On January 26, 2010, the voters of Oregon approved a $727 million tax increase.  In true progressive fashion, they are attempting to target the rich to pay for everyone else.  The top 2.5% wealthy Oregonians and corporations who net in excess of $250k are expected to shoulder up the burden.  Makes sense, right?  Naturally, if you make more money than me, I have a right to come and get my share of your hard work.  After all, it’s protected in the constitution.

Wait, no that’s not in the constitution, or anywhere else for that matter.  It’s not even in the economics text books or the Wall Street Journal.  But it must be good for Oregon, or else they wouldn’t of passed it.

Of course, if it was good for Oregon, this bill wouldn’t have the nickname it does, the “Suicide Bill.”

Oregon has already lost many key companies due to its taxes, and now in an attempt to recover those lost tax revenues, they are hitting the companies that remain, like the Nike HQ in Beaverton.  But Nike’s founder Phil Knight is now exploring other places to call Nike’s home, some in the US and others in Canada.

Here’s a quick Econ 101.  Business opens.  Business makes money.  Business hires people.  People make money.  People spend money.  Business makes money.  Business hires more people and opens more outlets.  More people make money.  Cycle continues.

What’s missing from this?  Government.  Add in government controls, and business moves or closes.  People don’t make money.  People don’t spend money.  Other businesses don’t make money on what was spent.  Cycle continues.

So when the federal government people, regardless of what letter follows their name, increases taxes, spending, bureaucracy, debt, (basically when the government increases period), it attacks those companies who produce the most jobs and businesses who fall in the first cycle, resulting in the second cycle.

There is money to be made.  The people who are good at making money will figure out the best way for them to do so.  America will prosper when those in government realize that they are in a supporting role to we the people, and by taking themselves out of the business loop, they will allow job creation (because the government cannot create jobs), which will increase employed citizens, which decreases the amount of people dependent on the government, which decreases the need for big government, spending, and programs, thus resulting in less of a tax ‘need’ by the government.  At the same time, more employed citizens create more tax revenue, meaning more people pay less taxes.  We the people keep more of our money, and the government likely gets more overall tax revenue in the end.

I believe it is Robert Kiyosaki who wrote in his “Rich Dad” books that you will become wealthy if you figure out how to serve more people at a lower cost per person.  Same principle works in government.  Lower controls, lower taxes, create a permissive environment, and more people will get jobs, subsequently paying less tax per person, but more total tax revenue overall.