Because of the results of the last election…anyone moving?

[Longwalkhome]

It really doesn't make sense for old folks to move to Idaho because of the sales tax. If you saved money in Oregon you paid taxes on income before you saved it. To move to Idaho you get taxed again to spend your money. Sell your house here and take the profit only to be taxed to spend it.

 

[Croat]

It really doesn't make sense for old folks to move to Idaho because of the sales tax. If you saved money in Oregon you paid taxes on income before you saved it. To move to Idaho you get taxed again to spend your money. Sell your house here and take the profit only to be taxed to spend it.

Yes, but...
Retirees on fixed incomes, of course, need to be attentive to every dollar they get and minimize their tax burden. Which means Oregon is a horrible place to retire. Oregonians are burdened by one of the highest income taxes in the country. And it doesn't take a financial genius to understand that getting taxed on ALL of your income in Oregon is much worse than getting sales taxed on just a portion of your income when you buy "things" (i.e., no sales tax on food, rent/mortgage, utilities, and similar). Unfortunately, Idaho is like California, it has both a sales tax and an income tax. Unlike Oregon or Idaho, Washington has no income tax, it relies on sales tax. That's why so many Oregon retirees relocate to Washington-Oregon border communities like Vancouver, White Salmon, Walla Walla, and similar. Living in Washington gives retirees the luxury of avoiding income tax, yet they can still do their major shopping just across a bridge in sales-tax-free Oregon. This unique combination of tax systems between Washington and Oregon creates a retiree tax haven like no other in the United States.

And to make a bad situation even worse, a retired Oregonian living in Portland really gets screwed. According to Axios, in 2022 Portland had the fifth highest "effective" property tax rate in the United States ("effective" tax rate is how much property tax is paid as a percentage of home value). Then there is the arts tax, Metro's homeless tax, super-high parking meter rates, neighborhood parking permits, environmental fees, outrageous water bills... the burden just gets piled on more and more in that city.

So here's the question: if moving to a Washington border community gets rid of so much of the tax and cost burden suffered by people living in Oregon, especially for those living in Portland, then why don't more Oregon retirees do that? The simple answer is the inertia of status quo. People inherently don't like change (especially old people) and moving is a really BIG change for anyone. Even when living on a fixed income, Oregon and Portland retirees will stubbornly suffer their much higher tax and cost burdens rather than relocate to get out from under it. And they will continue to suffer that financial consequence despite knowing the mathematical benefits they would enjoy by simply moving 3,000 feet across the Columbia River. It is financial stupidity, of course, but we're talking about the human condition here.

 

[sobo]

20 years ago "Blue" was was something very different than today. No comparison. None, Zip, Zilch, Nada.......

I won't agree there's no comparison of Team Blue between then and now. One need only to review the Klantoon Presidency, followed by the presidential aspirant, Climate Scientist and Inventor of the Internet, Al Gore, to see that it has changed, yes, but not that there's no comparison...

 

[sobo]

It really doesn't make sense for old folks to move to Idaho because of the sales tax. If you saved money in Oregon you paid taxes on income before you saved it. To move to Idaho you get taxed again to spend your money. Sell your house here and take the profit only to be taxed to spend it.

The state income tax in Idaho is a pittance compared to the litany of taxes that are extorted from me here, even though there is no state income tax in Washington. I've studied the Idaho tax rates for someone in my age group and income bracket. I'll be just fine...

 

[sobo]

Yes, but...
Retirees on fixed incomes, of course, need to be attentive to every dollar they get and minimize their tax burden. Which means Oregon is a horrible place to retire. Oregonians are burdened by one of the highest income taxes in the country. And it doesn't take a financial genius to understand that getting taxed on ALL of your income in Oregon is much worse than getting sales taxed on just a portion of your income when you buy "things" (i.e., no sales tax on food, rent/mortgage, utilities, and similar). Unfortunately, Idaho is like California, it has both a sales tax and an income tax. Unlike Oregon or Idaho, Washington has no income tax, it relies on sales tax. That's why so many Oregon retirees relocate to Washington-Oregon border communities like Vancouver, White Salmon, Walla Walla, and similar. Living in Washington gives retirees the luxury of avoiding income tax, yet they can still do their major shopping just across a bridge in sales-tax-free Oregon. This unique combination of tax systems between Washington and Oregon creates a retiree tax haven like no other in the United States.

And to make a bad situation even worse, a retired Oregonian living in Portland really gets screwed. According to Axios, in 2022 Portland had the fifth highest "effective" property tax rate in the United States ("effective" tax rate is how much property tax is paid as a percentage of home value). Then there is the arts tax, Metro's homeless tax, super-high parking meter rates, neighborhood parking permits, environmental fees, outrageous water bills... the burden just gets piled on more and more in that city.

So here's the question: if moving to a Washington border community gets rid of so much of the tax and cost burden suffered by people living in Oregon, especially for those living in Portland, then why don't more Oregon retirees do that? The simple answer is the inertia of status quo. People inherently don't like change (especially old people) and moving is a really BIG change for anyone. Even when living on a fixed income, Oregon and Portland retirees will stubbornly suffer their much higher tax and cost burdens rather than relocate to get out from under it. And they will continue to suffer that financial consequence despite knowing the mathematical benefits they would enjoy by simply moving 3,000 feet across the Columbia River. It is financial stupidity, of course, but we're talking about the human condition here.

Cross-border living/taxes aside, one must also answer the question of how much they are willing to be treated like a peasant in that "(income) tax-free" state. How willing is one to be a subject that is dictated to by one who would call himself a king? How willing is one to be a serf that is told how he may/may not live, what he can/can't do with his own property, what he can/can't own or buy, where he can/can't go and when, how he can/can't conduct his own affairs, etc.?

In short, to me, I will not sacrifice the chance at Liberty and Freedom simply because a state income tax exists in a freer state than to remain in a less-free state that doesn't have an income tax, and continue to suffer the privations foisted upon me by that less-free state. There's plenty of other taxes and fees in Washington that I must pay that will not apply to me in Idaho. And the combined state and county sales tax where I plan to move in Idaho is ⅓ of what it is at my place in Washington. As I said in the post above, I've studied the Idaho tax rates for someone in my age group and income bracket, and I'll be just fine...

 

[Croat]

Cross-border living/taxes aside, one must also answer the question of how much they are willing to be treated like a peasant in that "(income) tax-free" state. How willing is one to be a subject that is dictated to by one who would call himself a king? How willing is one to be a serf that is told how he may/may not live, what he can/can't do with his own property, what he can/can't own or buy, where he can/can't go and when, how he can/can't conduct his own affairs, etc.?

In short, to me, I will not sacrifice the chance at Liberty and Freedom simply because a state income tax exists in a freer state than to remain in a less-free state that doesn't have an income tax, and continue to suffer the privations foisted upon me by that less-free state. There's plenty of other taxes and fees in Washington that I must pay that will not apply to me in Idaho. And the combined state and county sales tax where I plan to move in Idaho is ⅓ of what it is at my place in Washington. As I said in the post above, I've studied the Idaho tax rates for someone in my age group and income bracket, and I'll be just fine...

Exactly. Relocating is not just a financial decision, it is equally a quality of life decision. Along with its exorbitant tax and cost burdens, the quality of life in Oregon has also been destroyed by the politicians, mostly in Portland of course, but really the entire state is going foul. Oregon is increasingly falling on the freedom meter. Hell, even the WalMart in Ontario at the very border with Idaho won't sell guns anymore because they are in the state of Oregon. That's the kind of state that Oregon has become, and I personally want no part of it. Washington is not that bad yet, but the Socialists (otherwise known as Democrats) in Olympia will never rest until they have outdone both Oregon and California with their unrelenting need to control and tax and spend and oppress, all the while reducing core services the public actually needs. For now it is barely okay, but like you I see Washington's future rather bleakly. Consequently, like you we are looking at relocating to Idaho due to quality of life considerations, despite how much of a financial hit that would represent. Needless to say it won't be nearly as bad financially as living in Oregon, so there's that. In essence, the extra cost burden from making that move will represent the price a person has to pay for freedom. I'd give Nevada more of a look but, frankly, too many Californians trying to escape from Gavin Newsom end up in Nevada and it is getting more blue all the time, so no viable future there. Same with Montana. Many people in the Pacific Northwest aren't aware that Montana's history has always had a major blue streak, and still does today, although it is hopefully waning a bit in today's environment. Wyoming? Too damned cold for too damned long. So, that seems to just leave Idaho...

 

[Catfishmoon]

Here's a few more articles that makes me optimistic for Idaho's future:

EDITORIAL: Those moving vans have red plates

By far, most voters moving to Idaho are Republicans

cdapress.com

EDITORIAL: The red wave that's blanketed Kootenai County

Transplants overwhelmingly register Republican

cdapress.com

Common sense would indicate that the majority of adults moving to Idaho are doing so because at least in part because they agree with the conservative politics of the state, but I am skeptical of validity of these statistics.
I would want to see the actual logistics of how these numbers they published (newcomer who is a R, who is a D, who is Independent) were calculated. Most of my family members do not know how I personally vote, the government or some media outlet certainly does not know.

 

[DivCurlGrad72]

I would want to see the actual logistics of how these numbers they published (newcomer who is a R, who is a D, who is Independent) were calculated. Most of my family members do not know how I personally vote, the government or some media outlet certainly does not know.

From the article:

Secretary of State Phil McGrane's staff has compiled data from 118,702 voters who moved to and then registered in Idaho, going all the way back to 2004.

So the source is official Idaho State voter registration data.

 

[Catfishmoon]

Secretary of State Phil McGrane's staff has compiled data from 118,702 voters who moved to and then registered in Idaho, going all the way back to 2004.

So my question remained the same; Exactly how does Phil McGrane's staff know which political party the new immigrants to Idaho vote for?
According to the statement above it would suggest every voter who moves to Idaho fills out a survey questionnaire regarding their political party affiliation..

After further investigation it seems that is exactly correct on how the State of Idaho and 32 other states get that information. When people register to vote in those states, they acknowledge affiliation with a political party or as independent and that information is published.

As a lifetime voter in Washington State where that doesn't occur, I was unaware of that procedure elsewhere. I learned something new today.

 

[sobo]

So my question remained the same; Exactly how does Phil McGrane's staff know which political party the new immigrants to Idaho vote for?
According to the statement above it would suggest every voter who moves to Idaho fills out a survey questionnaire regarding their political party affiliation..

After further investigation it seems that is exactly correct on how the State of Idaho and 32 other states get that information. When people register to vote in those states, they acknowledge affiliation with a political party or as independent and that information is published.

As a lifetime voter in Washington State where that doesn't occur, I was unaware of that procedure elsewhere. I learned something new today.

Yes, in order to legally vote in Idaho, one must declare a party affiliation (or declare no affiliation).
Gotta fill out and submit the form below to be registered to vote. Completely different than WA...

clicky to embiggen...

 

[Jay Walk]

Yeah, well the taxes in Oregon are no picnic. What is Oregon now, the second-highest income tax bracket in the United States? If not second, somewhere near the top. And Oregon's income tax is especially harmful to poor people because it shoots up to 8.75% after a mere $10,200 in income. Youch! For a "progressive" state that damage to poor tax payers is extremely regressive.

And here's what I fail to comprehend when it comes to taxes in Oregon. Why do they keep raising them? And not just taxes, but fees too. Because history would seem to show we can do so much more if taxes are kept low. Examples:

• Eight bridges were built across the Willamette River in only a 20-year span into the 1930s. That means they had to buy the land under the bridgeheads, construct the bridges, maintain them, and allow free crossings all with the low taxes they had back then. Now Oregon wants to charge us fees just to cross bridges and they speak in Billions of dollars for new construction. How does that make sense?
• Same with parks. Look around at the thousands of acres of parks in Portland and Oregon that were all purchased, constructed, and maintained under low tax systems prior to WWII. And back then parks were always free to enter. Yet today we have parks getting reclassified as "special districts" so the government can take ever more money from us just to maintain them, not to mention multiple fees just to enter and use parks already paid for with our tax dollars.
• What the hell? How is it that our great-grandfathers could do so much more with so little, yet Oregon today can barely do a little with so much more tax money? There is something seriously, seriously wrong with the voracious beast we call government in Oregon.

Public Employee Unions.

 

[3MTA3]

Yes, in order to legally vote in Idaho, one must declare a party affiliation (or declare no affiliation).
Gotta fill out and submit the form below to be registered to vote. Completely different than WA...

clicky to embiggen...

View attachment 1779586

Any time I move my voting strategy is

1. Vote normally on national elections
2. Skip voting on state wide elections for a year or two until I have a decent bearing on things
3. Skip voting on local elections for two to three years for the same purpose.

In the mean time get involved in activities that expose me to the local culture and get to know what is what.

Guess it's because of the damage done here over my lifetime by self assured aholes that think the know better than the locals.

 

[Longwalkhome]

I have traveled a lot in my opinion and for my lifestyle Oregon has been good to me. It's changed for worse in the last 20 years and I don't think young people have any opertunity now for most of them. Prices are to high and jobs don't pay enough.

Myself I love Oregon because of the variety of the things we used to be able to do. Hunting and fishing while growing up here was better than you could wish for but that's gone. Used to go salmon fishing out of Newport and you were allowed 3 silvers. Come back in early after a good catch and go crabbing in the bay.

Oregon has always had a lot to do, I spent a lot of time in Idaho and there just isn't much to enjoy like Oregon has....for me. Ymmv.

 

[Croat]

I have traveled a lot in my opinion and for my lifestyle Oregon has been good to me. It's changed for worse in the last 20 years and I don't think young people have any opertunity now for most of them. Prices are to high and jobs don't pay enough.

Myself I love Oregon because of the variety of the things we used to be able to do. Hunting and fishing while growing up here was better than you could wish for but that's gone. Used to go salmon fishing out of Newport and you were allowed 3 silvers. Come back in early after a good catch and go crabbing in the bay.

Oregon has always had a lot to do, I spent a lot of time in Idaho and there just isn't much to enjoy like Oregon has....for me. Ymmv.

You and I have many similar memories. So sad what they've done to the state. One can only hope it will turn around, but I'll probably get a call from Elon to visit Mars before that happens...

 

[Mono1]

Public Employee Unions.

Amazing to me that that nobody has ever questioned the constitutionality of public sector unions, aside from the Janus SCOTUS decision. Even FDR thought it was a bad idea.

 

[Jay Walk]

Amazing to me that that nobody has ever questioned the constitutionality of public sector unions, aside from the Janus SCOTUS decision. Even FDR thought it was a bad idea.

It's a well-oiled machine, every school year, teachers strike the districts, the districts give them more but it's the taxpayers that supply the funds.

 

[Diamondback]

It's a well-oiled machine, every school year, teachers strike the districts, the districts give them more but it's the taxpayers that supply the funds.

And then you have a Supreme court that thinks school districts are entitled to every dime they want to light on fire and more, no matter whether or not they leave any funding for roads/public safety/other essentials or even if the taxpayers can AFFORD it

 

[fishfearme]

Just take it from me, we got it way better than Cali

 

[Capn Jack]

I tease my wife sometimes by telling her that we should find a box canyon somewhere in Idaho. We could put a house at one end, a target range at the other and a sign on the mail box that says, "If you can read this you're within range".
Seriously though, those back roads are hell on propellers and my gills tend to dry out if I get too far from the, "Salt Chuck."

 

[Croat]

WOW. Three BILLION in new taxes proposed. Including new sales tax, new gas tax, new income tax, new employer tax...
As if people didn't have enough reasons to flee from Oregon.

Alert!! Kotek floats $3B new taxes (property, income, sales, gas)

By Taxpayers Association of Oregon OregonWatchdog.com Oregon Governor Tina Kotek's Housing Production Advisory Council has just submitted a 20-page draft report, HPAC Policy Recommendations, on ideas on how to address the affordable housing crisis. On section 7 (Page 16/17) it lists 5 suggest

oregoncatalyst.com