WSJ article- state tax

[wmw999 2,461]

However, how to raise taxes is pretty directly tied to how much needs to be raised. If the need is small enough, one can ask one person to cover the cost. If the "need" is large enough, then the state can take over everything (communism). There is probably a medium in there. Not a happy one, because those with more needs have a different "happy medium" from those with fewer needs.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[quade 4]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I hoped Arnold could succeed in changing that practice, but I suspect try #2 will fail tomorrow.

Arnold and tomorrow's election over budgets is what we might call "Irony."

People call a lot of things ironic, but I think the true irony is you putting in this one liner in the same breath you used to attack someone else for useless posting.

Elaborate - the rest of the people here may have very limited understanding of Sacramento.

Okies, Arnold got elected because the previous governor couldn't keep the books balanced and the state got into trouble. In an attempt to balance the books started asking for new taxes. One in particular was going to hit SUVs and Arnold's new Hummer. This got Arnold all excited and he started making a lot of political speeches. Some people thought he should run for governor and pushed for a special election.

Now, Arnold faces exactly the same issues and is trying to get out of it by . . . raising taxes in a special California election.

Dude . . . if that isn't irony, I don't know what is!

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[DougH 270]

Excessive is a level of "public service" that requires goverment revenue to rise year after year.

Government spending that is maxed out to the upper limits of the budget in good years is not sustainable, that would fit my definition of excessive. Capital gains revenue doesn't go up year after year. I can find six year olds with a pretty good grasp of this concept, but no state legislators with the same comprehension.

Public services that require government revenue raising at a level that hurts state economic growth is excessive, it is also not sustainable since citizens can get up and leave.

Big government is not a going concern.

"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall"
=P

[funjumper101 15]

Quote

This strikes close to home (no pun intended) as I am in the process of moving out of Connecticut and relocating to Florida. Taxes are one of the primary reasons for the move...state income tax, property taxes, etc.

As far as my fellow citizens in the community are concerned.... they can drown in the financial swamp that is of their own making. I see no reason to support the wasteful spending of the left-wing politicians in CT. While the governor is a "Republican", she is a RINO. The Dems control the legislature and the Republicans can't get their act together to offer an alternative.

I'm voting with my feet.

Did you happen to run the numbers related to property taxes? Do you have kids? How about the quality of schools and state colleges/universities? Other taxes? Energy costs for bug control (inland) and air conditioning 8 months of the year? How about the percentage of high school starts compared to high school completions? If I remember correctly, Florida has one of the lowest rates of HS graduation in the country. Do you really want to live in a state full of un-educated folks?

Taxes are only one component of costs. Direct and indirect costs must be considered.

Lots of folks moved from Massachusetts to New Hampshire to avoid the onerous state income taxes. Then they found out that it takes a long while for the snowplows to come around. The schools are old, along with the textbooks and the teachers. Class sizes are enormous. The roads don't get repaired. Property taxes are extortionate. An on, and on, and on. All those taxes not paid = all those services not delivered.

Best of luck to you in your new state. I am sure you'll love it.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Okies, Arnold got elected because the previous governor couldn't keep the books balanced and the state got into trouble. In an attempt to balance the books started asking for new taxes. One in particular was going to hit SUVs and Arnold's new Hummer. This got Arnold all excited and he started making a lot of political speeches. Some people thought he should run for governor and pushed for a special election.

Now, Arnold faces exactly the same issues and is trying to get out of it by . . . raising taxes in a special California election.

Dude . . . if that isn't irony, I don't know what is!

fair enough - there were a lot of different ways the irony remark could have gone.

Arnold had been thinking about political office well before the special election. He certainly was considering running against Davis the year prior, but Davis's machine started attacking him early on potential adultery and it looked like he wasn't ready to get his hands dirty. The special election made it much easier.

[TheBachelor 5]

Quote

As a whole, people tend to do whatever is within their own best interests even at the sake of the community as a whole. Essentially, people ARE willing to fuck over their fellow man for a small "sure thing" benefit over a larger "possible" benefit.

Wow, I agree with Quade for the first time... [Not really, I guess, but the quote still applies.] The problem in California are the people suckling at the teat of this welfare state. Come from Latin / Central America, have babies which are automatically citizens. Get free medical care, food stamps, education, etc.

Now don't think I'm just picking on the illegals. There are plenty of others with a hand out. T

he Dems who control the state legislature never met an entitlement that they didn't like. They (and Arnold) have spent themselves into such a hole that even after passing the largest tax increase ever in February, they're still billions in the hole, and want more taxes.

Someone who makes good money will sure look at that before moving here, and those who are a drain on the system will continue to arrive in droves.

There are battered women? I've been eating 'em plain all of these years...

[BDashe 0]

Funjumper- the article actually addresses many of these items if you care to read the whole thing.

Also, was it quade or kelp that pointed out Laffer? Man, he has rendered himself so insignificant that they have him commentating on cnn, fox (admittedly bias), and several other news stations several times per month. Wow, the guy really doesn't know anything... so insignificant that even the liberal media pays him for his thoughts and ideas.

So there I was...

Making friends and playing nice since 1983

[DougH 270]

Quote

Quote

As a whole, people tend to do whatever is within their own best interests even at the sake of the community as a whole. Essentially, people ARE willing to fuck over their fellow man for a small "sure thing" benefit over a larger "possible" benefit.

Wow, I agree with Quade for the first time... [Not really, I guess, but the quote still applies.] The problem in California are the people suckling at the teat of this welfare state. Come from Latin / Central America, have babies which are automatically citizens. Get free medical care, food stamps, education, etc.

Now don't think I'm just picking on the illegals. There are plenty of others with a hand out. T

he Dems who control the state legislature never met an entitlement that they didn't like. They (and Arnold) have spent themselves into such a hole that even after passing the largest tax increase ever in February, they're still billions in the hole, and want more taxes.

Someone who makes good money will sure look at that before moving here, and those who are a drain on the system will continue to arrive in droves.

So what is your definition of excessive public services?

It sounds like public services that the government can't afford, that are overwhelmingly distributed to individuals who aren't bearing any of the burden of funding them.

I tend to agree with you, but I can simplify it further and remove my opinion on social programs, if you can't fund it you don't offer it. PERIOD.

COPS. WELFARE. SCHOOLS. HEALTHCARE. EVERYTHING. If the expense doesn't match the revenue you cut services until they do.

It is not impossible to raise revenue through growing the economy. In my book it is very desirable, combined with financially responsible government.

"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall"
=P

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

I can simplify it further and remove my opinion on social programs, if you can't fund it you don't offer it.

great... now you just opened the "but 'they' (anyone else or anyone they don't like) CAN afford it because we (anyone they like or want to cater the votes from) 'NEEEEEEED' it" can of worms


of course, this does except the "FREE healthcare is a RIGHT no matter how much it costs YOU" crowd

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Ok, so my guess is you're really asking what public services are required and which are optional?

Well, let's say you were making an island state from scratch, which of these would you cut?

Police
Courts
Fire
Hospital
Military
Education
Water
Transportation
Waste Management
Energy
Telecommunications (phones/fiber/internet)
Public Information (libraries/public records)

*Cut Telco, it's been privatized since the beginning.
*Most Hospitals are private.
*Cut military (for an Island nation, it's not a start-up requirement, the police are a civil solution).
*Cut Energy, it's been privatized since the beginning as well.
*Cut waste management, it's private industry.


It is not government's job to provide these things. It is government's job to ensure these things can be provided. That means getting out of the way and stepping in during points of common sense regulation. The government doesn't contract those things out. Most people pay directly for those services, not by proxy through a government agency.

California can't do that because the legislature spends too much money, and the Governator can't win the battle. He sought ways to fund the appetite of the Assembly, and now things are short what...$22B. No problem, just print money...oh wait they can't do that.

So, California can raise taxes again, and float some more bonds...oh wait, they're doing that now.

So, California can lobby the Federal government for a handout and get some stimulus money...oh wait, they're getting some now.

So, California can f**k**g reduce spending for once and make some tough decisions and learn from the hole they dug their @sses into...oh wait...they haven't done that, and they won't do that.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[lawrocket 3]

Yes, quade, people operate with "self-interest." EVERYBODY DOES. You, me, and everybody else. There isn't a person out there who DOESN'T operate with self-interest in mind. Even those who believe that their life should be about serving others are working from a self-interested viewpoint.

Now, the neo-liberal feels (in self-interested self-righteousness) that we should all be united as one, whether we want to or not, to make this community, state, nation and world a better place. That is, a better place from THEIR self-interested perspective. The world would be better if those with money had less of it, and therefore should be selfless, whilst those who haven't money should be self-interested and take the offerings.

Neo-conservatives, on the other hand, recognize that self-interest is what they want. The rest of the world would be better off if the neo-con versions of self-interest and self-righteousness prevailed.

The libertarian viewpoint is one of, "My self-interest is different from yours." Is my business the taking of people's money? No. My business is earning it. Sometimes my job is to "take" something from others who have "taken" something from a client without paying for it.

My thoughts? Leave me alone. I've kept people employed. I've maintained seven people with income and health insurance because they provided a service that was a worthy exchange. I've fired people, too, because they took more than they gave.

Yes, it is in my interest to make money. It turns out that the way to do that is to offer a good service at a good price. If I am too self-interested, like Calvin selling lemonade for $100.00 per cup, then I make no sales. I have no clients.

Sure, I'd like to get some of the other firms' clients. How do I do that? By offering services of the same quality or better at a lower price. I won't be getting anywhere with a shitty product at a high price.

Who can provide a shitty product at a high price? Yep. Governments can.

Milto Friedman explained that there are four ways in which money can be spent:
(1) You spend your own money on yourself (what you need or want at the best quality for the best price - you do your balancing. Hence, I drive a 2005 Volvo XC-90);
(2) You spend someone else's money on yourself (You'll get what you want of the highest quality and the price means nothing - hence, I'd be driving a Maybach 57 is someone else will pay for it);
(3) You spend your own money on someone else (If I'm gonna have to buy someone a car, I'm gonna buy that person golf cart. It might not fit their needs but since they aren't buying it, who cares?); or
(4) You spend someone else's money on someone else (the most inefficient since not only am I making the decision on what everyone's needs or wants are, but since I am not spending my money I don't care about whether they need or want it, and I don't care how much it costs).

The tax system, with its overt burden on employers, has decided to do No. 4. The money isn't being spent on them. It is their money being spent on others.

So once the cost of doing business gets to a certain point, the employer decides, "I can do this with less expense in Nevada than I can do it here." And the person thus moves his company to Nevada.

Or, a person opens up a competing firm in Nevada. The cost of business being lower, that person can charge a lower price for the same marginal profit and put the first out of business.

California is not the most business-friendly of places. And California is losing jobs. So is Ohio and Michigan - places where doing business comes with a higher price.

So I'll ask this: What can the State of California do to attract businesses recognizing that businesses seek to make money? That's right. Lower the cost of doing business. The state can have a direct impact by lowering fees and taxes on the businesses.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[lawrocket 3]

I look forward to the Propositions failing tomorrow. The legislature will have ZERO choice but to make cuts and to make big cuts in the billions.

Like Sarkozy in France, this hopefully will signal that gravy train is ending. The safety net is not a hammock.

And yes. It's going to hurt. It'll hurt everyone - myself included. Taxes won't be going down. Spending will because the budget can no longer approach a balance any other way.

"The rich" are tapped out. businesses still in California are tapped out. We may have big pain for the next couple of years.

In five years u think it will have been worth it.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

I look forward to the Propositions failing tomorrow. The legislature will have ZERO choice but to make cuts and to make big cuts in the billions.

I would applaud it greatly if that happens. However I doubt it.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[grimmie 186]

Gray Davis was recalled because of the California elctricity crisis and the dot.com bubble bursting.
Then the prison guard raises got everyone riled up.

When you look at the California budget and the business community that suffers from overbearing laws, it's amazing anyone lives or works here.

Add in the billions spent on indigent healthcare, the court system, the prison system and the ridiculous amount of money we waste during fire season each year, it's mind boggling.

Now add in the school systems, infrastructure and the disaster of the year(insert fire, flood or earthquake here) it gets enormously expensive.

Now we have entire neighborhoods sitting vacant and property tax not being paid. Cities and Counties are raising permit fees on everything and charging for services that were once free.

Try building anything in this state. The fees and requirements are ludicrous. So now we're left with a bunch of empty buildings with well lighted ample parking and nice greenbelts around them.

And if you really want to be disheartened, look at how a city budgets their money. If there is a few thousand dollars left in a department heads budget he has to spend it or he won't get that much next time. Cities are finally realizing that that sort of thinking must stop.

I have been on a fire department here in SoCal for 26 years. We(the FF union) have presented ways to save the city millions of dollars over the years, but nothing changes. We try to get them to relax some of the archaic fire codes to make it more business friendly.

I have a lot of cop and FF friends retiring. Non of them are staying in CA. Why not save $7,000 or $8,000 per year on your taxes by going to Nevada or a like state?

Politicians like to spend, not save. Spending is what gets them in office and keeps them there. I hope that trend comes to an end soon.

oops, I just fell off of my soapbox..carry on...

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

Politicians like to spend, not save. Spending is what gets them in office and keeps them there. I hope that trend comes to an end soon.

It's easy to blame politicians for everything. However we must admit that the people of California were actively participated in it as well. Just look on Nov 08 ballot results when voters approved multibillion projects in the middle of obvious recession. And this was not the first time.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *