Socialist Seattle council member whines that massive budget isn’t enough to address racism

Socialist Kshama Sawant

This past week the Seattle City Council passed a $6.5 BILLION budget. With a population of approximately 745,000 that equates to a little over $8,700 taxpayer dollars to be spent per citizen.

Ballotpedia cites an April 2015 study which found that the country’s 100 largest cities by population spent an average of $2,605 per citizen in the most recent fiscal year for which reports were available. The average city budget in the largest 100 cities was $2.14 billion. Seattle was one of six cities which spent more per citizen on average than the states in which they are located.

Fast forward to 2019 and Seattle is still on track to break large-city budget records.

Earlier this month three Seattle council members were seeking re-election and they all won. Including socialist Kshama Sawant.

The socialist was the lone dissenting voice in approving the city’s new budget. Her reasoning?

The budget is “not a moral document.”

Apparently $6.5 BILLION doesn’t go far enough in addressing the social needs of the city and the “deep inequality and racism” in Seattle.

Odd how such a liberal and “progressive” city – which has been run by demorats for decades – could still possibly have a problem with inequality and racism.

Anyhow, back to Seattle’s budget.

As an “economist,” socialist Sawant should know a thing or two about financial documents. She says the $6.5 BILLION budget still “fails to meet human needs.”

The socialist is intent on squeezing more money out of taxpayers: “I don’t want us to rest on our laurels, and I hope that when January comes around, we will get back to serious organizing to win taxes on big business, to win rent control, and to make this city affordable and livable for everybody.”

As an “economist,” I wonder how she calculates how much money is necessary to address subjective and unquantifiable budget line items such as racism and inequality?

And what budget line items does she want include to make sure than “human needs” are met? After all, can’t a progressive subjectively make an argument for anything their hearts desire (and that which gets them votes) be proclaimed as a human need?

Seattle progressives DESERVE everything they vote for (homelessness criminals, repeat offenders, etc.) They’ve all failed in economics as they haven’t learned one golden rule:

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error131
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Share and Enjoy !

0Shares
0 0 0
 

4
Leave a Reply

avatar
4 Comment authors
AlmaJackie PuppetDr. EowynWilliam Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
Notify of
William
Member
William

“I wonder how she calculates how much money is necessary to
address subjective and unquantifiable budget line items such as racism and inequality?” These are infinity feels-based problems requring infinity funding with our money. Which, as Maggie pointed out, is finite. No problem, we’ll just use Monopoly money until the entire system collapses. This can only make sense to someone like Sawant who was probably awarded a degree in economics from the University of Dollar General. Degrees are on sale now at your local DG

Dr. Eowyn
Admin

For Demonrats, bigger budgets and more taxes are never enough.

Jackie Puppet
Member

Is this another way of addressing reparations?

Alma
Member
Alma

What’s the count for homeless people? Don’t separate the races or you’ll have to account for men women undefined sexes old young, and how much is she pocketing?