XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, talk.politics.guns   
   From: jfournier@sjrb.ca   
      
   While New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani has been in the national   
   limelight for many months, his democratic socialist colleague in   
   Seattle, Mayor Katie Wilson, has mostly remained under the radar.   
      
   A few weeks ago, Mamdani released his Fiscal Year 2027 Preliminary   
   Budget, which calls for $14 billion in new spending, even though New   
   York City faces a $12 billion deficit over the next two years.   
      
   Deservedly, Mamdani was lambasted for wanting to raise spending, raid   
   the city’s “rainy day fund,” and worst of all, hike property taxes.   
      
   Around the same time, Seattle Mayor Katie Wilson delivered her State of   
   the City Address, in which she implored the “city council to fund   
   shelter expansion,” “expand childcare and early education as public   
   goods,” “expand access to affordable food,” increase rent subsidies,   
   etc.   
      
   “I am determined to add 1,000 new units this year, with services matched   
   to people’s needs, and we are on our way to reach this goal,” Wilson   
   proclaimed.   
      
   Although Wilson has not yet released a formal budget proposal, it seems   
   more than reasonable that she wants to vastly increase spending on   
   several socialist programs and projects.   
      
   However, like New York City, Seattle simply cannot afford socialism.   
      
   For the past several years, the Seattle City Council has passed   
   “balanced” budgets, as it must do under the law. But in reality, the   
   city’s budget is far from balanced.   
      
   In late 2024, the Seattle City Council announced that it has   
   “successfully” closed “a $250-plus million dollar budget shortfall while   
   making all-time-high investments in affordable housing and other   
   critical services.”   
      
   “In one of the toughest budget years in recent memory, we have come   
   together, made smart decisions, and protected the services our city   
   depends on while making strides toward greater financial   
   sustainability,” Councilmember Dan Strauss, chair of the select budget   
   committee, triumphantly stated.   
      
   For the record, the 2025-26 budget included “Seattle’s largest-ever   
   investment in affordable housing – more than $340 million – five times   
   as much as the City was spending before the pandemic,” “Record-high   
   investments in public safety programs, including expanding Community   
   Assisted Response and Engagement (CARE) citywide and seven days a week,”   
   “Funding the creation of new non-congregate shelters and $4 million to   
   help YouthCare create a workforce training and affordable housing   
   project for homeless youth,” “New funding to help address substance use   
   disorder,” and “$7.1 million in additional rental assistance to help   
   people stay housed.”   
      
   Guess what? That $250 million shortfall did not remain closed for long.   
   Next year, a budget deficit of at least $127 million already looms.   
      
   Make no mistake, Seattle spends a lot of money. This year, it will   
   allocate $8.9 billion in total. For context, Seattle’s population is   
   approximately 800,000.   
      
   In 2018, Seattle’s population was about 743,000 residents. That year,   
   the city budget totaled $4.6 billion.   
      
   One need not be a mathematician to comprehend that Seattle’s budget has   
   nearly doubled since 2018, whereas its total population has increased by   
   less than 60,000 people.   
      
   So, what is a Seattle socialist to do?   
      
   Well, Wilson is in a conundrum. On one hand, she wants to increase   
   spending because she is a Democratic Socialist. On the other hand, she   
   must balance the budget.   
      
   Unsurprisingly, Wilson wants to tax the rich. On February 14, she made a   
   speech describing the city as “filthy rich,” suggesting “progressive   
   taxes on high earners are sustainable and lucrative,” which the   
   Washington Policy Center notes, “downplays migration risks, and ignores   
   the delayed nature of behavioral responses to taxation.”   
      
   While it is true that Seattle’s millionaire’s tax, which went into   
   effect in 2025, has led to more revenue for the city, it is also a   
   short-sighted “solution” that will likely bear less fruit as time goes   
   on.   
      
   “The tax’s first-year over performance reflects wealth already   
   here…Migration often lags policy by years, as seen in California and New   
   York, where high earners quietly decamp after thresholds are crossed,”   
   the Washington Policy Center writes.   
      
   In other words, revenue grabs like Seattle’s 5 percent levy on those   
   earning more than $1 million may result in a one-time windfall, but they   
   are neither sustainable nor lucrative over the long term.   
      
   The best viable solution for a city drowning in debt, like Seattle, is   
   to curb spending while creating tax and regulatory environments that are   
   conducive to innovation and wealth creation.   
      
   For a socialist like Wilson, that is a tough pill to swallow.   
      
   As Margaret Thatcher so brilliantly put it, “the problem with socialism   
   is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.” To be clear,   
   socialism in Seattle is doomed to fail because Thatcher’s axiom even   
   applies to millionaires in The Emerald City.   
      
   https://townhall.com/columnists/christalgo/2026/03/03/seattle-socialists-   
   should-be-sleepless-n2672183   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)