Latest / The Schmidt Show PDX / Prosperity Redux

Transcript

Prosperity Redux · The Schmidt Show PDX

• 0:00
  [music]
• 0:27
  SPEAKER_01: Welcome back to the Schmidt Show.
• 0:29
  SPEAKER_01: I'm Mike Schmidt,
• 0:30
  SPEAKER_01: former Multnomah County District Attorney, father of a future fencing superstar.
• 0:35
  SPEAKER_01: I mean, he's only on the third day of summer camp,
• 0:38
  SPEAKER_01: but I really think that this is going to be the one that sticks.
• 0:40
  SPEAKER_01: Oh, and a part time podcast host.
• 0:43
  SPEAKER_01: Today, we're going to revisit the topic that kicked off season three a month earlier
• 0:47
  SPEAKER_01: than we expected.
• 0:49
  SPEAKER_01: Prosperity.
• 0:50
  SPEAKER_01: Which is a nice framing for what much of the conversation is actually about, which is taxes.
• 0:56
  SPEAKER_01: In some ways,
• 0:57
  SPEAKER_01: it's natural,
• 0:57
  SPEAKER_01: predictable even,
• 0:59
  SPEAKER_01: that when affordability is ever present in our minds,
• 1:01
  SPEAKER_01: the choice to order out or cook in for dinner,
• 1:04
  SPEAKER_01: comparison shopping at grocery stores for deals,
• 1:07
  SPEAKER_01: hunting for the gas station with the lowest prices.
• 1:10
  SPEAKER_01: It's just natural that tax policy is also going to dominate the conversation.
• 1:15
  SPEAKER_01: The question of who gets to frame that debate, though, is still very much being wrestled over.
• 1:20
  SPEAKER_01: Big businesses looking to return more value to shareholders,
• 1:23
  SPEAKER_01: small businesses trying to weather international tempest caused
• 1:27
  SPEAKER_01: by our insane tariff policy,
• 1:30
  SPEAKER_01: and individual earners wondering why their tax obligation is bigger than
• 1:34
  SPEAKER_01: the billionaire in the White House when they're only making $40,000 a year.
• 1:39
  SPEAKER_01: Or from the state's perspective,
• 1:41
  SPEAKER_01: the revenue forecast projecting a down or flat revenue
• 1:45
  SPEAKER_01: while inflation keeps driving up our labor and material costs,
• 1:49
  SPEAKER_01: leading to structural budget deficits.
• 1:51
  SPEAKER_01: The framing matters.
• 1:54
  SPEAKER_01: Today, I get to talk to a leader from an organization dedicated
• 1:57
  SPEAKER_01: to providing good information that policymakers can use and to framing these issues
• 2:02
  SPEAKER_01: from the point of view of Oregon's most vulnerable.
• 2:05
  SPEAKER_01: Juan Carlos Odoñez, Communications Director of the Oregon
• 2:11
  SPEAKER_01: He's got a problem with how the Prosperity Council's report is being sold.
• 2:25
  SPEAKER_01: Then turns around and recommends tax cuts that are mostly benefiting the wealthy
• 2:29
  SPEAKER_01: and corporations,
• 2:31
  SPEAKER_01: reinstating a tax break for investors making over a million dollars a year,
• 2:34
  SPEAKER_01: weakening the estate tax and broader based revenue sources.
• 2:39
  SPEAKER_01: So today we're going to pressure test both sides of what the OCPP,
• 2:44
  SPEAKER_01: the Oregon Center for Public Policy, are arguing and agree with in this report.
• 2:48
  SPEAKER_01: And where do they part ways?
• 2:49
  SPEAKER_01: And if the governor had handed this assignment to Juan Carlos and his team instead
• 2:53
  SPEAKER_01: of a room full of business leaders,
• 2:55
  SPEAKER_01: what would Oregon's prosperity plan actually look like?
• 2:59
  SPEAKER_01: Juan Carlos Odoñez, welcome to the show.
• 3:01
  SPEAKER_01: Let's get into it.
• 3:16
  SPEAKER_01: Juan Carlos Ordóñez, thank you
• 3:17
  SPEAKER_02: so much for being on the pod.
• 3:19
  SPEAKER_02: Welcome.
• 3:20
  SPEAKER_02: Thanks for having me on the show.
• 3:21
  SPEAKER_02: It's great.
• 3:21
  SPEAKER_01: Yeah, absolutely.
• 3:22
  SPEAKER_01: Well, I'm really excited to talk to you.
• 3:24
  SPEAKER_01: As you know,
• 3:25
  SPEAKER_01: we kicked off our season this year,
• 3:28
  SPEAKER_01: season three, with one of the co-chairs of the Oregon Prosperity Council.
• 3:33
  SPEAKER_01: And they put out a report and have recommendations for how the state
• 3:37
  SPEAKER_01: of Oregon is going to reach prosperity.
• 3:39
  SPEAKER_01: You work for the Oregon Center for Public Policy.
• 3:43
  SPEAKER_01: You also have looked at the Prosperity Report,
• 3:45
  SPEAKER_01: and so I'm so excited to talk to you today and learn more about the Oregon Center
• 3:50
  SPEAKER_01: for Public Policy, but also your take on the report.
• 3:54
  SPEAKER_01: So why don't we start with who are you and tell us about the center?
• 3:59
  SPEAKER_02: Yeah, the Oregon Center for Public Policy is a nonpartisan research organization.
• 4:04
  SPEAKER_02: We analyze research tax, budget,
• 4:08
  SPEAKER_02: and economic policy with a goal of advancing economic opportunity
• 4:12
  SPEAKER_02: for all Oregonians,
• 4:13
  SPEAKER_02: especially low and moderate income Oregonians who are struggling the most
• 4:17
  SPEAKER_02: in this economy.
• 4:19
  SPEAKER_02: And the areas where we focus the most on is tax policy because the tax system plays
• 4:25
  SPEAKER_02: an absolutely central role in determining whether we have an economy
• 4:30
  SPEAKER_02: where everybody can benefit or only the few at the top.
• 4:36
  SPEAKER_02: We also look at policies that try to advance policies that increase worker power so
• 4:42
  SPEAKER_02: that workers are able to come together and bargain collectively for higher wages
• 4:48
  SPEAKER_02: and better benefits.
• 4:49
  SPEAKER_02: Because again,
• 4:50
  SPEAKER_02: that plays a huge role in determining whether the economy is working for all of us.
• 4:55
  SPEAKER_02: And lastly, we focus on policies that increase economic security.
• 5:00
  SPEAKER_02: And especially in recent years,
• 5:01
  SPEAKER_02: we've been focusing on the idea of establishing an income floor here in Oregon,
• 5:06
  SPEAKER_02: what's called a guaranteed income.
• 5:08
  SPEAKER_02: Those are the areas where we tend to focus on the most.
• 5:12
  SPEAKER_02: But ultimately,
• 5:13
  SPEAKER_02: our goal is to make sure that all Argonians have a real opportunity to thrive and
• 5:18
  SPEAKER_02: that the economy is
• 5:20
  SPEAKER_01: working for all of us.
• 5:21
  SPEAKER_01: So you mentioned being nonpartisan.
• 5:24
  SPEAKER_01: How long has the center been around?
• 5:26
  SPEAKER_01: Oh, great question.
• 5:27
  SPEAKER_01: We are celebrating our 25th anniversary.
• 5:30
  SPEAKER_02: 25, all right.
• 5:30
  SPEAKER_02: And so it's a great time.
• 5:32
  SPEAKER_01: I'd have brought birthday cake if I
• 5:33
  SPEAKER_02: were to.
• 5:35
  SPEAKER_02: So it's a great.
• 5:36
  SPEAKER_02: And so we've been in some of the,
• 5:38
  SPEAKER_02: you know,
• 5:38
  SPEAKER_02: some of the very important policy battles at the state level in terms
• 5:42
  SPEAKER_02: of things like wages, tax policy, all these years.
• 5:46
  SPEAKER_02: And, you know, we're really proud of the work that we've accomplished.
• 5:49
  SPEAKER_01: You all are advising policymakers.
• 5:53
  SPEAKER_01: Is that kind of one of the main functions is to advise policymakers?
• 5:57
  SPEAKER_02: We definitely focus as to what's happening in the legislature.
• 6:00
  SPEAKER_02: So we will say,
• 6:02
  SPEAKER_02: for example,
• 6:02
  SPEAKER_02: publish a report on a particular issue that might be moving or that would be good
• 6:07
  SPEAKER_02: for lawmakers to know about.
• 6:08
  SPEAKER_02: And certainly we share with all lawmakers, policymakers, but the public as well.
• 6:13
  SPEAKER_02: I mean, all of the research that we publish is...
• 6:17
  SPEAKER_02: Available on our website because we believe that it's of interest to all Oregonians
• 6:21
  SPEAKER_02: to know what's happening in Salem and the issues that affect their lives.
• 6:25
  SPEAKER_01: Yeah.
• 6:26
  SPEAKER_01: And so you advise governors,
• 6:27
  SPEAKER_01: you advise legislators,
• 6:29
  SPEAKER_01: and just kind of across the board, even in city and county and local folks?
• 6:34
  SPEAKER_01: We mostly stick to state level issues.
• 6:36
  SPEAKER_02: Yeah.
• 6:38
  SPEAKER_02: We often approach folks wanting to discuss some tax issue
• 6:41
  SPEAKER_02: that might affect their city or their county.
• 6:45
  SPEAKER_02: And we wish we could help, but there's only so much that the capacity will stretch.
• 6:48
  SPEAKER_02: So we tend to just stick to state level policy and federal policy
• 6:52
  SPEAKER_01: as well.
• 6:52
  SPEAKER_01: Yeah.
• 6:53
  SPEAKER_01: One of the things that I recently saw, and maybe I'd step back for a second.
• 7:00
  SPEAKER_01: One of the challenging things in today's media and news
• 7:04
  SPEAKER_01: and information environment is getting clean information that is trustworthy
• 7:10
  SPEAKER_01: that you can rely on because there's just
• 7:13
  SPEAKER_01: so much different information out there these days and different agendas
• 7:18
  SPEAKER_01: that people have and other things.
• 7:20
  SPEAKER_01: But anyway,
• 7:21
  SPEAKER_01: I saw this or I read or heard this statistic,
• 7:23
  SPEAKER_01: I don't recall, that the inequality in Oregon is actually...
• 7:34
  SPEAKER_02: There was a recent piece published by The Oregonian showing this.
• 7:39
  SPEAKER_02: We have not looked at the state-to-state comparison on inequality.
• 7:44
  SPEAKER_02: I will say that that analysis makes sense,
• 7:47
  SPEAKER_02: even though I can't say for sure that it's correct,
• 7:49
  SPEAKER_02: but it sort of makes sense because of some of the things that Oregon is doing
• 7:53
  SPEAKER_02: and doing well.
• 7:55
  SPEAKER_02: So that said,
• 7:59
  SPEAKER_02: Even if inequality in Oregon is lower than in most other places, it's still extreme.
• 8:05
  SPEAKER_02: It's still through the roof.
• 8:06
  SPEAKER_02: It's just that everywhere else, it's even worse.
• 8:09
  SPEAKER_02: Even worse.
• 8:10
  SPEAKER_02: And this sort of gets to,
• 8:12
  SPEAKER_02: I think, some of the things that we're going to talk about, that that issue...
• 8:16
  SPEAKER_02: Income inequality,
• 8:17
  SPEAKER_02: wealth inequality,
• 8:18
  SPEAKER_02: that is the main economic challenge that we face both nationally and at
• 8:22
  SPEAKER_02: the state level.
• 8:23
  SPEAKER_02: And unless we deal with that issue,
• 8:25
  SPEAKER_02: there will be, there's no way of establishing economic security for people.
• 8:31
  SPEAKER_02: There's no way that the vast majority of people in our state and our country can really thrive.
• 8:37
  SPEAKER_02: And so that really has to be the focus.
• 8:40
  SPEAKER_02: When you talk about prosperity, that has to be the focus of policymakers.
• 8:45
  SPEAKER_01: Yeah.
• 8:45
  SPEAKER_01: And when I when I read that, I was like, well, that's good.
• 8:49
  SPEAKER_01: And like you, I was like, you know, maybe that doesn't make sense.
• 8:51
  SPEAKER_01: I know that Oregon, I mean,
• 8:53
  SPEAKER_01: you know,
• 8:53
  SPEAKER_01: I've been here for 20 years now and I've worked in a whole number of jobs and fields
• 8:58
  SPEAKER_01: and everything else.
• 8:59
  SPEAKER_01: And we are a very labor friendly state in terms of Yeah, that's right.
• 9:07
  SPEAKER_01: And that would be one of the things.
• 9:20
  SPEAKER_02: When I say that it sort of makes sense without digging into the exact analysis that was done.
• 9:25
  SPEAKER_02: But yes,
• 9:26
  SPEAKER_02: the fact that we have a higher share of workers who are unionized,
• 9:30
  SPEAKER_02: unions increase wages for people who are unionized,
• 9:34
  SPEAKER_02: but not just that, for the broader community as well.
• 9:38
  SPEAKER_02: So it has like a spillover effect.
• 9:41
  SPEAKER_02: That certainly has been well established by the research.
• 9:43
  SPEAKER_02: That would be one factor that we have a stronger minimum wage than most other places.
• 9:50
  SPEAKER_02: It's clear that even though low-income workers here in Oregon are struggling
• 9:54
  SPEAKER_02: and there's no question that they are,
• 9:57
  SPEAKER_02: they make higher wages here than they do in most other places.
• 10:00
  SPEAKER_02: And that's a very good thing.
• 10:02
  SPEAKER_02: That speaks highly of our state in terms of the values that we want to advance
• 10:05
  SPEAKER_02: in terms of making life better for people.
• 10:08
  SPEAKER_02: That we have somewhat,
• 10:10
  SPEAKER_02: and again,
• 10:11
  SPEAKER_02: this will be probably a topic of conversation,
• 10:12
  SPEAKER_02: but our tax system in terms of its progressivity is And I should say,
• 10:17
  SPEAKER_02: Oregon does not have a part.
• 10:19
  SPEAKER_02: Ultimately,
• 10:19
  SPEAKER_02: when you look at all state and local taxes added up together,
• 10:23
  SPEAKER_02: we have a slightly regressive tax system.
• 10:27
  SPEAKER_02: But nevertheless, it's less regressive than most other places.
• 10:31
  SPEAKER_02: We're less bad than most other places.
• 10:35
  SPEAKER_02: We're less bad.
• 10:37
  SPEAKER_02: And so I think that would probably be another factor that I would cite.
• 10:42
  SPEAKER_01: Yeah.
• 10:42
  SPEAKER_01: Well, and that makes sense to me.
• 10:44
  SPEAKER_01: I mean, we don't have a sales tax and, you know, nationally, most states do.
• 10:50
  SPEAKER_01: And, you know,
• 10:51
  SPEAKER_01: obviously it's clear that our sales tax is a very regressive tax,
• 10:54
  SPEAKER_01: that the people have the least choice in how much money,
• 10:57
  SPEAKER_01: a percent of their income they have to spend on just the basics are going
• 11:00
  SPEAKER_01: to pay more sales tax as a percent of their income than, you know, higher earners.
• 11:05
  SPEAKER_01: So, So that's maybe a positive for us.
• 11:09
  SPEAKER_02: It's absolutely a positive.
• 11:10
  SPEAKER_02: Yeah.
• 11:14
  SPEAKER_02: The personal income tax is our main source of revenue for the Oregon General Fund,
• 11:19
  SPEAKER_02: what people call the state budget.
• 11:21
  SPEAKER_02: And because it is an income tax, you can make it progressive.
• 11:25
  SPEAKER_02: That's one of the great things about an income tax,
• 11:29
  SPEAKER_02: that you can ask proportionally more of the rich than of the poor.
• 11:32
  SPEAKER_02: And that's huge in terms of both just having a tax system that works well for
• 11:37
  SPEAKER_02: the whole state, for the community.
• 11:41
  SPEAKER_02: That's the good news.
• 11:42
  SPEAKER_02: The bad news is that our personal income tax system is only mildly progressive.
• 11:47
  SPEAKER_02: There's not a lot of room separating those in the moderate income folks to well-off folks.
• 11:56
  SPEAKER_02: So it's progressive, but it's mildly progressive.
• 11:59
  SPEAKER_02: And so that's one of the areas where we would want to work on.
• 12:03
  SPEAKER_01: Well, I want to start getting us to the report,
• 12:07
  SPEAKER_01: the Prosperity Council report that I had Curtis Robinhold,
• 12:10
  SPEAKER_01: one of the co-chairs on here to discuss in our first episode of the season.
• 12:14
  SPEAKER_01: And I'm so happy that you're here to give a different viewpoint and perspective
• 12:19
  SPEAKER_01: because I think...
• 12:20
  SPEAKER_01: It can be hard for people who have a day job, right?
• 12:24
  SPEAKER_01: And they're not reading a 400 page report to really know what they take away
• 12:30
  SPEAKER_01: from this and what's important to them from this report and what's not.
• 12:35
  SPEAKER_01: I want to jump right into the report, some of the recommendations.
• 12:38
  SPEAKER_01: I want to get your take on those things.
• 12:40
  SPEAKER_01: I want to step back a little bit to what I would term the vibes
• 12:45
  SPEAKER_01: or what maybe others would term as the business climate in Oregon.
• 12:52
  SPEAKER_01: I mean, do you feel like that's where this is coming out of?
• 12:55
  SPEAKER_01: Absolutely.
• 12:55
  SPEAKER_01: Absolutely.
• 12:56
  SPEAKER_01: Absolutely.
• 13:12
  SPEAKER_02: Big corporate lobby in Oregon has been pounding the table for actually for years,
• 13:17
  SPEAKER_02: but especially in the most recent period about Oregon's business climate.
• 13:22
  SPEAKER_02: And I think that that is a big part of what drove the both the creation
• 13:27
  SPEAKER_02: of what was initially the prosperity roadmap published by issued by
• 13:33
  SPEAKER_02: the governor's office and that subsequently led to the Prosperity Council.
• 13:39
  SPEAKER_02: And so that idea of Oregon has a bad business climate is what's been driving a lot of this.
• 13:46
  SPEAKER_02: And the reality is that this whole notion of business climate,
• 13:49
  SPEAKER_02: for one, it's a very incoherent concept.
• 13:52
  SPEAKER_02: It's a made up concept by lobbyists.
• 13:54
  SPEAKER_02: I think that that's the main thing that people need to understand by corporate lobbyists.
• 14:00
  SPEAKER_02: It's, you know, there's a...
• 14:03
  SPEAKER_02: My colleague pointed out that he was reading the book Nixonland and that
• 14:07
  SPEAKER_02: the writer points out that this notion of business climate came out in the 1950s,
• 14:12
  SPEAKER_02: but it was conjured up by GE to basically describe states with low taxes
• 14:18
  SPEAKER_02: and no unions.
• 14:19
  SPEAKER_02: I mean, and so that's their concept of what a good business climate is.
• 14:22
  SPEAKER_01: That's a good business climate.
• 14:23
  SPEAKER_02: Yeah.
• 14:23
  SPEAKER_02: And then in the like later on in like the 1970s, you started to get these things.
• 14:29
  SPEAKER_02: Indices, sort of indices, rankings of business climates.
• 14:32
  SPEAKER_02: Again, rankings made up by
• 14:37
  SPEAKER_02: business lobbies or by think tanks funded
• 14:41
  SPEAKER_02: by corporations purporting to establish which states have a business climate.
• 14:48
  SPEAKER_02: And it's an incoherent, well,
• 14:50
  SPEAKER_02: it's an incoherent idea to think that there is such a thing as a business climate
• 14:54
  SPEAKER_02: because like In every state, businesses are affected differently by taxes.
• 15:00
  SPEAKER_02: We see it quite well here in Oregon.
• 15:02
  SPEAKER_02: So my wife has her own business.
• 15:06
  SPEAKER_02: She's a sole proprietor.
• 15:07
  SPEAKER_02: She's a mental health therapist.
• 15:11
  SPEAKER_02: How the tax system affects her is very different how the tax system affects Nike and Intel.
• 15:17
  SPEAKER_02: It's just completely different.
• 15:18
  SPEAKER_02: So where is the business?
• 15:19
  SPEAKER_02: It's the business climate.
• 15:21
  SPEAKER_02: For who?
• 15:22
  SPEAKER_02: Yeah, for who?
• 15:23
  SPEAKER_02: It's just like a very incoherent idea.
• 15:28
  SPEAKER_02: But even that aside,
• 15:29
  SPEAKER_02: it's just kind of – you see what – There's not much substance behind it because
• 15:36
  SPEAKER_02: then there's multiple rankings that purport to establish the business climate
• 15:43
  SPEAKER_02: of states.
• 15:44
  SPEAKER_02: And in some, Oregon does better than in others.
• 15:47
  SPEAKER_02: In some, it does very poorly and in some, it does better.
• 15:51
  SPEAKER_02: So there's no agreement as to what the business climate is,
• 15:54
  SPEAKER_02: even if you could, even if there were such a thing.
• 15:57
  SPEAKER_02: And ultimately, those rankings reflect the biases of the people who write it.
• 16:06
  SPEAKER_02: Assume that,
• 16:07
  SPEAKER_02: in fact,
• 16:08
  SPEAKER_02: in the way that you determine the rankings,
• 16:11
  SPEAKER_02: you score states that have higher taxes on rich people and on corporations,
• 16:19
  SPEAKER_02: that that's a bad thing,
• 16:19
  SPEAKER_02: then you're going to do poorly on these rankings,
• 16:21
  SPEAKER_02: regardless of how well the people in the state are doing.
• 16:25
  SPEAKER_02: The business climate ranking that initially this prosperity roadmap pointed to and
• 16:31
  SPEAKER_02: that Oregon Business and Industries has been citing over and over again is a ranking
• 16:36
  SPEAKER_02: by CNBC, a business network.
• 16:40
  SPEAKER_02: And that somehow they're the authority?
• 16:43
  SPEAKER_02: Well...
• 16:45
  SPEAKER_02: So this one showed Oregon doing not so well.
• 16:49
  SPEAKER_02: But when you would look at the states in their top 10,
• 16:53
  SPEAKER_02: and this is what the initial roadmap said,
• 16:57
  SPEAKER_02: we should aim for being at the top 10 of the CNBC business rankings, right?
• 17:02
  SPEAKER_02: I mean, that's kind of weird, but, but, but if you look at, yeah, it totally arbitrary.
• 17:07
  SPEAKER_02: But if you sort of like look at the states that are there,
• 17:10
  SPEAKER_02: like the top state was North Carolina.
• 17:12
  SPEAKER_02: And the reason why they appear there is because for the past decade,
• 17:15
  SPEAKER_02: they've been slashing taxes.
• 17:16
  SPEAKER_02: And so, yeah, so according to their model, yeah, they're going to come out on top.
• 17:23
  SPEAKER_02: But when you look at the things that matter to people in terms
• 17:25
  SPEAKER_02: of personal income growth, you know, in terms of wages for low income.
• 17:31
  SPEAKER_02: And even if you accept...
• 17:57
  SPEAKER_02: Take seriously the rankings.
• 17:58
  SPEAKER_02: You show that it's just a mess.
• 18:00
  SPEAKER_02: It just doesn't make sense.
• 18:02
  SPEAKER_01: Well, what you're saying makes me think,
• 18:04
  SPEAKER_01: and of course,
• 18:06
  SPEAKER_01: all kinds of different outlets and different places have different rankings,
• 18:10
  SPEAKER_01: like you say, and it depends.
• 18:11
  SPEAKER_01: I've seen Oregon and I've seen Portland rank very highly on some lists of places
• 18:15
  SPEAKER_01: to live for quality of life, things like that.
• 18:17
  SPEAKER_01: I've seen us rank very low.
• 18:19
  SPEAKER_01: It depends on who the outlet is and what, I guess, acts they have to grind.
• 18:23
  SPEAKER_01: But is there a useful concept in ranking states for whatever purpose?
• 18:31
  SPEAKER_01: I mean, in terms of whether businesses should be here or quality of life or things,
• 18:36
  SPEAKER_01: is that a useful exercise or is that just kind of...
• 18:40
  SPEAKER_01: I don't know, maybe leads to incentives and outcomes.
• 18:45
  SPEAKER_01: For example, CNBC puts out a ranking and they say, well, here's how we're going to measure this.
• 18:49
  SPEAKER_01: And states suddenly like Oregon have a goal of being in the top 10.
• 18:53
  SPEAKER_01: We're going to change policy to fit a I mean, that seems like a dangerous game to play.
• 19:12
  SPEAKER_02: Then these rankings would send you in the opposite direction.
• 19:15
  SPEAKER_02: And that's really the the problem in danger with these that
• 19:19
  SPEAKER_02: of taking them seriously, because ultimately they become a race to the bottom.
• 19:23
  SPEAKER_02: And that's really what what what they boil down to that that.
• 19:27
  SPEAKER_02: If we just cut taxes on corporations and on the rich, somehow we are winning the race.
• 19:33
  SPEAKER_02: Well, no.
• 19:34
  SPEAKER_02: I mean, the reality is that that is not,
• 19:37
  SPEAKER_02: you know,
• 19:37
  SPEAKER_02: if this is a competition, this is not a game you want to play, much less win.
• 19:42
  SPEAKER_02: Because you end up – and it was interesting that Curtis Robinhold,
• 19:46
  SPEAKER_02: when he spoke with you a few weeks ago,
• 19:50
  SPEAKER_02: all of a sudden he says – and I shouldn't say that because I don't know
• 19:53
  SPEAKER_02: where he came from and if he had –
• 19:59
  SPEAKER_02: But it was interesting that he said, you know, oh, we don't want to look at North Carolina.
• 20:04
  SPEAKER_02: We don't want to look at Texas.
• 20:05
  SPEAKER_02: Oh, but these were the states were in the top 10.
• 20:07
  SPEAKER_02: Why are we all of a sudden not looking at them?
• 20:09
  SPEAKER_02: Well, I think it goes again because it's completely arbitrary, the comparisons.
• 20:15
  SPEAKER_02: And after we and others pointed out how conservative,
• 20:21
  SPEAKER_02: Dumb the results were in terms of sort of like who you're putting out as a model
• 20:25
  SPEAKER_02: for us to emulate.
• 20:26
  SPEAKER_02: I think that then the narrative started shifting.
• 20:28
  SPEAKER_02: Oh, well, we're going to look at these other states.
• 20:30
  SPEAKER_02: And so I think that we should the focus should be not.
• 20:34
  SPEAKER_02: Yes, let's learn from what.
• 20:36
  SPEAKER_02: Yeah, you know, it's...
• 21:03
  SPEAKER_01: We've talked on this program with some other guests about programs like Preschool
• 21:07
  SPEAKER_01: for All,
• 21:08
  SPEAKER_01: for example,
• 21:08
  SPEAKER_01: which is here in Multnomah County and gives people preschool access for their kids.
• 21:14
  SPEAKER_01: I put my kids through preschool.
• 21:18
  SPEAKER_01: And it's expensive, like very expensive.
• 21:22
  SPEAKER_01: You're talking about up to maybe sometimes in excess of $2,000 per child per month,
• 21:29
  SPEAKER_01: $24,000 a year.
• 21:32
  SPEAKER_01: It's incredibly out of reach for some families.
• 21:34
  SPEAKER_01: And that means that people might not enter the workforce or get out of the workforce
• 21:38
  SPEAKER_01: or hopefully lean on other family members and grandparents and things if they have
• 21:43
  SPEAKER_01: that privilege to have folks.
• 21:46
  SPEAKER_01: And it's been frustrating to me The conversation around Preschool for All has been,
• 21:50
  SPEAKER_01: oh,
• 21:50
  SPEAKER_01: this is,
• 21:51
  SPEAKER_01: you know,
• 21:52
  SPEAKER_01: people are leaving our state,
• 21:53
  SPEAKER_01: they're leaving our county,
• 21:54
  SPEAKER_01: they're leaving this place,
• 21:55
  SPEAKER_01: instead of embracing it as a competitive advantage to,
• 22:01
  SPEAKER_01: you know, positively advertise to people across the country, man.
• 22:05
  SPEAKER_01: And where you want to raise a family is Portland, Oregon,
• 22:07
  SPEAKER_01: because they're going to help you get through preschool,
• 22:10
  SPEAKER_01: which is going to allow you to take that job,
• 22:14
  SPEAKER_01: do the thing that you want to pursue your thing,
• 22:16
  SPEAKER_01: because the childcare portion is going to be taken care of.
• 22:20
  SPEAKER_01: And I think so much of the framing that I'm hearing today,
• 22:23
  SPEAKER_01: this business climate framing is focused on One side of the scale in terms of, oh,
• 22:29
  SPEAKER_01: well,
• 22:29
  SPEAKER_01: the tax and the negative in this when you know where we invest our dollars is just
• 22:37
  SPEAKER_01: as important for establishing, hey,
• 22:38
  SPEAKER_01: this is the environment that you're in
• 22:41
  SPEAKER_01: and you get these things like you should come here.
• 22:43
  SPEAKER_01: But I don't see us or our leaders leaning into that competitive advantage narrative.
• 22:50
  SPEAKER_02: I couldn't agree more.
• 22:51
  SPEAKER_02: I think that one of the things that's most disappointing
• 22:55
  SPEAKER_02: about this whole Prosperity Council is just that rather than focusing on that issue,
• 23:02
  SPEAKER_02: and we do think that what one of the goals should be for the state is to make Oregon
• 23:08
  SPEAKER_02: the best place to raise a family and a place to live,
• 23:13
  SPEAKER_02: to have a high quality of life.
• 23:15
  SPEAKER_02: That is not only great for the population of a state, for the people who live here, Thank you.
• 23:34
  SPEAKER_02: Certainly having universal preschool should be one of those goals.
• 23:39
  SPEAKER_02: And it's interesting that if you sort of look into the detail of
• 23:44
  SPEAKER_02: the Prosperity Council's recommendations,
• 23:46
  SPEAKER_02: they point out very clearly that one of the things that businesses are saying is
• 23:50
  SPEAKER_02: that they're having a hard time finding workers because of the problem of childcare.
• 23:53
  SPEAKER_02: Right.
• 23:56
  SPEAKER_02: Finding is nowhere to be reflected in the recommendations.
• 24:00
  SPEAKER_02: Yeah.
• 24:01
  SPEAKER_01: Yeah.
• 24:01
  SPEAKER_01: Well, let's dive into the report.
• 24:04
  SPEAKER_01: So we've kind of been talking a little bit about the general background,
• 24:08
  SPEAKER_01: the whole business climate idea that has led I mean,
• 24:11
  SPEAKER_01: what did you see good in the report, if anything?
• 24:38
  SPEAKER_02: Well, I was glad to see their acknowledgement of the importance of child care.
• 24:42
  SPEAKER_02: I think in terms of the specific recommendations, I mean,
• 24:47
  SPEAKER_02: there was there's a recommendation that Oregon should invest more
• 24:51
  SPEAKER_02: in higher education.
• 24:52
  SPEAKER_02: I think that that definitely is a worthy goal against it.
• 24:57
  SPEAKER_02: Having.
• 24:59
  SPEAKER_02: A highly educated workforce is one of the best things that we can do for
• 25:02
  SPEAKER_02: the state's economy,
• 25:04
  SPEAKER_02: in addition for the benefits that it brings to the people of the state.
• 25:09
  SPEAKER_02: So we definitely support that.
• 25:11
  SPEAKER_02: The only quibble is the sort of weird way in which the goal was stated and
• 25:17
  SPEAKER_02: that it's something like strategically align Oregon's higher ed funding
• 25:21
  SPEAKER_02: to Washington and California.
• 25:23
  SPEAKER_02: I mean, it's sort of like strategically align.
• 25:26
  SPEAKER_02: I mean, does that mean that if Washington and California reduce higher ed funding,
• 25:30
  SPEAKER_02: we're going to do it as well?
• 25:31
  SPEAKER_02: I don't know why we would phrase it that way.
• 25:34
  SPEAKER_02: But if they had just said increase funding, yes, let's do it.
• 25:39
  SPEAKER_02: Sign us up.
• 25:39
  SPEAKER_02: Yeah.
• 25:41
  SPEAKER_02: That, I think, is the most interesting proposal that was in there.
• 25:46
  SPEAKER_02: There were a number of recommendations, some of them which it's not our policy area.
• 25:53
  SPEAKER_02: Let others sort of comment on those.
• 25:55
  SPEAKER_02: I would put some of those in that bucket.
• 25:58
  SPEAKER_02: Some that sound...
• 26:03
  SPEAKER_02: To have a reasonable discussion about some of those proposals,
• 26:07
  SPEAKER_02: for example,
• 26:08
  SPEAKER_02: this idea of establishing,
• 26:11
  SPEAKER_02: changing business Oregon,
• 26:13
  SPEAKER_02: the sort of economic development agency of this arm of the state
• 26:16
  SPEAKER_02: into some new structure.
• 26:18
  SPEAKER_02: Apparently, some businesses feel that it's not working well.
• 26:20
  SPEAKER_02: That's a reasonable conversation to have for sure.
• 26:25
  SPEAKER_02: I do think that,
• 26:26
  SPEAKER_02: again, some of the, when you look at the fine print, it does raise some questions.
• 26:30
  SPEAKER_02: For example,
• 26:31
  SPEAKER_02: they make it very clear that the board of that entity is only going to be staffed
• 26:35
  SPEAKER_02: by business leaders and innovators or something like that.
• 26:41
  SPEAKER_02: I think workers should have a voice into economic development policy in the state or
• 26:48
  SPEAKER_02: that there's academics who may have some interesting ideas.
• 26:52
  SPEAKER_02: So I think that it should reflect a broader constituency.
• 26:57
  SPEAKER_02: It should reflect more who we are as Oregonians,
• 27:02
  SPEAKER_02: not just clearly business community has a lot to say and useful insights
• 27:07
  SPEAKER_02: into economic development.
• 27:09
  SPEAKER_02: But they're not the only ones who care about or have ideas about it.
• 27:15
  SPEAKER_02: So again, there's some policies.
• 27:17
  SPEAKER_02: Then again, there was one about reducing regulations by 20%.
• 27:29
  SPEAKER_02: You know, ideas, if there are some regulations, and by the way, regulations are protections.
• 27:35
  SPEAKER_02: They protect the environment.
• 27:37
  SPEAKER_02: They protect our drinking water.
• 27:39
  SPEAKER_02: They protect, you know, that's what they are.
• 27:41
  SPEAKER_02: They protect the community and people.
• 27:43
  SPEAKER_02: And so there's a reason why we have regulations.
• 27:46
  SPEAKER_02: It's true.
• 27:47
  SPEAKER_02: Some of these regulations that are on the books, they may have outlived their usefulness.
• 27:51
  SPEAKER_02: Maybe they were not well crafted and there's problems with them.
• 27:56
  SPEAKER_02: That should be up for discussion.
• 27:57
  SPEAKER_02: We should regularly be looking at our laws to see if they're working well or not.
• 28:02
  SPEAKER_02: But simply saying,
• 28:03
  SPEAKER_02: we're going to cut them by 20%,
• 28:05
  SPEAKER_02: it sounds kind of dogey,
• 28:08
  SPEAKER_02: like kind of how Elon Musk coming in and saying,
• 28:09
  SPEAKER_02: we're going to slash it by $3 trillion, whatever it was
• 28:13
  SPEAKER_01: that he said.
• 28:14
  SPEAKER_01: For example, I just saw a video that the mayor of New York City, Zoran Mamdami, just put out.
• 28:21
  SPEAKER_01: And he saw He's talking about reducing regulations and the regulations
• 28:24
  SPEAKER_01: that he's pinpointing is the state of New York requires a registration
• 28:30
  SPEAKER_01: to sell ice cream.
• 28:31
  SPEAKER_01: The city of New York requires another one to sell ice cream.
• 28:34
  SPEAKER_01: For example,
• 28:35
  SPEAKER_01: he's like,
• 28:35
  SPEAKER_01: we don't need two I mean,
• 28:36
  SPEAKER_01: there's two regulations that are kind of doing the same thing,
• 28:39
  SPEAKER_01: maybe slightly different.
• 28:40
  SPEAKER_01: And now you've got to register here.
• 28:42
  SPEAKER_01: You've got to register there.
• 28:43
  SPEAKER_01: Maybe their freezer calculation is one degree less or more.
• 28:48
  SPEAKER_01: He's like, no, we don't need to do that.
• 28:49
  SPEAKER_01: So, I mean, clearly there's a good case for reexamining and seeing.
• 28:54
  SPEAKER_01: All right.
• 28:55
  SPEAKER_01: This is taken care of by another thing here.
• 28:58
  SPEAKER_01: And so maybe we don't need it anymore.
• 28:59
  SPEAKER_01: But what I hear you saying is like, yeah, let's let's do that.
• 29:02
  SPEAKER_01: If there are things that aren't working or outdated or maybe overlap needlessly.
• 29:06
  SPEAKER_01: Great.
• 29:07
  SPEAKER_01: But pinning an arbitrary like.
• 29:09
  SPEAKER_01: One out of five regulations must go seems not a goal.
• 29:14
  SPEAKER_02: It's completely arbitrary to say, you know, 20%.
• 29:17
  SPEAKER_02: Why not 25% or why not 2%?
• 29:19
  SPEAKER_02: I mean, it's just like there's no rhyme or reason for that.
• 29:21
  SPEAKER_02: And so that's problematic.
• 29:24
  SPEAKER_02: So in terms of just the general idea of we should look at our regulations,
• 29:28
  SPEAKER_02: are they working well for our state or not?
• 29:30
  SPEAKER_02: Are they creating unnecessary roadblocks, whatever?
• 29:34
  SPEAKER_02: Of course, that's completely reasonable, and there should be a discussion on that.
• 29:38
  SPEAKER_02: Just put forward the specifics of what's not working well,
• 29:41
  SPEAKER_02: and then you think it's not working well,
• 29:43
  SPEAKER_02: and then let the legislative process take effect.
• 29:50
  SPEAKER_01: Now I want to dive into the things that you found problematic in the report
• 29:54
  SPEAKER_01: that you didn't agree with.
• 29:55
  SPEAKER_01: You recently wrote an article talking about the bait and switch argument,
• 29:59
  SPEAKER_01: the sleight of hand of this report.
• 30:01
  SPEAKER_01: And so I want you to get into that, but let's stop.
• 30:04
  SPEAKER_01: Start with something you've already brought up,
• 30:06
  SPEAKER_01: which is the composition of the folks who wrote this report.
• 30:12
  SPEAKER_01: You mentioned just a second ago,
• 30:13
  SPEAKER_01: we're talking about who should lead business organs should be a broader diversity
• 30:18
  SPEAKER_01: of workers,
• 30:19
  SPEAKER_01: consumers, other people who bring expertise, academics and business, of course.
• 30:25
  SPEAKER_01: That was not the composition of the folks who wrote this report.
• 30:30
  SPEAKER_01: What's your reaction to the composition and then let's get into some of
• 30:34
  SPEAKER_01: the critique you have of the actual findings.
• 30:39
  SPEAKER_02: The Prosperity Council was by and large made up of corporate representatives,
• 30:47
  SPEAKER_02: business interests, and only two members of labor were included.
• 30:55
  SPEAKER_02: And so clearly the deck was stacked, I mean, to a particular point of view and narrative.
• 31:01
  SPEAKER_02: And again,
• 31:02
  SPEAKER_02: I think we already talked a little bit about the narrative that had been building up
• 31:05
  SPEAKER_02: to this moment.
• 31:07
  SPEAKER_02: And so I think that that was already in some ways baked in.
• 31:11
  SPEAKER_02: The recommendations that came out were absolutely no surprise because
• 31:15
  SPEAKER_02: of what had transpired before in the lead up to this and who was included in those
• 31:21
  SPEAKER_02: who put out the report.
• 31:23
  SPEAKER_02: And interestingly,
• 31:24
  SPEAKER_02: in the area that definitely we can weigh in the most,
• 31:27
  SPEAKER_02: the tax recommendations, the two labor folks...
• 31:35
  SPEAKER_02: They dissented from this portion of it because it is clearly very one-sided based
• 31:42
  SPEAKER_02: on
• 31:46
  SPEAKER_02: putting forward the wishes of the big corporate lobby.
• 31:51
  SPEAKER_02: It's the same things that they have been saying over and over again over the years,
• 31:54
  SPEAKER_02: and they've been sort of louder about it in
• 31:55
  SPEAKER_01: the most recent period.
• 31:56
  SPEAKER_01: That's interesting.
• 31:57
  SPEAKER_01: I mean, so what I hear you saying is,
• 32:01
  SPEAKER_01: They already knew the result that they wanted to arrive at.
• 32:04
  SPEAKER_01: And then they put together a council,
• 32:06
  SPEAKER_01: talked to people across the state,
• 32:08
  SPEAKER_01: held hearings and ended up at the result that they originally wanted to arrive at.
• 32:11
  SPEAKER_01: Do you feel like this was just a kind of window dressing to make it seem as
• 32:17
  SPEAKER_01: if this was an investigatory process,
• 32:20
  SPEAKER_01: but in fact,
• 32:21
  SPEAKER_01: they already knew what the answer was going to be before they even got started?
• 32:24
  SPEAKER_01: Or do you feel like Is that kind of what you're saying?
• 32:27
  SPEAKER_02: Well,
• 32:28
  SPEAKER_02: I have no inside knowledge as to what exactly happened or what was in the minds of
• 32:34
  SPEAKER_02: the people who put to the report.
• 32:35
  SPEAKER_02: But it certainly, one could certainly, it would not surprise me if that were in fact the case.
• 32:40
  SPEAKER_02: Just put it that way.
• 32:41
  SPEAKER_02: And it's interesting that after the report came out,
• 32:44
  SPEAKER_02: Oregon Business and Industries,
• 32:45
  SPEAKER_02: which is the big corporate lobby,
• 32:47
  SPEAKER_02: and it's the lobby for the biggest corporations that do business here in Oregon,
• 32:52
  SPEAKER_02: came out with a statement saying,
• 32:53
  SPEAKER_02: you know, we,
• 32:54
  SPEAKER_02: you know, fully,
• 32:55
  SPEAKER_02: you know,
• 32:55
  SPEAKER_02: we agree with the recommendations and they're saying
• 32:58
  SPEAKER_02: the same things we've been saying for a long time.
• 33:00
  SPEAKER_02: And that's absolutely right.
• 33:01
  SPEAKER_02: So thank you for acknowledging that point.
• 33:03
  SPEAKER_02: Yeah.
• 33:04
  SPEAKER_01: All right, well, let's get into some of the specifics.
• 33:08
  SPEAKER_01: You know,
• 33:08
  SPEAKER_01: one of the things that Curtis brought up and then it's highlighted in the report is
• 33:13
  SPEAKER_01: an individual here in Oregon making,
• 33:15
  SPEAKER_01: I think he said,
• 33:16
  SPEAKER_01: $40,000 a year as income is taxed at a higher rate than they are
• 33:20
  SPEAKER_01: in other comparable states like Washington or California.
• 33:23
  SPEAKER_01: And they kind of hold that up as an example of our tax structure being out of whack.
• 33:29
  SPEAKER_01: What do you think about that example?
• 33:31
  SPEAKER_01: And do you arrive at the same conclusion?
• 33:34
  SPEAKER_02: So in terms of that specific point, there's two things to say.
• 33:39
  SPEAKER_02: The first is that...
• 33:45
  SPEAKER_02: The analysis that we have seen,
• 33:47
  SPEAKER_02: the way they arrive at that conclusion that a middle class household here
• 33:52
  SPEAKER_02: in Oregon pays a higher overall tax rate than a middle income household
• 33:58
  SPEAKER_02: in Washington or California,
• 34:00
  SPEAKER_02: it's not clear how exactly they arrive at that analysis.
• 34:02
  SPEAKER_02: The analysis that we've seen by a very credible shop that has been doing that kind
• 34:06
  SPEAKER_02: of analysis for a long time,
• 34:09
  SPEAKER_02: the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy out of Washington, D.C., they...
• 34:15
  SPEAKER_02: Take a look at the tax structures of all the states and they look at all the taxes
• 34:20
  SPEAKER_02: that people pay in those states.
• 34:21
  SPEAKER_02: So we talked about the personal income tax,
• 34:23
  SPEAKER_02: which is the main driver of revenue for the state budget.
• 34:28
  SPEAKER_02: But that's not the only tax.
• 34:30
  SPEAKER_02: The only tax that we pay here, we pay,
• 34:31
  SPEAKER_02: there's other state taxes,
• 34:34
  SPEAKER_02: local taxes,
• 34:34
  SPEAKER_02: you know,
• 34:35
  SPEAKER_02: for example,
• 34:35
  SPEAKER_02: property taxes, excise taxes, which are like taxes on gasoline or whatever.
• 34:40
  SPEAKER_02: So they add up all the state and local taxes and figure out what's
• 34:43
  SPEAKER_02: the overall effective tax rate.
• 34:46
  SPEAKER_02: So they do that for Oregon, and they do that for all the other states.
• 34:49
  SPEAKER_02: And when you look at that analysis, Oregon,
• 34:53
  SPEAKER_02: a middle income household in Oregon,
• 34:55
  SPEAKER_02: pays a lower effective tax rate than their counterparts in Washington
• 35:00
  SPEAKER_02: and Washington.
• 35:02
  SPEAKER_02: In Washington,
• 35:03
  SPEAKER_02: they don't have a personal income tax,
• 35:05
  SPEAKER_02: but they have a sales tax and they have other taxes that are quite regressive,
• 35:10
  SPEAKER_02: regressive meaning they hit low in middle income people harder than people.
• 35:16
  SPEAKER_02: Right.
• 35:31
  SPEAKER_02: Most regressive tax structure.
• 35:33
  SPEAKER_02: So if you're a low income person, you're much worse off in Washington state than you are here.
• 35:39
  SPEAKER_02: And if you're middle income, you're also worse off by a little bit next door.
• 35:44
  SPEAKER_02: So there's the question of like, you know, it's not true what they're saying.
• 35:50
  SPEAKER_02: But putting aside that,
• 35:51
  SPEAKER_02: putting aside the accuracy of that claim,
• 35:54
  SPEAKER_02: the problem with them raising this point is that It's the bait and switch.
• 36:01
  SPEAKER_02: It's that they talk about it.
• 36:03
  SPEAKER_02: And this is not the only piece of the bait and switch.
• 36:07
  SPEAKER_02: They also cite other figures about like,
• 36:10
  SPEAKER_02: you know, two out of five Oregon households Don't make enough to make ends meet.
• 36:16
  SPEAKER_02: This is based on an analysis put up by the United Way called the Alice Index.
• 36:21
  SPEAKER_02: Excellent analysis.
• 36:22
  SPEAKER_02: We refer to it often.
• 36:24
  SPEAKER_02: So when I started reading the report,
• 36:27
  SPEAKER_02: I thought, oh, wow, that's great that they're That they're going to take this on.
• 36:30
  SPEAKER_02: Yeah, but yeah, right.
• 36:31
  SPEAKER_02: What are you proposing to deal with this issue?
• 36:34
  SPEAKER_02: The answer is nothing because they sort of cite these,
• 36:37
  SPEAKER_02: you know,
• 36:38
  SPEAKER_02: there's a lot of language that seems to suggest concern for the economic challenges
• 36:43
  SPEAKER_02: that families are facing here.
• 36:45
  SPEAKER_02: And, you know, supposedly the taxes that middle income households pay.
• 36:49
  SPEAKER_02: But then when you look at the specific recommendations that have nothing,
• 36:53
  SPEAKER_02: they offer nothing to middle income families.
• 36:56
  SPEAKER_02: So when you look at the specifics,
• 36:58
  SPEAKER_02: They have in the near term for the next legislative session,
• 37:02
  SPEAKER_02: they have four recommendations.
• 37:05
  SPEAKER_02: One of them is reinstating a tax break for venture capitalists that
• 37:14
  SPEAKER_02: the legislature got rid of in the most recent legislative session.
• 37:19
  SPEAKER_02: It's called the QSBS.
• 37:21
  SPEAKER_02: And 94% of the tax benefits of this tax break go to people making over
• 37:26
  SPEAKER_02: a million dollars a year.
• 37:28
  SPEAKER_02: So we're talking about a tax break for super rich, wealthy investors.
• 37:33
  SPEAKER_02: That's who benefits from it.
• 37:36
  SPEAKER_02: They want to put it back, not a tax cut for the middle class.
• 37:40
  SPEAKER_01: Wait, I'll just...
• 37:43
  SPEAKER_01: Because I think I want to go a little bit point for point here.
• 37:47
  SPEAKER_01: So on that one,
• 37:47
  SPEAKER_01: when I asked Curtis about that,
• 37:49
  SPEAKER_01: he said, well, you know, that is people who are taking a risk on a business.
• 37:53
  SPEAKER_01: So, you know, they are putting their labor in an exchange instead of getting a salary there.
• 37:59
  SPEAKER_01: They're getting these shares that could eventually,
• 38:02
  SPEAKER_01: if the business succeeds, pay them off in the future.
• 38:05
  SPEAKER_01: And it was more,
• 38:07
  SPEAKER_01: I think the example he was thinking of and explaining in his mind was more like
• 38:11
  SPEAKER_01: if you and I were like, hey, I got a business idea.
• 38:14
  SPEAKER_01: Let's do a startup and we're not going to make any money for a little while,
• 38:17
  SPEAKER_01: but we're going to have shares of this business that we're going to split.
• 38:19
  SPEAKER_01: And someday if we make money, boy, you and I will be great.
• 38:23
  SPEAKER_01: Is that just a bad example for changing this policy?
• 38:28
  SPEAKER_01: Because what I hear you saying is 94% is actually not going to you and me sitting
• 38:33
  SPEAKER_01: across the table thinking of a new business.
• 38:35
  SPEAKER_01: It's going to venture capitalists who are picking investments and are able
• 38:40
  SPEAKER_01: to invest capital in order and take shares for prospective wins.
• 38:46
  SPEAKER_01: Yeah.
• 38:46
  SPEAKER_02: So the founders under this QSBS tax break, the founders would get a benefit as well.
• 38:51
  SPEAKER_02: They would get the tax break as well, as well as the venture capitalists that give you money.
• 38:55
  SPEAKER_02: So I think that there is a certain,
• 38:58
  SPEAKER_02: I don't know what I would call it,
• 39:00
  SPEAKER_02: not arrogance, but certainly kind of disconnect into thinking that only...
• 39:06
  SPEAKER_02: That they're the only ones who take risks.
• 39:08
  SPEAKER_02: All of us take risks in our lives and to what profession we decide to work on.
• 39:13
  SPEAKER_02: And so to say that somehow these folks need a special tax break to work.
• 39:20
  SPEAKER_02: To do what they want to do.
• 39:22
  SPEAKER_02: There's clearly, I think it's privileging a certain group of people over others.
• 39:29
  SPEAKER_02: And so, and the reality is that we,
• 39:31
  SPEAKER_02: they are already privileged because this is the QSBS is a tax break for capitalists.
• 39:35
  SPEAKER_02: And at the federal level,
• 39:39
  SPEAKER_02: capital gains are already massively favoring in terms of their tax rates.
• 39:45
  SPEAKER_02: And that's the reason why someone who works
• 39:50
  SPEAKER_02: Who earns a wage,
• 39:51
  SPEAKER_02: who earns a paycheck often ends up paying a higher tax overall tax rate than
• 39:56
  SPEAKER_02: a wealthy investor because capital gains are pay a much lower tax rate.
• 39:59
  SPEAKER_02: And so this is just piling on.
• 40:01
  SPEAKER_02: It's yet another capital gains
• 40:03
  SPEAKER_01: tax break.
• 40:04
  SPEAKER_01: Right.
• 40:08
  SPEAKER_01: I heard Curtis saying we need to be competitive with other states.
• 40:12
  SPEAKER_01: And the fact that we disengaged from that federal tax cut that QSBS was putting
• 40:19
  SPEAKER_01: on us,
• 40:19
  SPEAKER_01: but our other competitive states have it,
• 40:22
  SPEAKER_01: that means that people won't do those startups here in Oregon.
• 40:26
  SPEAKER_02: But they do.
• 40:27
  SPEAKER_02: I mean, there's startups all over the place.
• 40:29
  SPEAKER_02: I mean, Joe Courtright is an economist.
• 40:33
  SPEAKER_02: He runs the website City Observatory.
• 40:35
  SPEAKER_02: He has a lot of information
• 40:36
  SPEAKER_02: on how Oregon has been creating manufacturing businesses here,
• 40:40
  SPEAKER_02: you know, a higher clip.
• 40:42
  SPEAKER_02: He's got other information in terms of business startups.
• 40:45
  SPEAKER_02: Oregon attracts startups.
• 40:49
  SPEAKER_02: That's not a problem.
• 40:50
  SPEAKER_02: It's...
• 40:52
  SPEAKER_02: This idea that somehow tax rates drive where businesses locate.
• 40:57
  SPEAKER_02: And there's a ton of research showing that it just doesn't.
• 41:01
  SPEAKER_02: That's not what ultimately matters for where you start a business.
• 41:05
  SPEAKER_02: It's where your customers might be.
• 41:07
  SPEAKER_02: It's where your family lives, your family connections, your networks.
• 41:10
  SPEAKER_02: And so we can get...
• 41:13
  SPEAKER_02: And the reality is that these investors will still get huge tax breaks at
• 41:19
  SPEAKER_02: the federal level because Oregon got rid of...
• 41:23
  SPEAKER_02: It kind of gets a little complicated,
• 41:25
  SPEAKER_02: but this is not a tax break that anyone in Oregon said, let's do it.
• 41:30
  SPEAKER_02: It's a federal tax break that has been in the books and it was established at
• 41:36
  SPEAKER_02: the federal level and it was expanded a year ago by the big Trump tax
• 41:42
  SPEAKER_02: and budget bill.
• 41:44
  SPEAKER_02: It made it even more costly.
• 41:46
  SPEAKER_02: Oregon connects automatically to the federal tax code in many ways.
• 41:49
  SPEAKER_02: And so when that big federal tax bill got enacted,
• 41:54
  SPEAKER_02: Oregon, again, automatically connected to that even more costly QSBS tax break.
• 42:02
  SPEAKER_02: No one in Oregon said, oh, let's do that.
• 42:05
  SPEAKER_02: Let's see if that's a good idea.
• 42:06
  SPEAKER_02: Let's debate it.
• 42:07
  SPEAKER_02: No, it automatically became part of our tax code because the legislature
• 42:11
  SPEAKER_02: The legislature can always say,
• 42:13
  SPEAKER_02: no thanks,
• 42:13
  SPEAKER_02: we're going to depart, but they have to take affirmative action to disconnect.
• 42:16
  SPEAKER_02: And so they didn't do that until the most recent session when they finally disconnected from it.
• 42:22
  SPEAKER_02: I want to get you back on, because I
• 42:24
  SPEAKER_01: took us down this path.
• 42:24
  SPEAKER_01: I want to get you back onto the bait and switch.
• 42:27
  SPEAKER_01: Sure.
• 42:29
  SPEAKER_01: The report says, hey, you know, we've got to look out for low income and middle income people.
• 42:33
  SPEAKER_01: Here's an example.
• 42:34
  SPEAKER_01: And now here's the four tax policies that we're proposing in the short term.
• 42:38
  SPEAKER_01: So we talked about the QSBS, but I want you to keep.
• 42:40
  SPEAKER_02: Yeah.
• 42:41
  SPEAKER_02: Another one is weakening the Oregon estate tax.
• 42:44
  SPEAKER_02: And that is the only tax that we have here in Oregon that applies to
• 42:51
  SPEAKER_02: the wealthiest folks that goes to the wealth.
• 42:54
  SPEAKER_02: So, you know, it's the And so only 5% of all the states pay this.
• 43:03
  SPEAKER_02: And it's really aimed,
• 43:04
  SPEAKER_02: it's one of the most progressive forms of taxation that we have here in Oregon.
• 43:08
  SPEAKER_02: This would weaken that revenue, important revenue source for schools and other basic services.
• 43:14
  SPEAKER_02: So again, not anything aimed at the middle class.
• 43:17
  SPEAKER_02: It would only benefit possibly the wealthiest 5% of households.
• 43:23
  SPEAKER_01: Do we worry about wealth flight?
• 43:26
  SPEAKER_01: I mean, the example that was given in that interview was wealthy people just leave.
• 43:31
  SPEAKER_01: They go to Arizona so that they can avoid our estate tax.
• 43:34
  SPEAKER_01: Do we end up losing anyway because they're leaving or is that overblown?
• 43:41
  SPEAKER_02: If they were going to leave, they were already left.
• 43:44
  SPEAKER_02: But the reality is that there's a lot of research in terms of the migration of rich people.
• 43:50
  SPEAKER_02: And rich people rarely move.
• 43:53
  SPEAKER_02: Rich people move less than lower income people.
• 43:57
  SPEAKER_02: Most of the people who move are young and lower income.
• 44:03
  SPEAKER_02: They move at much higher rates.
• 44:04
  SPEAKER_02: And the research shows that, yes, some rich people move, not very often.
• 44:11
  SPEAKER_02: Often it's not because of taxes.
• 44:13
  SPEAKER_02: It's rarely because of taxes if they move.
• 44:16
  SPEAKER_02: And the reason is because they have built their...
• 44:19
  SPEAKER_02: Their business and their wealth in a particular place.
• 44:22
  SPEAKER_02: So it's hard to move.
• 44:23
  SPEAKER_02: And so their families are located here.
• 44:25
  SPEAKER_02: They're very rooted in place.
• 44:28
  SPEAKER_02: So it's not it.
• 44:30
  SPEAKER_02: Yeah, some people are going to leave.
• 44:31
  SPEAKER_02: But overall,
• 44:32
  SPEAKER_02: our state is better off by having a revenue source that aims at
• 44:38
  SPEAKER_02: the wealthiest folks,
• 44:40
  SPEAKER_02: those who can most afford it,
• 44:42
  SPEAKER_02: to fund better schools,
• 44:43
  SPEAKER_02: to fund better health care,
• 44:44
  SPEAKER_02: to fund all the essential services they provide quality of life.
• 44:49
  SPEAKER_01: So continuing on, we've touched on the estate tax, the QSBS.
• 44:53
  SPEAKER_01: What other bait and switch things did you see in there?
• 44:56
  SPEAKER_02: Well, there were the other two pieces were the corporate weakening.
• 45:01
  SPEAKER_02: It was I should say the language was a little.
• 45:04
  SPEAKER_02: I'm a little more vague on this as to whether it's actual weakening,
• 45:08
  SPEAKER_02: but certainly changing the corporate activities tax again.
• 45:12
  SPEAKER_02: But that's aimed at corporations, not middle class households.
• 45:15
  SPEAKER_02: The other one is expanding a research and development tax credit for corporations.
• 45:20
  SPEAKER_02: Again, not something aimed at the middle class.
• 45:22
  SPEAKER_02: So in their near term priorities, nothing for the middle class.
• 45:27
  SPEAKER_02: And then they also propose...
• 45:33
  SPEAKER_02: Establishing a task force to do comprehensive tax reform,
• 45:37
  SPEAKER_02: to sort of look comprehensively at our tax system.
• 45:43
  SPEAKER_02: There's nothing wrong with that.
• 45:44
  SPEAKER_02: I do think that we should periodically look at our tax system to see what's working
• 45:49
  SPEAKER_02: and what's not.
• 45:51
  SPEAKER_02: But the main thing that they propose for that is something that has come up
• 45:55
  SPEAKER_02: in your podcast before, I think, with John Isaacs.
• 45:58
  SPEAKER_02: He's talked about basically,
• 46:01
  SPEAKER_02: and I think he said this,
• 46:02
  SPEAKER_02: but certainly this is what's in the recommendations of the Prosperity Council.
• 46:08
  SPEAKER_02: So lowering personal income tax rates paired with,
• 46:13
  SPEAKER_02: they won't say it,
• 46:14
  SPEAKER_02: they won't say the words,
• 46:16
  SPEAKER_02: they call it a broad-based tax,
• 46:17
  SPEAKER_02: but what they're talking about is establishing a sales tax.
• 46:19
  SPEAKER_02: A sales tax.
• 46:20
  SPEAKER_02: Yeah.
• 46:20
  SPEAKER_02: And so as we discussed before, sales tax is very regressive.
• 46:23
  SPEAKER_02: It hits low and moderate income people much harder than it does those at the top.
• 46:30
  SPEAKER_02: And so what it amounts to is basically a tax shift from those at the top to those who make less.
• 46:36
  SPEAKER_01: Yeah.
• 46:37
  SPEAKER_01: Yeah.
• 46:40
  SPEAKER_01: If I was going to characterize the argument that I thought was being made around
• 46:45
  SPEAKER_01: the Prosperity Council,
• 46:47
  SPEAKER_01: so they lift up the middle income folks and the lower income folks and say,
• 46:51
  SPEAKER_01: hey, we can do better for them.
• 46:52
  SPEAKER_01: And there's a lot of nice language in the report that says...
• 46:55
  SPEAKER_01: You know, prosperity means prosperity for everybody and that all boats rise and all this.
• 47:01
  SPEAKER_01: I guess what I would imagine if they were sitting here and saying,
• 47:05
  SPEAKER_01: well, this is how we see that is our it almost goes back to business climate, right?
• 47:10
  SPEAKER_01: Our competitiveness.
• 47:12
  SPEAKER_01: If people won't come here and locate businesses here,
• 47:15
  SPEAKER_01: or if businesses are leaving,
• 47:17
  SPEAKER_01: then we're going to have less revenue at the state,
• 47:19
  SPEAKER_01: less income tax, less workers getting good jobs here.
• 47:24
  SPEAKER_01: And so, yes,
• 47:26
  SPEAKER_01: we are focusing on the middle income people because we're going
• 47:30
  SPEAKER_01: to incentivize more investment.
• 47:35
  SPEAKER_01: Two questions on that.
• 47:36
  SPEAKER_01: One is, Do you think that these proposals incentivize more investment?
• 47:41
  SPEAKER_01: Does this make us a more competitive, attractive state to invest?
• 47:45
  SPEAKER_01: And two, even if it does, is that really going to lift all boats?
• 47:50
  SPEAKER_01: Is that really going to impact the $40,000 a year earner?
• 47:54
  SPEAKER_01: No and no.
• 47:57
  SPEAKER_01: Okay, impact that.
• 47:59
  SPEAKER_02: So in terms of is it going to make our state grow more?
• 48:07
  SPEAKER_02: We're going to go up.
• 48:07
  SPEAKER_02: Our economy is going to – no, the reality – so let me step back.
• 48:11
  SPEAKER_02: Oregon, when you look at the long run,
• 48:14
  SPEAKER_02: and we published a report recently on this,
• 48:16
  SPEAKER_02: from 1997 – and that's when the data series begins,
• 48:18
  SPEAKER_02: so that's why it's 1997 – to 2024 –
• 48:22
  SPEAKER_02: Oregon's economy has grown faster than most other states.
• 48:27
  SPEAKER_02: And we had been growing even faster.
• 48:29
  SPEAKER_02: If you looked at the cutoff point where around 2020, 2021,
• 48:34
  SPEAKER_02: we would be in the top handful of states in terms of economic growth,
• 48:38
  SPEAKER_02: in terms of personal income growth, in terms of productivity growth.
• 48:43
  SPEAKER_02: Oregon, over the long haul,
• 48:45
  SPEAKER_02: has done extremely well, even though we have a quote-unquote bad business climate.
• 48:53
  SPEAKER_02: Again, I would recommend the work of Joe Courtright.
• 48:56
  SPEAKER_02: He's also published a lot of information on just how well Oregon has done compared
• 49:00
  SPEAKER_02: to other states and a lot of these economic metrics.
• 49:07
  SPEAKER_02: Even though the business community complains
• 49:09
  SPEAKER_02: about Oregon's personal income tax rates and other things about our tax structure,
• 49:16
  SPEAKER_02: Oregon has done extremely well over the long haul.
• 49:22
  SPEAKER_02: But ultimately,
• 49:27
  SPEAKER_02: they don't say it,
• 49:28
  SPEAKER_02: but when you look at the recommendations and what's really behind it is this idea
• 49:35
  SPEAKER_02: that if we just cut taxes on rich people and on corporations,
• 49:39
  SPEAKER_02: prosperity will flow broadly.
• 49:41
  SPEAKER_02: And this is the same old story we've been hearing for over four decades
• 49:46
  SPEAKER_02: of trickle down economics or neoliberalism or whatever you want to call it.
• 49:51
  SPEAKER_02: The idea that if only we cut taxes on the rich and corporations, we'll all be better off.
• 49:58
  SPEAKER_02: But the record is very clear by now that Incomes for Oregonians,
• 50:04
  SPEAKER_02: and this is not just the case in Oregon, this is all across the country.
• 50:07
  SPEAKER_02: Wages have been stagnant.
• 50:09
  SPEAKER_02: Wages and income have been stagnant over all these decades,
• 50:13
  SPEAKER_02: and all the income gains have been flowing to those at the top.
• 50:18
  SPEAKER_02: And there is a clear connection between tax policy.
• 50:22
  SPEAKER_02: It's not the only driver,
• 50:25
  SPEAKER_02: but it's clear that tax policy and all the tax cuts,
• 50:28
  SPEAKER_02: especially at the federal level, have a lot to do with income.
• 50:32
  SPEAKER_02: How it is that economic inequality has gotten so out of whack.
• 50:51
  SPEAKER_02: We momentarily had a trillionaire in place.
• 50:54
  SPEAKER_02: So that is the product of this idea that we just cut taxes on the rich,
• 50:59
  SPEAKER_02: we reduce regulations, we decimate unions, and somehow we're better off.
• 51:04
  SPEAKER_02: No,
• 51:04
  SPEAKER_02: the reality is that it has gone us into a situation where economic inequality is out
• 51:11
  SPEAKER_02: of control.
• 51:12
  SPEAKER_02: And it's completely...
• 51:15
  SPEAKER_02: So interconnected,
• 51:16
  SPEAKER_02: the economic insecurity,
• 51:18
  SPEAKER_02: we talked about how two out of five Oregon families doesn't make enough
• 51:21
  SPEAKER_02: to make ends meet.
• 51:22
  SPEAKER_02: That is directly connected to the fact that so much
• 51:28
  SPEAKER_02: of the productivity gains of
• 51:30
  SPEAKER_02: the wealth created by people are flowing to just a few as opposed
• 51:33
  SPEAKER_02: to being shared broadly.
• 51:34
  SPEAKER_01: So we've been talking about a lot of the recommendations and the idea
• 51:39
  SPEAKER_01: that our business climate is, whether that's a good measure or not.
• 51:45
  SPEAKER_01: But I'll say probably why I think some of this is resonating with people.
• 51:50
  SPEAKER_01: And maybe even Portlanders specifically is because we can see with our own eyes
• 51:56
  SPEAKER_01: that Portland has experienced some challenges over the past couple of years.
• 52:00
  SPEAKER_01: I mean, you look at just the real estate market,
• 52:03
  SPEAKER_01: for example,
• 52:04
  SPEAKER_01: and we're all seeing giant buildings like Big Pink sell for pennies on the dollar.
• 52:10
  SPEAKER_01: Which, of course,
• 52:10
  SPEAKER_01: I don't own any of those big buildings,
• 52:12
  SPEAKER_01: so it doesn't impact me directly,
• 52:14
  SPEAKER_01: but it does seem like an indicator,
• 52:16
  SPEAKER_01: a very visible indicator that things are not going as well in Portland.
• 52:22
  SPEAKER_01: And then we have some of our bigger industries that have faced some headwinds
• 52:28
  SPEAKER_01: in Nike, Intel, chip manufacturing.
• 52:32
  SPEAKER_01: So, I mean...
• 52:33
  SPEAKER_01: There's clearly something that is resonating with people in here.
• 52:39
  SPEAKER_01: What's your analysis of that and whether or not this actually addresses any of that
• 52:46
  SPEAKER_01: or if it should?
• 52:47
  SPEAKER_01: Yeah.
• 52:48
  SPEAKER_02: So as we were discussing before,
• 52:50
  SPEAKER_02: I was going over some of the information before that,
• 52:53
  SPEAKER_02: you know,
• 52:53
  SPEAKER_02: when you look at the long run,
• 52:55
  SPEAKER_02: Oregon's economy has done extremely well compared to other states.
• 53:00
  SPEAKER_02: Now, if you look at the near term,
• 53:03
  SPEAKER_02: there's no question that our economy has faced some bumps for sure.
• 53:07
  SPEAKER_02: And so the
• 53:11
  SPEAKER_02: There's still positive data to be found in that in terms of our,
• 53:15
  SPEAKER_02: for example, personal income growth.
• 53:18
  SPEAKER_02: We're still doing better than in the national economy.
• 53:21
  SPEAKER_02: And if you're going to look at maybe just one measure,
• 53:24
  SPEAKER_02: like the income that flows to people, that is a pretty good measure.
• 53:27
  SPEAKER_02: But nevertheless, and there's others, again, that one can point to.
• 53:31
  SPEAKER_02: But nevertheless,
• 53:32
  SPEAKER_02: I think it's important to recognize that,
• 53:34
  SPEAKER_02: yes, Oregon has faced some challenges in the near term.
• 53:39
  SPEAKER_02: What's unfortunate is that the business community and
• 53:46
  SPEAKER_02: the Prosperity Council don't really probe into the reasons for why.
• 53:50
  SPEAKER_02: They come up with these excuses of our business climate and so on
• 53:55
  SPEAKER_02: that have no real substance to them.
• 53:58
  SPEAKER_02: Instead of looking at the data as to what the real drivers of the economic weakness is.
• 54:02
  SPEAKER_02: Okay.
• 54:03
  SPEAKER_02: And it's pretty clear.
• 54:06
  SPEAKER_02: Oregon is one of the most...
• 54:08
  SPEAKER_02: Trade dependent states of any in the nation.
• 54:11
  SPEAKER_01: And I have a friend, she owns a winery.
• 54:15
  SPEAKER_01: And when all these tariffs got rolled out nationally, I mean,
• 54:19
  SPEAKER_01: and then our trade,
• 54:20
  SPEAKER_01: you know, I think a significant portion of her wine went to Canada.
• 54:25
  SPEAKER_01: Right.
• 54:25
  SPEAKER_01: And then all the Canadian back and forth and tariffs and everything hit.
• 54:29
  SPEAKER_01: And, you know, she was hit hard and wine is a huge industry here in Oregon.
• 54:34
  SPEAKER_01: So that's just an example on top of my mind.
• 54:36
  SPEAKER_02: But that's actually one example that I wanted to bring up because
• 54:39
  SPEAKER_02: the Oregon Wine Board Just put out a press release this month, early July.
• 54:43
  SPEAKER_02: It said, quote,
• 54:44
  SPEAKER_02: Oregon wine exports,
• 54:45
  SPEAKER_02: which had historically been growing steadily,
• 54:48
  SPEAKER_02: decreased by 29%, driven by a near total loss of access to the Canadian market.
• 54:53
  SPEAKER_02: There you go.
• 54:54
  SPEAKER_02: So yes, your friend is absolutely right.
• 54:56
  SPEAKER_02: And the Oregon Wine Board fully recognizes this.
• 54:59
  SPEAKER_02: And obviously, it's not just wine.
• 55:01
  SPEAKER_02: Oregon is one of the most trade-dependent states in the country.
• 55:04
  SPEAKER_02: And it's important to understand,
• 55:06
  SPEAKER_02: obviously,
• 55:07
  SPEAKER_02: the Tariffs and all this has been all over the news over the past year since
• 55:13
  SPEAKER_02: the second Trump administration.
• 55:15
  SPEAKER_02: But these began before COVID, during the first Trump administration.
• 55:19
  SPEAKER_02: And so tariffs began back then.
• 55:26
  SPEAKER_02: So the Oregon State Economist said,
• 55:29
  SPEAKER_02: you know,
• 55:30
  SPEAKER_02: when they were testifying before the legislature and the report that they gave to
• 55:34
  SPEAKER_02: the legislature,
• 55:35
  SPEAKER_02: the state was handily outpacing the national economy before tariffs began and
• 55:39
  SPEAKER_02: then quickly downshifted the pace of growth by about 2.5 percentage points
• 55:43
  SPEAKER_02: by mid-2019.
• 55:45
  SPEAKER_02: So tariff policy has obviously hit Oregon harder,
• 55:49
  SPEAKER_02: has hit the entire country, but Oregon more than most places.
• 55:52
  SPEAKER_02: So yeah, why is our economy not doing as well as it was before?
• 55:55
  SPEAKER_02: Part of the reason is trade policy.
• 55:58
  SPEAKER_02: Another big factor in why our economy is not as robust is
• 56:02
  SPEAKER_02: because our two biggest private sector employees,
• 56:06
  SPEAKER_02: you already mentioned them, Nike and Intel have been laying off thousands of people.
• 56:11
  SPEAKER_02: And they've been doing that for a few years now.
• 56:17
  SPEAKER_02: We looked at the figures in the past couple of years.
• 56:21
  SPEAKER_02: They account for something like 30% of all large layoffs in the state.
• 56:26
  SPEAKER_02: So that's big.
• 56:27
  SPEAKER_02: Not only that, the...
• 56:31
  SPEAKER_02: And those layoffs at these big employers have a huge spillover effect into the community.
• 56:37
  SPEAKER_02: So when you lay off these workers,
• 56:39
  SPEAKER_02: they're no longer – well,
• 56:41
  SPEAKER_02: you may not – the suppliers that are supplying your company,
• 56:43
  SPEAKER_02: you're maybe not buying as much from them.
• 56:46
  SPEAKER_02: Or those workers who are laid off are no longer frequenting the coffee shop or
• 56:52
  SPEAKER_02: the restaurant or whatever.
• 56:53
  SPEAKER_02: So it has a huge spillover effect.
• 56:56
  SPEAKER_02: According to Intel,
• 56:57
  SPEAKER_02: and these are their figures,
• 56:58
  SPEAKER_02: that for every one job they create, 13 jobs are created in the community.
• 57:05
  SPEAKER_02: That's their figure.
• 57:06
  SPEAKER_02: But another analysis shows that In the manufacturing sector,
• 57:13
  SPEAKER_02: which is what Intel is,
• 57:17
  SPEAKER_02: that for every job lost in a manufacturing business,
• 57:23
  SPEAKER_02: seven and a half jobs are lost in the community.
• 57:25
  SPEAKER_02: So again,
• 57:26
  SPEAKER_02: we've seen thousands of jobs lost in Nike and Intel,
• 57:31
  SPEAKER_02: and so it's having a huge spillover effect in the community.
• 57:34
  SPEAKER_02: And the thing to understand,
• 57:35
  SPEAKER_02: and this goes back to the whole issue of taxes,
• 57:38
  SPEAKER_02: is that The reason why Nike and Intel are laying off people is because of
• 57:42
  SPEAKER_02: the businesses' decisions that they made.
• 57:45
  SPEAKER_02: There were clearly some missteps there.
• 57:47
  SPEAKER_02: Intel missed some of the AI chip growth, all that aspect of it.
• 57:57
  SPEAKER_02: They were left behind to a significant extent.
• 57:59
  SPEAKER_02: Maybe they're catching up now, but at the very least, they missed the boat on that one.
• 58:05
  SPEAKER_02: And in terms of Nike,
• 58:08
  SPEAKER_02: they apparently,
• 58:09
  SPEAKER_02: according to the reporting of the Oregonian,
• 58:10
  SPEAKER_02: they made also some serious business missteps in terms of how they would retail to
• 58:15
  SPEAKER_02: the customer and whatnot.
• 58:16
  SPEAKER_02: So the record is very clear as to the reasons why the Not
• 58:21
  SPEAKER_01: the progressive policies
• 58:23
  SPEAKER_01: of Oregon that helps wages
• 58:28
  SPEAKER_02: and labor and things like that.
• 58:29
  SPEAKER_02: Not at all.
• 58:29
  SPEAKER_02: And most certainly not tax policy because both
• 58:32
  SPEAKER_02: of these companies derive huge advantages from From Oregon's tax system.
• 58:38
  SPEAKER_02: That is absolutely clear.
• 58:42
  SPEAKER_02: Because of a change that was done a couple decades ago,
• 58:45
  SPEAKER_02: their corporate income tax contributions absolutely plummeted.
• 58:50
  SPEAKER_02: They pay very little.
• 58:52
  SPEAKER_02: They get huge property tax breaks, at least Intel does.
• 58:57
  SPEAKER_02: It's one of the biggest recipients of property tax breaks.
• 59:00
  SPEAKER_02: And they pay no sales taxes here,
• 59:02
  SPEAKER_02: which sales taxes tend to be like 30%,
• 59:05
  SPEAKER_02: a third of the taxes that businesses normally pay.
• 59:08
  SPEAKER_02: So they pay none here, whereas they wouldn't somewhere else.
• 59:11
  SPEAKER_02: So they derive huge tax advantages from Oregon's tax structure.
• 59:15
  SPEAKER_02: So much so that in 2012,
• 59:19
  SPEAKER_02: Nike somehow strong-armed Governor Kitzhaber to rush legislation to lock in
• 59:27
  SPEAKER_02: the tax structure for them for 30 years, I think it was.
• 59:31
  SPEAKER_02: So they liked it so much that they were going to make absolutely sure
• 59:33
  SPEAKER_02: that it was not changed for them, only them.
• 59:36
  SPEAKER_02: But then Intel came in and said, we want the same deal, and they got the same deal.
• 59:40
  SPEAKER_02: No other two companies got the deal, only those two.
• 59:44
  SPEAKER_02: And so it's clear that they like the tax structure that we have.
• 59:49
  SPEAKER_02: Taxes have nothing to do with their economic woes.
• 59:52
  SPEAKER_02: And so, again, these facts are very inconvenient for the business lobby.
• 59:58
  SPEAKER_02: And it's obviously not just Intel.
• 1:00:00
  SPEAKER_02: I mean, for semiconductors,
• 1:00:01
  SPEAKER_02: for manufacturers, for exporters, that's the tax structure that they enjoy as well.
• 1:00:06
  SPEAKER_02: So, yeah, I mean, those are two of the key drivers.
• 1:00:11
  SPEAKER_02: Obviously,
• 1:00:11
  SPEAKER_02: the Portland,
• 1:00:13
  SPEAKER_02: as you probably know better than most, got hit pretty hard during the pandemic.
• 1:00:17
  SPEAKER_02: And that obviously has affected business here in the community.
• 1:00:23
  SPEAKER_02: But again, an external factor that has nothing to do really with policies here.
• 1:00:27
  SPEAKER_01: Yeah.
• 1:00:28
  SPEAKER_01: So to your point,
• 1:00:28
  SPEAKER_01: you know,
• 1:00:29
  SPEAKER_01: it's like, okay,
• 1:00:30
  SPEAKER_01: maybe we are identifying some of the headwinds or the fact
• 1:00:33
  SPEAKER_01: that we're experiencing challenges,
• 1:00:35
  SPEAKER_01: but the cure that's being prescribed has nothing to do with the cause
• 1:00:40
  SPEAKER_01: of our challenges.
• 1:00:43
  SPEAKER_01: And then just business decisions made by some
• 1:00:46
  SPEAKER_01: of our biggest employers are causing some of the things
• 1:00:50
  SPEAKER_01: that people are seeing right now and the challenges that we're facing.
• 1:00:53
  SPEAKER_01: Lowering the QSBS or the estate tax or some
• 1:00:57
  SPEAKER_01: of these other recommendations are not going to change or get at
• 1:01:01
  SPEAKER_01: the underlying causes of what we are facing.
• 1:01:04
  SPEAKER_02: Oh, absolutely.
• 1:01:05
  SPEAKER_02: Again, as Oregon business and industry said, it's the same thing they've been arguing for years.
• 1:01:09
  SPEAKER_02: You know, that's what they're and that's what they're still pushing for.
• 1:01:11
  SPEAKER_02: It has nothing to do with it.
• 1:01:13
  SPEAKER_02: It won't help the state to the.
• 1:01:15
  SPEAKER_02: And in fact,
• 1:01:16
  SPEAKER_02: it'll have a cost to to Oregonians and in either reduce funding
• 1:01:22
  SPEAKER_02: for essential services like like schools and health care and whatnot,
• 1:01:27
  SPEAKER_02: or if they get their way,
• 1:01:29
  SPEAKER_02: It means a tax shift where low and middle income Oregonians will be paying more.
• 1:01:34
  SPEAKER_02: So to offset the loss of taxes collected from the most well off in corporations.
• 1:01:41
  SPEAKER_01: Let's rewind the clock.
• 1:01:43
  SPEAKER_01: We're going to go back in time.
• 1:01:45
  SPEAKER_01: Instead of Governor Kotek putting together this Prosperity Council,
• 1:01:49
  SPEAKER_01: she calls you Juan Carlos and says, hey, I need a prosperity report.
• 1:01:54
  SPEAKER_01: What does the vision for the Oregon Center of Public Policy,
• 1:01:57
  SPEAKER_01: what would that prosperity vision look like for Oregon?
• 1:02:01
  SPEAKER_01: What do we need to do to truly be a prosperous state?
• 1:02:05
  SPEAKER_02: So we would,
• 1:02:07
  SPEAKER_02: as we were discussing before,
• 1:02:09
  SPEAKER_02: I think that setting some goals around making Oregon the best place to raise
• 1:02:14
  SPEAKER_02: a family, the best place to start a business.
• 1:02:17
  SPEAKER_02: I mean, those things are worthy goals that would really improve the quality of life
• 1:02:22
  SPEAKER_02: for our people.
• 1:02:24
  SPEAKER_02: And it wouldn't be just beneficial for businesses,
• 1:02:26
  SPEAKER_02: although I think that it would happen,
• 1:02:28
  SPEAKER_02: but it would be, I mean, that's the place where you want to live.
• 1:02:31
  SPEAKER_02: And so, I think some of the top things that might fall into
• 1:02:36
  SPEAKER_02: that would be significant investments in education from early education,
• 1:02:42
  SPEAKER_02: which has a huge payoff.
• 1:02:44
  SPEAKER_02: So preschool, I mean,
• 1:02:45
  SPEAKER_02: I think setting the goal,
• 1:02:48
  SPEAKER_02: and this is something that Governor Kotick didn't mention at some point,
• 1:02:51
  SPEAKER_02: setting up a commission to study universal preschool throughout Oregon.
• 1:02:56
  SPEAKER_02: I think that's definitely a worthy goal.
• 1:02:59
  SPEAKER_02: But all the way through higher ed and through apprenticeship.
• 1:03:03
  SPEAKER_02: Not everybody can or should go, needs to go to college to do well and thrive.
• 1:03:09
  SPEAKER_02: So having a strong apprenticeship program,
• 1:03:11
  SPEAKER_02: but it's well, you know, better funding for higher ed, for sure.
• 1:03:17
  SPEAKER_02: So that whole continuum of education, there's research showing that the
• 1:03:24
  SPEAKER_02: States with the strongest economies in terms of economic growth tend to be those
• 1:03:28
  SPEAKER_02: with the most highly educated population.
• 1:03:32
  SPEAKER_02: It's also a workforce issue and for preschool so that,
• 1:03:35
  SPEAKER_02: you know, a parent, preschool is very expensive.
• 1:03:39
  SPEAKER_02: And so it keeps at least one, often one parent from being able to join the workforce.
• 1:03:44
  SPEAKER_02: So that would be part of it.
• 1:03:46
  SPEAKER_02: But even going earlier than that, childcare is important.
• 1:03:50
  SPEAKER_01: So as you're talking,
• 1:03:52
  SPEAKER_01: Juan Carlos,
• 1:03:53
  SPEAKER_01: some of the things in my mind that I'm thinking about is this report,
• 1:03:58
  SPEAKER_01: this Prosperity Council focuses on kind of the top driving wealth for the bottom.
• 1:04:05
  SPEAKER_01: And what I hear you saying is instead of that,
• 1:04:08
  SPEAKER_01: why don't we focus on the bottom, on the people that have to do the work?
• 1:04:14
  SPEAKER_01: Let's become at a competitive advantage to our sister states.
• 1:04:19
  SPEAKER_01: If people are looking at lists of places to make investments,
• 1:04:23
  SPEAKER_01: Let's get on the list where it says this is the best place to raise a family.
• 1:04:27
  SPEAKER_01: This is the best place to get an educated workforce.
• 1:04:29
  SPEAKER_01: This is the best place for health of your labor force to be taken care of.
• 1:04:33
  SPEAKER_01: Let's attract businesses by investing in the base instead of trying to attract businesses.
• 1:04:38
  SPEAKER_01: Some smaller businesses and investment and hope that those benefits trickle down to
• 1:04:44
  SPEAKER_01: the rest of us.
• 1:04:45
  SPEAKER_01: Is that kind of the vision of the Oregon Center of Public Policy in terms of
• 1:04:50
  SPEAKER_01: a progressive prosperity vision?
• 1:04:53
  SPEAKER_01: Yeah.
• 1:04:54
  SPEAKER_02: Rather than having a race to the bottom,
• 1:04:55
  SPEAKER_02: we should be having a race to the top, if you want to use an analogy of competition.
• 1:05:00
  SPEAKER_02: Not that we necessarily should,
• 1:05:01
  SPEAKER_02: but yes, investing in our people and infrastructure is the way we need to go.
• 1:05:06
  SPEAKER_02: That is what creates broadly shared prosperity, and it's good for business.
• 1:05:11
  SPEAKER_02: We know that, for example, when...
• 1:05:18
  SPEAKER_02: During the middle of the 20th century,
• 1:05:22
  SPEAKER_02: when tax rates were much higher than they are now at the federal level,
• 1:05:26
  SPEAKER_02: for example, we had a much more vibrant middle class.
• 1:05:29
  SPEAKER_02: Granted, there were groups that were excluded from that prosperity, people of color.
• 1:05:33
  SPEAKER_02: But for those who were included in the system, there was broadly shared prosperity.
• 1:05:38
  SPEAKER_02: And there were several pillars that were key to that.
• 1:05:41
  SPEAKER_02: A strongly progressive tax system was part of it.
• 1:05:44
  SPEAKER_02: Big investments in the public sector.
• 1:05:47
  SPEAKER_02: You could go to college almost for free back then.
• 1:05:50
  SPEAKER_02: Yeah.
• 1:05:52
  SPEAKER_02: And, you know,
• 1:05:53
  SPEAKER_02: you also had very high rates of unionization,
• 1:05:56
  SPEAKER_02: of workers being able to bargain for higher wages.
• 1:06:00
  SPEAKER_02: And that just made it lift up wages for unionized workers and for workers not unionized.
• 1:06:07
  SPEAKER_02: And at that time, the economy grew faster.
• 1:06:10
  SPEAKER_02: And the reason is because,
• 1:06:12
  SPEAKER_02: you know,
• 1:06:12
  SPEAKER_02: right now we have that,
• 1:06:14
  SPEAKER_02: there's a lot of talk about the so-called K-shaped economy,
• 1:06:16
  SPEAKER_02: where Only a narrow few are consuming.
• 1:06:22
  SPEAKER_02: And so it makes it harder for some, if you just don't have the customer base for businesses.
• 1:06:27
  SPEAKER_02: So having a much more economically secure,
• 1:06:32
  SPEAKER_02: broad middle class,
• 1:06:33
  SPEAKER_02: that's really what we should be aiming for in a highly educated workforce.
• 1:06:38
  SPEAKER_02: So if we were to look at sort of the big...
• 1:06:42
  SPEAKER_02: Broad areas of how we can get there,
• 1:06:45
  SPEAKER_02: it is through a more progressive tax system that raises the net revenue that we need
• 1:06:50
  SPEAKER_02: to invest in having a really strong education system
• 1:06:55
  SPEAKER_02: and having really good infrastructure.
• 1:06:57
  SPEAKER_02: Another pillar would be making it so that workers are able to come together
• 1:07:02
  SPEAKER_02: and bargain collectively,
• 1:07:04
  SPEAKER_02: or at least work together to push for higher wages and benefits.
• 1:07:09
  SPEAKER_02: That has become very difficult under the current federal labor law system.
• 1:07:14
  SPEAKER_02: But there's steps that the state can take.
• 1:07:17
  SPEAKER_02: And establishing an income floor beneath which no one can fall.
• 1:07:22
  SPEAKER_02: So there's at least a minimum level of a safety net that will catch you
• 1:07:26
  SPEAKER_02: when you fall in hard times.
• 1:07:29
  SPEAKER_02: That's kind of like roughly the outline that we would suggest.
• 1:07:33
  SPEAKER_02: But obviously, for some of these investments, you need to find a way to pay for them.
• 1:07:38
  SPEAKER_02: So we would look to, especially corporations, to invest.
• 1:07:44
  SPEAKER_02: Contribute more, the rich as well.
• 1:07:46
  SPEAKER_02: And the fact is that corporations have been playing games with the tax system for
• 1:07:50
  SPEAKER_02: a very long time,
• 1:07:51
  SPEAKER_02: shifting profits earned here in the U.S.,
• 1:07:54
  SPEAKER_02: shifting them abroad and using all kinds of tricks to do that.
• 1:07:59
  SPEAKER_02: We need to address that, for example.
• 1:08:01
  SPEAKER_02: We should be talking about raising the corporate income tax rate,
• 1:08:05
  SPEAKER_02: not more tax breaks for corporations.
• 1:08:08
  SPEAKER_02: And I would also suggest a policy that I think is long overdue is
• 1:08:12
  SPEAKER_02: that we have this debate with the big business lobby.
• 1:08:15
  SPEAKER_02: They say corporations are paying too much.
• 1:08:18
  SPEAKER_02: We say, no, they actually are paying not very much.
• 1:08:22
  SPEAKER_02: Let's settle the debate.
• 1:08:23
  SPEAKER_02: Let's settle it once and for all.
• 1:08:25
  SPEAKER_02: Require big corporations to make public their tax pay.
• 1:08:29
  SPEAKER_02: How much they pay to the state of Oregon,
• 1:08:32
  SPEAKER_02: how much revenue they have,
• 1:08:34
  SPEAKER_02: and some key information as to the tax breaks that they use or not.
• 1:08:37
  SPEAKER_02: And then we will see, maybe Oregon business and industry is correct.
• 1:08:41
  SPEAKER_02: They're paying too much.
• 1:08:42
  SPEAKER_01: Show us.
• 1:08:43
  SPEAKER_01: Show us your tax returns.
• 1:08:45
  SPEAKER_01: Could a state do that?
• 1:08:46
  SPEAKER_01: Could Oregon say, we're going to pass that law?
• 1:08:49
  SPEAKER_01: It's a transparency law in the state of Oregon.
• 1:08:51
  SPEAKER_01: You have to show us your tax returns.
• 1:08:52
  SPEAKER_02: Oregon can do it.
• 1:08:53
  SPEAKER_02: They can require corporations to make it public.
• 1:08:55
  SPEAKER_02: And this is a trend that's taking place more so internationally.
• 1:09:00
  SPEAKER_02: There's some information at the federal level that's disclosed,
• 1:09:04
  SPEAKER_02: but at the state level is very opaque.
• 1:09:06
  SPEAKER_01: Well, that's,
• 1:09:06
  SPEAKER_01: you know,
• 1:09:08
  SPEAKER_01: part of, I think some of the challenges is the opacity, the lack of information.
• 1:09:13
  SPEAKER_01: I was talking to someone yesterday and they said,
• 1:09:16
  SPEAKER_01: well, you know, Portland has the PCEF, the climate fund that they do.
• 1:09:23
  SPEAKER_01: And they got that funding out of, you know, taxing 1% of, I think it's gross sales tax.
• 1:09:29
  SPEAKER_01: I might have that wrong.
• 1:09:29
  SPEAKER_01: But Absolutely.
• 1:09:31
  SPEAKER_01: I mean, it's, you know, the story for the past
• 1:09:58
  SPEAKER_02: Four and a half decades has been one of like,
• 1:10:01
  SPEAKER_02: not just income flowing to the top, but also surging corporate profits.
• 1:10:06
  SPEAKER_02: And so, but somehow, you know, they need more tax breaks.
• 1:10:10
  SPEAKER_02: And so that's why having more information would be...
• 1:10:16
  SPEAKER_02: For the benefit of the state and for the people of Oregon.
• 1:10:20
  SPEAKER_02: And as well,
• 1:10:20
  SPEAKER_02: and also,
• 1:10:21
  SPEAKER_02: honestly,
• 1:10:22
  SPEAKER_02: to bring some balance to see,
• 1:10:26
  SPEAKER_02: because of this game of shifting profits abroad,
• 1:10:29
  SPEAKER_02: it's a game that only the big corporations can play,
• 1:10:31
  SPEAKER_02: the big multinational corporations.
• 1:10:33
  SPEAKER_02: And it puts local businesses at a disadvantage.
• 1:10:35
  SPEAKER_02: Yeah, absolutely.
• 1:10:36
  SPEAKER_02: So this is also good for a lot of local businesses to have clarity as
• 1:10:40
  SPEAKER_02: to what our tax system is doing and what it isn't doing.
• 1:10:43
  SPEAKER_01: Yeah, I mean,
• 1:10:43
  SPEAKER_01: I think one of the things that a lot of Portlanders,
• 1:10:46
  SPEAKER_01: myself included, probably everybody just loves our small business community.
• 1:10:50
  SPEAKER_01: It's so diverse.
• 1:10:50
  SPEAKER_01: We have so many great businesses, food and everything else.
• 1:10:53
  SPEAKER_01: And we want to support those.
• 1:10:55
  SPEAKER_01: We want them to be successful and where we can make things better and allow them to thrive.
• 1:11:00
  SPEAKER_01: I think that's a goal and a value of a lot of people in this community.
• 1:11:03
  SPEAKER_02: Yeah, and a lot of them will thrive by having a healthy workforce,
• 1:11:08
  SPEAKER_02: workforce that's not stressed because they're scraping by with very low incomes.
• 1:11:15
  SPEAKER_02: So having quality public services is good for business as well.
• 1:11:19
  SPEAKER_02: It's good for the employers themselves.
• 1:11:20
  SPEAKER_02: A lot of them, some of them probably don't have health insurance.
• 1:11:24
  SPEAKER_02: And so for them to have health insurance,
• 1:11:26
  SPEAKER_02: for them to not be,
• 1:11:28
  SPEAKER_02: a lot of people would say, I would have said, I would start a business.
• 1:11:32
  SPEAKER_02: But I stay at my job because I have health coverage.
• 1:11:35
  SPEAKER_02: And so, yeah, strong public structures are of benefit to business.
• 1:11:42
  SPEAKER_02: I mean, you can't have a functioning economy without a strong, vibrant public sector.
• 1:11:48
  SPEAKER_02: Or you can have an economy that doesn't run very well.
• 1:11:53
  SPEAKER_01: I heard someone say this the other day, and it just resonated with me so much.
• 1:11:57
  SPEAKER_01: They're like, imagine...
• 1:11:59
  SPEAKER_01: A world where your health care is not predicated on your employment status or
• 1:12:04
  SPEAKER_01: which employer you're choosing to work for.
• 1:12:06
  SPEAKER_01: What would you do?
• 1:12:08
  SPEAKER_01: You know, what job would you pursue?
• 1:12:11
  SPEAKER_01: Which industry?
• 1:12:11
  SPEAKER_01: Which thing would you go after for income if health care was not a factor?
• 1:12:17
  SPEAKER_01: And I was like.
• 1:12:18
  SPEAKER_01: That's so true.
• 1:12:20
  SPEAKER_01: I mean, we would make different decisions if healthcare was out of the equation,
• 1:12:24
  SPEAKER_01: but because we have this system that says, oh no,
• 1:12:27
  SPEAKER_01: your healthcare is dependent on this job and you're going to,
• 1:12:31
  SPEAKER_01: it changes our economy.
• 1:12:33
  SPEAKER_02: Yeah.
• 1:12:33
  SPEAKER_02: Absolutely.
• 1:12:34
  SPEAKER_02: I mean, I think that a lot more people would be entrepreneurs.
• 1:12:36
  SPEAKER_02: That's right.
• 1:12:37
  SPEAKER_02: Take a risk if they don't have to know that their family is going to go
• 1:12:40
  SPEAKER_02: without health
• 1:12:40
  SPEAKER_01: insurance.
• 1:12:41
  SPEAKER_01: 100%.
• 1:12:41
  SPEAKER_01: All right.
• 1:12:42
  SPEAKER_01: Well, I want to wrap us up.
• 1:12:43
  SPEAKER_01: Is there anything else that I didn't hit you on this report that you wanted
• 1:12:47
  SPEAKER_01: to make sure you get in?
• 1:12:47
  SPEAKER_01: And then we're going to talk a little bit about where people can find
• 1:12:50
  SPEAKER_01: the Oregon Center for Public Policy.
• 1:12:52
  SPEAKER_02: I think that the biggest failing of the Prosperity Council is
• 1:12:55
  SPEAKER_02: that they've just been barking up the wrong tree rather than focusing on the things
• 1:12:59
  SPEAKER_02: that really would make our state prosperous for everybody,
• 1:13:03
  SPEAKER_02: not just for the relative few.
• 1:13:05
  SPEAKER_02: And that really should be the focus.
• 1:13:08
  SPEAKER_02: We need to address income inequality and economic insecurity.
• 1:13:12
  SPEAKER_02: That's what I would hope from a body that calls itself the Prosperity Council.
• 1:13:16
  SPEAKER_02: So let's hope that there's a Prosperity Council number two.
• 1:13:21
  SPEAKER_02: 2.0.
• 1:13:22
  SPEAKER_01: 2.0.
• 1:13:22
  SPEAKER_01: Yeah, there we go.
• 1:13:23
  SPEAKER_01: Well, maybe you can lead the next one.
• 1:13:26
  SPEAKER_01: So tell us a little bit about where people can find the Oregon Center for Public Policy.
• 1:13:31
  SPEAKER_01: How can people connect with you, learn more?
• 1:13:33
  SPEAKER_02: Yeah, so all of the research that we publish and all the commentaries are available
• 1:13:37
  SPEAKER_02: on our website, ocpp.org.
• 1:13:40
  SPEAKER_02: We welcome questions, suggestions.
• 1:13:43
  SPEAKER_02: We also have a podcast,
• 1:13:45
  SPEAKER_02: syndicated radio show podcast that has been alive for four or five years,
• 1:13:49
  SPEAKER_02: I want to say.
• 1:13:50
  SPEAKER_02: Nice.
• 1:13:51
  SPEAKER_02: I've lost track of time.
• 1:13:53
  SPEAKER_02: But you can find that on all your, it's called Policy for the People.
• 1:13:57
  SPEAKER_02: And you can find it on all the podcast feeds.
• 1:14:01
  SPEAKER_01: Awesome.
• 1:14:01
  SPEAKER_01: Well, Juan Carlos, thank you so much for coming in and talking to us today.
• 1:14:04
  SPEAKER_02: Well, it's great.
• 1:14:05
  SPEAKER_02: Thank you so much for having me,
• 1:14:14
  Mike.
• 1:14:17
  SPEAKER_01: That was Juan Carlos Ordonez from the Oregon Center for Public Policy.
• 1:14:21
  SPEAKER_01: We've had two different guests on this Prosperity Council report
• 1:14:25
  SPEAKER_01: in two very different readings of the same 400 pages.
• 1:14:29
  SPEAKER_01: And honestly, that's the entire point of this show.
• 1:14:31
  SPEAKER_01: To have a conversation about what Oregon's path forward should look like
• 1:14:36
  SPEAKER_01: and what Prosperity will mean for everybody.
• 1:14:39
  SPEAKER_01: If you want to check the receipts for yourself,
• 1:14:41
  SPEAKER_01: the City Observatory's Joe Cartwright has a detailed writing on this topic
• 1:14:45
  SPEAKER_01: and OCPP's published research on Oregon's actual economic performance and where
• 1:14:50
  SPEAKER_01: the state's tax dollars go.
• 1:14:52
  SPEAKER_01: And we will have links in the show notes.
• 1:14:55
  SPEAKER_01: Whether you're more persuaded by Curtis's competitiveness case
• 1:14:58
  SPEAKER_01: or Juan Carlos's fairness case,
• 1:15:00
  SPEAKER_01: I hope that this got you thinking harder about what prosperity actually means and
• 1:15:05
  SPEAKER_01: who it is for.
• 1:15:07
  SPEAKER_01: As always, you can find us on Substack.
• 1:15:09
  SPEAKER_01: Please subscribe, follow wherever you get your podcasts, and we will see you next time.