Rex Sinquefield is such a magnificent bastard, it's hard not to be in awe of him.
You might not know his name. But it's partly because of his billions that you'll be checking "Yes" or "No" next month when KC and St. Louis vote on whether to keep their e-taxes. Sinquefield threw millions of dollars behind Prop. A, which led to voters deciding on the 1-percent earnings tax that supplies $200 million in annual revenue to KC alone. Surely after all this time toying with us, Sinquefield would at least vote on the measure, right? Nope! As it turns out, Scrooge McDuck here isn't even able to vote on the measure.
The St. Louis Post Dispatch reports that Sinquefield does own a house in St. Louis, but his voter registration is actually listed at a palatial manor -- I'm not calling it a house because it's a goddamn actual manor -- well outside the city limits.
The house is built on -- I don't want to even write this. Do you have any idea what my tax return looks like? Bah. The 20,000-square-foot mansion is built on property called the Sinquefield Reserve. Well, aren't we la-de-da.
So, again, as we're all waiting to see if the city's e-tax will stick around or if we'll be figuring out how to run a city without the $200 million (when huge budget shortfalls are already a problem), Sinquefield will be nowhere near the drama that he himself engineered. I say it again: Sinquefield, you magnificent bastard!
Showing 1-5 of 5
Getting rid of this revenue will suddenly make city council responsible stewards of public funds? Or will the unicorns fly in from magic fairy land to guide them?
If you think our elected officials are wasting our money, then replace them with people who know what they're doing and the problem fixes itself, right? If you don't do this, then removal of $200 million in revenue is going to devastate essential services because the people setting the budget are incapable of making smart choices.
If this is really about having the taxpayer's voice being properly represented, why is the referendum only concern itself with the revenue side? Shouldn't there be comparable measures whereby taxpayers vote on how the $200 million should be cut from the budget? Or is the concern that if taxpayers were forced to think that through maybe there would be less enthusiasm for repealing the e-tax?
Frankly all your cookie-cutter talking points smell like bullshit. City hall may have been mismanaged for years, but extremist right-wing dogmatism isn't helping.
So what the guy made money as a businessman. Get over it.
It's not like he made it selling cocaine or robbing a bank.
Who do you think create jobs in the US.
People who have money and open up factories.
Why blame successful people. Or do you want everyone to live like poor people.
You forgot that a majority - 52% - of KCMO residents voted YES on the PROP that allows them to vote on their own taxes. RS just helped the citizens get a voice on their own taxes, so God bless him. ((( By the way ... He's not finished yet!!! )))
As for $200mil e-tax revenue per year, consider this. Most of that (about $115mil) can be accounted for by lost revenue from yuppie loft 10- and 25-year tax abatements plus subsidies to big money-losing TIFs in Power&Light, downtown industrial, west side, and more. (Thank you, K.Barnes.)
City Hall keeps throwing tax $$$ away, so the flow of $$$ to City Hall needs to slow.
like
dislike
