At least Prop. 30 is passing

|
(24)

I suspected that when all the votes were in, Prop. 30 might squeak through, and right now it looks like it wll. That's really good news, because I don't know what we'd be doing tomorrow if the results were different. Statewide it's not all bad -- Prop. 32 is toast, Prop. 39 has won and I think ol' Jerry B pulled it out on Prop. 30, which is now ahewad 52-48.

Comments

Yes, this is good news.

The Millionaire-Munger Family had its food fight. It (and shill Nathan Ballard) almost turned over the apple cart, but the people made the right choice.

California ranks 47th in education spending (per pupil), between Mississippi (48) and Arkansas (46). We have to stop acting like a southern-fried cracker state and start funding public education. This is a good step.

Posted by Troll the XIV on Nov. 07, 2012 @ 8:02 am

agreed, Troll the XIV.

Posted by Daniele E. on Nov. 07, 2012 @ 8:11 am

The structural deficit problem hasn't been solved, only covered up. We can't raise sales tax every year and the pensions timebomb is killing us. If 30 loses, Brown would have to make the tough but necessary decisions that can only be deferred, not solved, through ever higher taxes on working people.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 07, 2012 @ 8:47 am

You got be kidding. Increasing taxes good? This will send more rich folks out of the state Only the parasites will remain. The best solution was to just pay the government employees less.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 07, 2012 @ 9:03 am

increase my online purchases, and my big ticket items on my regular visits to Oregon.

While anyone self-employed will incorporate in Nevada which several people I know already do.

Google "Laffer Curve".

Posted by Guest on Nov. 07, 2012 @ 12:47 pm

You drive to Oregon to buy a washer and dryer?

Posted by Troll II on Nov. 07, 2012 @ 1:22 pm

Or computers, jewellery, etc.

Or just order online of course.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 07, 2012 @ 1:54 pm

Because bringing a car into CA within a year of purchase means you pay sales tax on that purchase - and OR reports sales of out-of-state buyers too.

I think you're full of shit. Or just stupid. Driving to Oregon to save $100 on the purchase of a new MacBook is ridiculous - the gas to get there and back costs at least $150 alone.

Posted by Troll II on Nov. 07, 2012 @ 2:25 pm

And if you drive up to Oregon regularly anyway, as I do, it makes sense to do major shops at the malls in Medford, Oregon, and save 10% or so.

Or shop online. Amazon caved on the sales tax but many online vendors still charge no sales tax.

Many ways to skin a cat.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 08, 2012 @ 7:15 am

The lower you cut tax rates, the higher tax revenues become.

So let's lower tax rates to 0%, then tax revenues will skyrocket.

Then we can all climb on our unicorns, fly off into the sunset, and live happily ever after.

Posted by Troll the XIV on Nov. 07, 2012 @ 1:46 pm

Raise taxes beyond that and, bingo, receipts decline because people practice more tax evasion and avoidance, or simply work less hard, or move to Nevada etc etc

Posted by Guest on Nov. 07, 2012 @ 1:56 pm

Taxes are not created equal. Some taxes are far better to adminsiter than others because they are much easier to collect and harder to evade. Some taxes are much fairer than others since they tax the wealthy more than the poor.

Something has happened to this website with a bunch of people following the simplistic claptrap of Ronald Reagan and spewing nonsense pablam here and calling it analysis.

We can easily REDUCE taxes on working people by repealing regressive payroll taxes and regressive sales taxes, while increasing taxes by an equal amount on the wealthiest bondholders, and wealthy landlords, and the small group of people who collect the majority of the world's dividends and capital gain payments.

If the current CA legislature ends up with 2/3 Dems in both Assembly and Senate they can change the tax system to REDUCE taxes on working people, while increasing taxes on landlords and the wealthy owners of dividend, interest, and capital gain income. But good luck getting the Democrats to make any significant changes. The Democrats are owned by the big landlords and big tech businesses located in SF and Silicon Valley who ship jobs out of the state while helping to reduce business taxes at the same time. And the public unions could care less about tax policy either, as witnessed by their strong support to increase the regressive sales tax again under Prop 30.

If liberals and progressives were ever looking for an accomodating legislature to finally get a bunch of positive legislation considered and passed, they've going to get their wish come January. But I suspect chatboards like this will continue to attract the same whiners and losers who would rather spew nonsense than organize with their neighbors to formulate positive alternatives that can be enacted by the CA legislature.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 08, 2012 @ 9:37 am

It will take significant degrees of organizing to make a difference with the legislators in Sacramento.

The Democrat Party has an array of operations whose charge is to insulate the Democrat Party from such demands for change.

I am not sure that we can get there from here.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 08, 2012 @ 9:49 am

You can't balance the deficit or the budget by taking only a few people highly. That's been known for decades.

So sales tax and payroll taxes are effective and efficient, because everyone pays something, and so nobody pays too much.

The Democrats won't do what you suggest because they know they would lose in the next election if they did. The GOP message on that would be compelling.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 08, 2012 @ 4:30 pm

The very ignorant Guest is probably paying way more tax than needed based on their terribly misinformed statements. Guest better set aside a bunch of money for penalties and interest if they're cheating the tax authorities out of money. Both the US gov (IRS) and state Gov (FTB) are brutal on tax cheats.

For anyone interested in more accurate information about business incorporation (and saving yourself potential tax penalties): Where a company incorporates (eg, Delaware, Panama, Nevada, CA) has NO IMPACT on the amount of US or state tax it owes. What's important is, WHERE DOES A COMPANY OPERATE, not where it's incorporated. If they conduct business in CA or the US or any other state, in almost every situation, they will be liable for state taxes there.

Re sales tax savings: Driving from the Bay Area to Medford is about 375 miles, 750 round trip. If a car gets 25 mpg, total gas cost is $120 (30 gallons X $4). If you buy $1,000 worth of TAXABLE stuff, the sales tax savings is about $85. But since most retail prices tend to be higher in Oregon than the Bay Area because there is a lot less store competition up there, it's doubtful you'll get the full $85 savings. Oh, and the motel bill and food and TIME, etc.

More simply, Guest has no idea what they're talking about and is giving terrible financial advice to people. And even more egregious, they're despoiling the good names of Guests everywhere.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 08, 2012 @ 9:09 am

That's a myth called the Millionaire Migration Myth - recent Stanford study indicates that taxes (increase or decrease) are not the reason for living in or leaving a state. Especially in California cuz it's so darn nice here.

http://news.stanford.edu/news/2012/november/millionaire-migration-myth-1...

Posted by CCSF Student & SF Citizen on Nov. 07, 2012 @ 1:32 pm

I know several people who set up their business in Reno or Vegas, and then arrange to get paid there.

There's always a way.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 07, 2012 @ 1:57 pm

"That's a myth called the Millionaire Migration Myth"

LOL. Affluent people have, in fact, been leaving the state for years, while less affluent people move in to replace them. This trend is now only going to accelerate.

Why do you think California has a third of the country's welfare recipients?

Posted by Demented, Yet Terribly, Terribly Persistent on Nov. 08, 2012 @ 9:48 am

First, I'm not sure where you got the one-third figure, but California has more welfare recipients because California has more people than any other state.

Posted by Hortencia on Nov. 08, 2012 @ 10:06 am

And California pays in way, way, way more in federal taxes than we get back in federal spending which means that we as coastal liberal progressive elites subsidize the "self sufficient" "up by their bootstraps" southern fried libertarians and Republicans, the real tax takers in this system.

The only "Red state" that pays in more than it gets back is Texas, and that only $1.05:$1.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 08, 2012 @ 10:18 am

Why do you think that the titans of the 21st century economy: Apple, Google, PayPal, eBay, Genentech, Twitter, Intel, Cisco and Facebook are located here in California?

Could it be the terrible business climate, the high tax structure or the "parasites" leeching off of the government?

Posted by Guest on Nov. 08, 2012 @ 10:08 am

because their income is given as deferred capital gains or as options. Or they are paid thru companies outside CA or via interest-free loans. Lots of ways of skinning that cat.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 08, 2012 @ 4:32 pm

Compared to the relatively large salaries paid to tens of thousands of California employees at Apple, Facebook, Google, Intel, and hundreds of other CA technology companies, the deferred comp and options paid to a few top executives is relatively small. Anyone can research the state tax numbers - the vast majority of state (and federal) income tax is paid by very high income knnowledge workers who are mostly at the high-technology companies, and the professional lawyers and accountants who service these companies. None of their compensation is deferred or involves "interest-free loans."

Even the thousands of employees who get stock options and make a nice bundle when a company goes public almost always do "same-day sales" when the options are exercised, resulting in immediate taxation at ORDINARY income tax rates, not capital gain tax rates. This is partly good investment planning - diversifying assets, especially when employees work at the same place where the stock is issued - but also because most employees can't afford the tax hit when options are exercised so they need to sell the stock to pay the tax bill.

Between people who deliberately disseminate false inforamtion on this chatboard to make the progressive community look stupid, and the few incessent, angry posters who call themselves progressives but obviously hate the progressive movement or they would control their anger and bitterness better when posting here, it may be a good thing the city has changed so much over the past 15 years that the D5 seat is history and the pro-landlord, pro-development policies of the mayor, port and real estate interests are firmly in control of the city. Counting to 6 is likely to become increasingly difficult for the "progressive community." And counting to 8 is likely near impossible.

San Franciso was an interesting place to live post urban flight after the 1960's when housing prices and rents plummented, but current extremely high rents and high real estate prices have taken the bloom off the rose. Even with Prop C passing and its emphasis on non-profit landlord housing, I don't see the demographics changing much at all. The city is now like Paris or Manhattan or London or Tokyo - only the uber rich need apply to live there, along with a few percentage of very low income folks who can score a subsidized affordable apartment.

If the SFBG wants to be a place where organizing and sharing ideas is possible, then mandatory chatboard registration is needed. One, it will mostly end the false posts like the one I'm responding to now - fools, idiots and liers would be quickly identified and shamed from posting in the future - and two, it should allow us to block people like lilli and marcos and troll II and dnative and matlock who add nothing but a lot of snark, misinformation and nonsense because they are profoundly lonely and bitter.

A chatboard that attracts well-meaning posters like Greg and Danielle and others will attract other balanced and informed posters, and some progress on thoughts and ideas might be possible. Otherwise this chatboard is mainly a cesspool of bad information and a bunch of angry, bitter posters.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 08, 2012 @ 6:00 pm

That false post was in response to my substantive post against the idea that high tax (CA is not high tax) states are bad for business, from work where my firefox on debian resists holding cookies so I'm guest often.

If you are who I think you are, you're one of the bitterest loneliest people in Sacramento. You bolted when you were evicted, but we managed to hang on and now we've got to live here with this gaggle of fools getting paid while the ship goes down and the City I moved to is evaporating before my eyes

They had their chance, its been a decade now, how much longer would we need to wait for them to make it finally work doing it their way?

Posted by marcos on Nov. 08, 2012 @ 6:19 pm

Related articles

  • Sorting out a strange election

    What the Nov. 6 results mean -- and don't mean

  • District surprises

    Big-money efforts could unseat Olague -- but not Mar

  • Is the tax revolt over?