Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 55
  1. #1
    stanpapi's Avatar
    stanpapi is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,072

    Default California Votes to increase taxes retroactively




    Good old Jerry Brown really means it this time. No more deficits. We're going nail this deficit, it's gone. Don't despair, California. You gave his party a super majority, too. So I'm sure with complete and total control and all this new revenue, things are bound to get better out there. Who wouldn't want to live in a state with a top rate of 13.3%? And if you are just over that magic mark of $1M, you'll potentially be paying a combined 56.7% federal and state tax rate. Heck, if you're over $250K (a pittance in California, given the cost of living), you'll be paying just about as much. But you know, the weather is just so darn nice...wait- there's even more good news. Today, Uncle Jerry is running a special. With this tax increase, all your income for the whole year will be taxed at the higher rate. Even the income you earned before this election. All the way back to January 1. What a deal!

    We should really watch how this works out for Governor Space Cadet. I am sure none of the super wealthy out there will quietly be changing their state of residency, despite high profiles like Spielberg who think this is such a fine idea. But you won't hear about any of those moves. Those are made quietly. You'll just suddenly hear about how many celebrities have come to embrace their homes in Nevada or Montana. Because, you know, those places are so "serene" and "peaceful"....

    California voters send Sacramento a message - latimes.com
    California Dreaming: An Irresponsible Tax Increase | Tax Foundation

  2. #2
    Lousluggage's Avatar
    Lousluggage is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Cleveland Circle
    Posts
    12,601

    Default

    It sounds like the voters approved it... sounds like they're expecting changes in spending.

    Do you live in CA? I know that there are posters on MTS who live there, who will be affected, I'd be interested in hearing their thoughts.
    This spot, and a place in my heart, is reserved for TC.

  3. #3
    stanpapi's Avatar
    stanpapi is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,072

    Default

    No, I'm not in California. I find it kind of boring, actually. Not a knock on anyone that is from there, but I just have never cared for it. Some of the most backwards thinking you will find is out there. I mean, when you are on the brink of bankruptcy, you have no choice but to cut spending or raise revenue. We'll see if they cut spending. I would not bet any amount of money that they will do that, because I'd lose. I do view them as a smaller version of the national problem. It's a race to see who can blow it up first.

    Seriously though- I've never done the math, but 250K in California is equivalent to about 75K here in Michigan, I would guess. Try to move out there from the midwest sometime and maintain the same level of housing you are used to. You're in for a shock. And then there's the taxes....

  4. #4
    mtutiger's Avatar
    mtutiger is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Fort Worth, TX
    Posts
    8,557

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stanpapi View Post
    No, I'm not in California.
    Then, with all due respect, why do you give a **** what the people of California want?
    "If you're committed enough, you can make any story work. I once convinced a woman that I was Kevin Costner and it worked... because I believed it!" - Saul Goodman
    2014 AAT: Dan Dickerson

  5. #5
    stanpapi's Avatar
    stanpapi is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,072

    Default

    You know, you're right- Why would someone in the midwest care about California? Different problems than us in the midwest, right? I mean, it's not like they have anything in common with say, the federal government. High taxes already, runaway deficits, massive spending, etc. etc. And now they have blessed even higher taxes, because that is really going to fix their problem this time. Strangely- voters actually voted for higher taxes. Because something like 40% of their revenue comes from 140,000 taxpayers. So higher taxes on those 140,000 taxpayers is going to absolutely fix the schools and cure a $16 billion deficit. And it will fix it once and for all, because Jerry says to trust him. No more spending.

    I cannot claim to have studied this in any great detail, because, no, I honestly do not care what Californians decide for themselves. But l just think we should all watch Gov. Brown very closely, because once he turns around California with this incredibly novel idea, it will completely validate the new policy we're getting at the federal level. After all, he has successful former governors like Jennifer Granholm out there in Berkley to provide him with counsel. It is absolutely guaranteed to work.

  6. #6
    Lousluggage's Avatar
    Lousluggage is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Cleveland Circle
    Posts
    12,601

    Default

    I can see it working if all sides are serious about tackling budget problems, but it's not something that will be solved overnight. From what I understand, a big part of California's problem is a combination of bills that limit taxation with those that require it to pay for a number of things... but I don't want to say more as I'm about as far away from CA as I can be geographically and still be in the US, so I don't know the exact details.

    If CA does manage to turn things around, that could be an important lesson for other states that are in trouble (NY, for one), but other than that the voters there have made their choice and that's their business, not mine.
    This spot, and a place in my heart, is reserved for TC.

  7. #7
    mtutiger's Avatar
    mtutiger is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Fort Worth, TX
    Posts
    8,557

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stanpapi View Post
    I cannot claim to have studied this in any great detail, because, no, I honestly do not care what Californians decide for themselves.
    Good... I just wanted to get this on the record. Having lived in California for a period of time and based off of your analysis, it seems to me like you don't know nor should care what the voters should think.

    If anything, based off of the talking points from Rush Balls you got today (yes, I listened to all three hours today, you probably did too), you should be thrilled that the voters of California got to exercise their rights as a state to decide its own destiny (ie. states right).

    Quote Originally Posted by stanpapi View Post
    I cannot claim to have studied this in any great detail, because, no, I honestly do not care what Californians decide for themselves. But l just think we should all watch Gov. Brown very closely, because once he turns around California with this incredibly novel idea, it will completely validate the new policy we're getting at the federal level.
    With your acumen at political prognistication, I think I might just head over to Intrade and throw some money down on the voters of California.
    "If you're committed enough, you can make any story work. I once convinced a woman that I was Kevin Costner and it worked... because I believed it!" - Saul Goodman
    2014 AAT: Dan Dickerson

  8. #8
    hueytaxi's Avatar
    hueytaxi is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Lakeland, Florida
    Posts
    43,593

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mtutiger View Post
    Then, with all due respect, why do you give a **** what the people of California want?
    I can't write this without sounding snarky, that is not the intent: Using your question as logic, why do you care if he gives a *** about the people of California's wants? Therefore why do I ask you a quest............................................. .....................silly message boards!
    Live your life for what it can be and not for what it was.

    MMXIV AAT: KYLE RYAN; MMXV AAT: TBD
    VT

  9. #9
    drownwithyou's Avatar
    drownwithyou is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Valencia, California
    Posts
    9,989

    Default

    I think you're kind of boring.
    2014 AAT: Guido Knudson Lakeland stats: 4.2 IP - 0.00 ERA, 0.857 WHIP, 10 K/4 BB, 2 Saves
    Twitter | Last.fm | Blog

  10. #10
    stanpapi's Avatar
    stanpapi is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,072

    Default

    Actually, I didn't listen to rush today and haven't for about a month. I avoid him at election time because he's a bit too over the top for me. He takes things a bit too far sometimes on certain issues. However, because this was such an odd election, I've been surfing the net for some of the other head scratching things that the voters approved around the country. I figured California was a good place to start for something on the left side of crazy, and I came across prop 30. I found it interesting, so I started to read. Plus I happen to think Jerry Brown is the nuttiest guy this side of Joe Biden. They don't call him moonbeam for nothing.

    One thing you should not do: Do not put me in the camp of people who believe people should not exercise their rights. You'll never, ever hear me say that. You'll never hear me say it's ok to intimidate voters. It is not, and whoever does it should be arrested and prosecuted. I simply questioned the sanity of their vote. That's a perfectly legitimate activity, particularly when you look at it and think to yourself "seriously?"

  11. #11
    stanpapi's Avatar
    stanpapi is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,072

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by drownwithyou View Post
    I think you're kind of boring.
    Then don't read.

  12. #12
    mtutiger's Avatar
    mtutiger is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Fort Worth, TX
    Posts
    8,557

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hueytaxi View Post
    I can't write this without sounding snarky, that is not the intent: Using your question as logic, why do you care if he gives a *** about the people of California's wants? Therefore why do I ask you a quest............................................. .....................silly message boards!
    I really don't care what California wants, as though having lived there previously for a time, I no longer live there.

    I just think it's hilarious that stanpapi is bashing Californians over them exercising their rights as a state to determine what their tax policy will be. I thought conservatives believed in states rights.

    FWIW, if Ballmich comes out and bashes it, I'll accept that. He lives in California.
    "If you're committed enough, you can make any story work. I once convinced a woman that I was Kevin Costner and it worked... because I believed it!" - Saul Goodman
    2014 AAT: Dan Dickerson

  13. #13
    Lousluggage's Avatar
    Lousluggage is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Cleveland Circle
    Posts
    12,601

    Default

    I'm not so sure it's crazy anyway. If they're trying to close a deficit, seems like increasing revenue would be one way to do that. I doubt they like it, if that makes you feel any better.
    This spot, and a place in my heart, is reserved for TC.

  14. #14
    Gehringer_2's Avatar
    Gehringer_2 is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Tiger country
    Posts
    26,550

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lousluggage View Post
    I can see it working if all sides are serious about tackling budget problems, but it's not something that will be solved overnight. From what I understand, a big part of California's problem is a combination of bills that limit taxation with those that require it to pay for a number of things... but I don't want to say more as I'm about as far away from CA as I can be geographically and still be in the US, so I don't know the exact details.

    If CA does manage to turn things around, that could be an important lesson for other states that are in trouble (NY, for one), but other than that the voters there have made their choice and that's their business, not mine.
    Most of my remaining immediate family is in CA so it is sort of my "state of second highest interest". I would agree with your basic reading that as the result of a public referendum system run amok, they have slowly been building a straight jacket around the state government. Brown apparently now has the super-majority that is required to actually govern there (the result of a prop much like our #5 that was rejected this year) but they really need some way to strip away all the contradictory 'props' that have passed and start over - something like a new state constitutional convention.
    'No Way To Prevent This, Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens

    2014 AAT: WXXXy AXXXXs/Ezequiell Carrera
    2013 AAT: Javier Betancourt

  15. #15
    stanpapi's Avatar
    stanpapi is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,072

    Default

    Again, please don't misconstrue what I said. I did not bash their right to do this. They can do whatever the heck they want. Free country, vote for a 100% tax if you want. I made light of the fact that they actually voted this into law. And you know what? Jerry can also tell them he won't spend anymore and they'll meet in the middle at breakeven. Knowing the history of spending out there and the fact they also elected a democratic super majority that is likely licking its chops right now, I'm sure it will work out just fine for them. All these fiscal problems will evaporate like tears running down a starlet's cheeks.

    By the way, talk about taking it up the rear. Retroactive taxes are a bit over the top....

  16. #16
    Lousluggage's Avatar
    Lousluggage is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Cleveland Circle
    Posts
    12,601

    Default

    Thanks G. I knew it was complicated, but it's good to hear from somebody who knows the details better.
    This spot, and a place in my heart, is reserved for TC.

  17. #17
    stanpapi's Avatar
    stanpapi is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,072

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lousluggage View Post
    I'm not so sure it's crazy anyway. If they're trying to close a deficit, seems like increasing revenue would be one way to do that. I doubt they like it, if that makes you feel any better.
    Yes. Absolutely correct. It is a way to do that. You are correct. If you, of course, stop spending. That's the 16 Billion dollar question, now isn't it?

  18. #18
    mtutiger's Avatar
    mtutiger is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Fort Worth, TX
    Posts
    8,557

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gehringer_2 View Post
    Most of my remaining immediate family is in CA so it is sort of my "state of second highest interest". I would agree with your basic reading that as the result of a public referendum system run amok, they have slowly been building a straight jacket around the state government. Brown apparently now has the super-majority that is required to actually govern there (the result of a prop much like our #5 that was rejected this year) but they really need some way to strip away all the contradictory 'props' that have passed and start over - something like a new state constitutional convention.
    This is absolutely the correct read... California is the only state in the nation where direct democracy (through propositions) can determine policies related to taxes and spending. Think about that... if you are a state legislator in Sacramento, how on earth can you run a state when voters simultaneously vote to decrease taxes yet increase spending election cycle after election cycle?

    That's what it comes down to... California was next to ungovernable to begin with because voters always wanted their taxes cut but never wanted to pay for additional services they wanted. From a policy standpoint, this may be a good direction for the state.
    "If you're committed enough, you can make any story work. I once convinced a woman that I was Kevin Costner and it worked... because I believed it!" - Saul Goodman
    2014 AAT: Dan Dickerson

  19. #19
    chasfh's Avatar
    chasfh is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    60647
    Posts
    23,906

  20. #20
    pfife's Avatar
    pfife is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Philaware Pragicago
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stanpapi View Post
    Yes. Absolutely correct. It is a way to do that. You are correct. If you, of course, stop spending. That's the 16 Billion dollar question, now isn't it?
    LOL you don't have to stop spending. You have to spend less than you bring in.

    Of course....

  21. #21
    RedRamage's Avatar
    RedRamage is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    GR, MI
    Posts
    20,685

    Default

    I always find retro-active stuff unsettling. It's changing the rules halfway through the game and that doesn't strike me as fair.

    I don't live in CA, so I guess it really doesn't matter. And I don't care if they want to raise taxes super high... that's their business.

    But I just dislike retro-active. For instance, let's say that Michigan decides to hike taxes 40% next year. I can objectively look at that and vote with my feet if I want to. If the increase in taxes is more of a burden than moving somewhere else, I can make arrangements and do that. But if in November they decide they are going to change the tax rate going back 10 months... it's too late for me to do anything about it. I can't adjust anything... not my earnings, investments, living area... I spent 10 months doing things under the current rules that made the most sense for me and my family... everything from savings, vacation plans, charity giving, housing thoughts, etc. etc. etc. And now, quite possibly, you're going to tell me that I planned wrong because now the rules are different? That isn't fair to me. It's not acceptable, and yet I can't do a thing about it!

  22. #22
    Melody's Avatar
    Melody is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    13,274

    Default

    I agree with you, RedRamage. I suspect, though, that most voters who approved this did so with the belief that it wasn't going to impact them personally.

  23. #23
    ballmich is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Valencia, CA
    Posts
    15,733

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lousluggage View Post
    It sounds like the voters approved it... sounds like they're expecting changes in spending.

    Do you live in CA? I know that there are posters on MTS who live there, who will be affected, I'd be interested in hearing their thoughts.
    It's a disaster and an economy killer. It should be good for Texas though, as this is going to push more employers out of the state. And productive employees will start to be happy to follow, if they can sell their homes.

    I think we might beat Illinois to bankruptcy now. My bankruptcy prediction for Los Angeles in 2014 is looking pretty good right about now.
    Manus haec inimica tyrannis ense petit placidam sub libertate quietem.

  24. #24
    ballmich is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Valencia, CA
    Posts
    15,733

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RedRamage View Post
    I don't live in CA, so I guess it really doesn't matter. And I don't care if they want to raise taxes super high... that's their business.
    It actually does matter, even if it isn't a direct cause/reaction to what is going on in Michigan.

    First, California represent a significant portion of the US's GDP. And the tax increases are terrible for our economy. That impacts the entire country.

    Second, this is going to drive California into bankruptcy even faster than we were going. When we get a federal bailout on the backs of responsible states and citizens, that affects you in Michigan. Money will be printed, and your dollars will be worth less.

    When you have a common currency but separate fiscal policies (think of Europe) it is a set-up for disaster during times of disstress.
    Manus haec inimica tyrannis ense petit placidam sub libertate quietem.

  25. #25
    stanpapi's Avatar
    stanpapi is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,072

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pfife View Post
    LOL you don't have to stop spending. You have to spend less than you bring in.

    Of course....
    You see, I figured that it was just implied. But it's encouraging that we have it on record that a liberal thinks you should spend less than you take in.

    Considering they are $16B in the hole already, I'd say any California governor or legislature's promise is as good as that of a used car salesman. In a plaid jacket. But you know, we should all trust Jerry on this one. It's not like a democratic legislature with carte blanche has never run rough shot before. But let's be positive here. Give him a chance.

  26. #26
    stanpapi's Avatar
    stanpapi is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,072

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ballmich View Post
    It actually does matter, even if it isn't a direct cause/reaction to what is going on in Michigan.

    First, California represent a significant portion of the US's GDP. And the tax increases are terrible for our economy. That impacts the entire country.

    Second, this is going to drive California into bankruptcy even faster than we were going. When we get a federal bailout on the backs of responsible states and citizens, that affects you in Michigan. Money will be printed, and your dollars will be worth less.

    When you have a common currency but separate fiscal policies (think of Europe) it is a set-up for disaster during times of disstress.
    I simply think we should let them form their own country. Then we can make a deal with them: The rest of us will agree to cut spending, reduce taxes and make regulation less onerous on business. And they have, of course, gone on record with what they think is the best approach to reinvigorate an economy and balance a budget.And then we'll pick a time period (say 4 years or so) and draft up a scorecard to see which one of us, the United (49) States of America, or the new nation of California, has a better economy and a healthier bottom line. That's something I would put money on. Alot.

  27. #27
    drownwithyou's Avatar
    drownwithyou is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Valencia, California
    Posts
    9,989

    Default

    Would that reduce traffic on the 405?
    2014 AAT: Guido Knudson Lakeland stats: 4.2 IP - 0.00 ERA, 0.857 WHIP, 10 K/4 BB, 2 Saves
    Twitter | Last.fm | Blog

  28. #28
    pfife's Avatar
    pfife is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Philaware Pragicago
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stanpapi View Post
    You see, I figured that it was just implied. But it's encouraging that we have it on record that a liberal thinks you should spend less than you take in.
    Actually, its not at all implied. In fact, it's been the GOP position that you only cut, not increase revenues. Only yesterday, after they got curbstomped, did they admit what you argue was "just implied".

  29. #29
    ballmich is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Valencia, CA
    Posts
    15,733

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by drownwithyou View Post
    Would that reduce traffic on the 405?
    Dude, it already is down, as compared to 2007.
    Manus haec inimica tyrannis ense petit placidam sub libertate quietem.

  30. #30
    mtutiger's Avatar
    mtutiger is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Fort Worth, TX
    Posts
    8,557

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stanpapi View Post
    I simply think we should let them form their own country. Then we can make a deal with them: The rest of us will agree to cut spending, reduce taxes and make regulation less onerous on business. And they have, of course, gone on record with what they think is the best approach to reinvigorate an economy and balance a budget.And then we'll pick a time period (say 4 years or so) and draft up a scorecard to see which one of us, the United (49) States of America, or the new nation of California, has a better economy and a healthier bottom line. That's something I would put money on. Alot.
    LMAO
    "If you're committed enough, you can make any story work. I once convinced a woman that I was Kevin Costner and it worked... because I believed it!" - Saul Goodman
    2014 AAT: Dan Dickerson

  31. #31
    drownwithyou's Avatar
    drownwithyou is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Valencia, California
    Posts
    9,989

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ballmich View Post
    Dude, it already is down, as compared to 2007.
    I can agree with that, but I still can't stand that freeway!
    2014 AAT: Guido Knudson Lakeland stats: 4.2 IP - 0.00 ERA, 0.857 WHIP, 10 K/4 BB, 2 Saves
    Twitter | Last.fm | Blog

  32. #32
    stanpapi's Avatar
    stanpapi is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,072

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pfife View Post
    Actually, its not at all implied. In fact, it's been the GOP position that you only cut, not increase revenues. Only yesterday, after they got curbstomped, did they admit what you argue was "just implied".
    You can of course parse the argument however you like and completely ignore the obvious- cutting both taxes and spending. That capitalism works just fine the way it's intended. And that massive debt and massive tax burdens are not so good. But I think it's time to stop the bickering. I'm turning over a new leaf. As this guy, Barry Obama tells me, elections have consequences. So this is something we should find common ground on and embrace. I absolutely and seriously view this as a terrific opportunity. We now have a good sized test tube out there on the coast to tell us exactly how the policy experiment will turn out. A state full of spending liberals, complete party control, and lots of new tax revenue. So we'll just see how it goes for them. This article makes it sound like it's off to a rollicking good start with respect to businesses and jobs. I'm sure the guy at the end of this article is just a rebel, though. In fact, I think his business plan is completely screwed up. If you are a business, why wouldn't you be absolutely salivating to get into a state that gives you the opportunity to pay 60% of your bottom line to various government treasuries? No, the guy at the end of this article, he needs to go back to business school. This is not how we do it anymore.

    Business buzz about election, Proposition 30 - Sacramento Business Journal

  33. #33
    Blue Square Thing's Avatar
    Blue Square Thing is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Someplace else
    Posts
    11,038

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stanpapi View Post
    I simply think we should let them form their own country. Then we can make a deal with them: The rest of us will agree to cut spending, reduce taxes and make regulation less onerous on business. And they have, of course, gone on record with what they think is the best approach to reinvigorate an economy and balance a budget.And then we'll pick a time period (say 4 years or so) and draft up a scorecard to see which one of us, the United (49) States of America, or the new nation of California, has a better economy and a healthier bottom line. That's something I would put money on. Alot.
    What's the population of California? 38 million or so?

    Are you seriously suggesting that it would be impossible for a country with that sort of population and with an economy that's pretty darned big by itself as well as having an important global presence in entertainment, high tech and defence industries to not do quite well in terms, say, of income per capita?

    There's an argument to be made that this would be disastrous economically. But, to be honest, I'm not sure that disaster would be California's problem.

  34. #34
    stanpapi's Avatar
    stanpapi is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,072

    Default

    You're absolutely right. An economy with a population like that could do fine on its own- with sound fiscal policy. And I'm not trying to argue, this is certainly A fiscal policy. We have a great opportunity here, see it for what it is. We can just sit back and watch their economy and verify that it worked exactly the way they say it will.

    Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go fill out my California business license right now....

  35. #35
    Blue Square Thing's Avatar
    Blue Square Thing is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Someplace else
    Posts
    11,038

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stanpapi View Post
    You're absolutely right. An economy with a population like that could do fine on its own- with sound fiscal policy. And I'm not trying to argue, this is certainly A fiscal policy. We have a great opportunity here, see it for what it is. We can just sit back and watch their economy and verify that it worked exactly the way they say it will.

    Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go fill out my California business license right now....
    Oh, there are places in the world without the economic advantages that California has which have high tax rates, high spending and seem to manage to produce a relatively high standard of living without bankrupting themselves.

    In itself, high taxation for the richest within society isn't, by itself, a necessarily poor economic model, especially if it's associated with quality of life advantages and a social welfare system which people see as advantageous. Sometimes, it seems, that countries with populations and industrial bases inferior to those of California seem to do really quite well, maintain their investing population and are economically sound despite having high taxation rates.

    Don't dismiss California quite so quickly. I imagine you need them rather more than they need you in the 21st Century in many ways.

  36. #36
    stanpapi's Avatar
    stanpapi is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,072

    Default

    I like that deal an awful lot. I will absolutely agree that California does not need the rest of us. In fact, let's all agree right now that California doesn't need us- let's even get it in writing. They absolutely have the right approach. But what that means, of course, is if for some strange reason, they **** the bed and come looking for a taxpayer funded bailout, we can look at them and say "no". Because, you know, they didn't need us. Let's sign that deal right now before they change their mind.

    As for their retroactive tax- the good news is, they aren't going to assess penalty on you just because you weren't smart enough to know that you'd be dumb enough to vote to raise taxes on yourself in the future on your past income. So you can go ahead and dump the excess amount you now owe into the California treasury without penalty on April 15th of 2013. How very civil of them.

  37. #37
    Blue Square Thing's Avatar
    Blue Square Thing is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Someplace else
    Posts
    11,038

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stanpapi View Post
    I like that deal an awful lot. I will absolutely agree that California does not need the rest of us. In fact, let's all agree right now that California doesn't need us- let's even get it in writing...
    You like that losing California's economy takes the rest of the US economy and makes it less relevant and less powerful?

    Blimey - deluxe with extra cheese thinking really innit? It's tough enough anyway; lose all that high tech stuff, lose the defence establishment, lose the innovation mass associated with both of those and you're up the creek in lots of ways.

  38. #38
    Lousluggage's Avatar
    Lousluggage is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Cleveland Circle
    Posts
    12,601

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ballmich View Post
    It's a disaster and an economy killer. It should be good for Texas though, as this is going to push more employers out of the state. And productive employees will start to be happy to follow, if they can sell their homes.

    I think we might beat Illinois to bankruptcy now. My bankruptcy prediction for Los Angeles in 2014 is looking pretty good right about now.
    Thanks.

    What, if anything do you think can be done? Is there a way for CA to get out of some of the obligations put in by the referendum system, or a way to eventually replace that system?
    This spot, and a place in my heart, is reserved for TC.

  39. #39
    mtutiger's Avatar
    mtutiger is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Fort Worth, TX
    Posts
    8,557

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blue Square Thing View Post
    You like that losing California's economy takes the rest of the US economy and makes it less relevant and less powerful?
    This... I'm pretty sure stanpapi doesn't understand what the implications of what sending the world's eight largest economy packing would be.
    "If you're committed enough, you can make any story work. I once convinced a woman that I was Kevin Costner and it worked... because I believed it!" - Saul Goodman
    2014 AAT: Dan Dickerson

  40. #40
    stanpapi's Avatar
    stanpapi is offline MotownSports Fan
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,072

    Default

    It would appear that some among us need a special signal when sarcastic humor is being employed. I will try to remember to do that next time I employ such a sneaky technique. Perhaps I can designate one of the smiley icons so it is more clear to folks. I will give it some thought and see what I can come up with.

    I do not want to send them packing. Mine was a hypothetical offer, to employ a policy that is fiscally sound against the one Jerry Brown has proposed. And then we can see who comes out on top. I am certainly not in favor of sending California on their own and losing such a large economy. However, to be clear- I am not in favor of bailing them out with taxpayer dollars. Absolutely not. But by employing such a dissasterous policy, this high end economy that all of you are so adamant I wanted to flush away will do that just fine on their own.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-26-2012, 06:20 PM
  2. The McCain Tax increase...
    By CMRivdog in forum Political Discussions
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 09-13-2008, 02:01 AM
  3. Wages increase....
    By belcherboy in forum Political Discussions
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 01-04-2005, 05:19 PM
  4. Medicare Increase
    By baseballbruce30 in forum Political Discussions
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-14-2004, 01:19 PM
  5. California Senate votes to ban Pate.
    By DetroitFolly in forum MotownSports Bar and Grill
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 04-28-2004, 06:15 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •