole discretion, may violate the copyright laws of the United States, and may subject the violator to legal prosecution. Mauldin Economics reserves the right to monitor the use of this publication without disclosure by any electronic means it deems necessary and may change those means without notice at any time. If you have received this publication and are not the intended subscriber, please contact service@mauldineconomics.com.

Disclaimers

The Mauldin Economics website, Thoughts from the Frontline, The Weekly Profit, The 10th Man, Connecting the Dots, Transformational Technology Digest, Over My Shoulder, Yield Shark, Transformational Technology Alert, Rational Bear, Street Freak, ETF 20/20, In the Money, and Mauldin Economics VIP are published by Mauldin Economics, LLC Information contained in such publications is obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but its accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The information contained in such publications is not intended to constitute individual investment advice and is not designed to meet your personal financial situation. The opinions expressed in such publications are those of the publisher and are subject to change without notice. The information in such publications may become outdated and there is no obligation to update any such information. You are advised to discuss with your financial advisers your investment options and whether any investment is suitable for your specific needs prior to making any investments.
John Mauldin, Mauldin Economics, LLC and other entities in which he has an interest, employees, officers, family, and associates may from time to time have positions in the securities or commodities covered in these publications or web site. Corporate policies are in effect that attempt to avoid potential conflicts of interest and resolve conflicts of interest that do arise in a timely fashion.
Mauldin Economics, LLC reserves the right to cancel any subscription at any time, and if it does so it will promptly refund to the subscriber the amount of the subscription payment previously received relating to the remaining subscription period. Cancellation of a subscription may result from any unauthorized use or reproduction or rebroadcast of any Mauldin Economics publication or website, any infringement or misappropriation of Mauldin Economics, LLC’s proprietary rights, or any other reason determined in the sole discretion of Mauldin Economics, LLC.

Affiliate Notice

Mauldin Economics has affiliate agreements in place that may include fee sharing. If you have a website or newsletter and would like to be considered for inclusion in the Mauldin Economics affiliate program, please go to http://affiliates.ggcpublishing.com/. Likewise, from time to time Mauldin Economics may engage in affiliate programs offered by other companies, though corporate policy firmly dictates that such agreements will have no influence on any product or service recommendations, nor alter the pricing that would otherwise be available in absence of such an agreement. As always, it is important that you do your own due diligence before transacting any business with any firm, for any product or service.

© Copyright 2018 Mauldin Economics