| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Jerry Brown's Budget Holds California Hostage | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Jul 1 2012, 12:15 AM (392 Views) | |
| Berton | Jul 1 2012, 12:15 AM Post #1 |
Thunder Fan
  ![]](http://z3.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)
|
This thread is for discussion only. Please do not post in this thread any name calling, insults, or taunts. Please stick with the subject of California and its budget problems. and do not divert from or otherwise disrupt this thread as that is not what Fr. Mike wants, at least according to what Pat has posted. ============================== Jerry Brown's Budget Holds California Hostage Taxes And Spending: Jerry Brown gets his budget, and voters get a ransom note — send more money or the schools get it. The public needs to stiffen its spine and say no, for the health of the state. The term "California state budget" has become a byword for gimmickry of all kinds: stealth borrowing, raids on local governments, pie-in-the-sky projections — you name it. The newest in this long-running series was made final last Wednesday, and in one way it's a departure. It's relatively free of trickery, leaning this time on intimidation to get the job done. That job is to defend the economic interests of the state's dominant political pressure group, the people who work for government. The method, this time around, is to offer voters a choice: Either they approve an increase in income and sales taxes this November, or the services that they value most will be cut severely. Schools would take the brunt of the pain. If the tax hike pushed by Gov. Brown and his public-sector union allies fails, K-12 funding from the state general fund would be cut by just under $5.4 billion. That represents about 10% lopped off school district budgets. The state would allow them to cut up to 15 days of instruction from each of the coming two school years, and they may have no choice but to take that option. This would be an irretrievable loss of instruction time for students. But if the tax increase passes, schools would get a $2.9 billion raise. Sounds like an offer the voters can't refuse, doesn't it? But refuse it they must. Otherwise, they'll just enable the state to perpetuate the taxing and spending policies that have landed it in its current fiscal mess. California has been digging this hole for years. Brown is asking voters to dig deeper. It's time for them to stiffen their spines and ask for something different — like spending limits and serious pension reform. The state of California's economy makes the tax proposal especially dangerous, and not just because the economy has been struggling. In fact, California has lately been showing signs of recovery. It added 33,900 jobs in May, nearly half the total for the whole country. Its jobless rate of 10.8% is still above the national average, but the gap is narrowing. This trend, if it continues, may make the draconian cuts in Brown's budget (minus the tax increase) unnecessary. It also could lead to another boom-and-bust cycle in the state's revenues if the new taxes are approved. Brown wants to raise income taxes from a top rate of 10.3% to 13.3%, the highest in the U.S., as well as adding a quarter-cent to the state sales tax. Revenue from the sales tax may be fairly predictable, but that's not the case with the income tax. California levies the tax not only on ordinary income but on capital gains as well. Revenue is highly volatile as a result, and the Legislature tends to ratchet up spending at the peaks. With the state evidently on the upswing again, Brown's tax hike could well produce another revenue bubble, with the usual sickening drop to follow. In essence, passage of the new budget is the starting point for a stare-down between Brown and the voters. If the voters blink, the political status quo stands. That fact alone should be enough to keep their eyes wide open. Link |
 |
 
|
| Jim Miller | Jul 1 2012, 12:18 AM Post #2 |
|
Survived the cleansing...so far.
|
I think what we have all learned from this California debacle is that we can't keep giving away more than we can afford. Too bad Washington doesn't realize that. |
|
|
|
| Corky52 | Jul 1 2012, 03:34 AM Post #3 |
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
|
As a Californian I can agree with the above. I think we should start with all the money we send to other states via the Federal government. The tax dollars earned in California should be spent in California, no more giving California money to "PO red states"! Every state tax dollar paid is one less dollar sent to the Feds, one more dollar that stays in California!!!  |
|
|
|
| Berton | Jul 1 2012, 03:36 AM Post #4 |
|
Thunder Fan
|
This thread is for discussion only. Please do not post in this thread any name calling, insults, or taunts. Please stick with the subject of California and its budget problems. and do not divert from or otherwise disrupt this thread as that is not what Fr. Mike wants, at least according to what Pat has posted. |
|
|
|
| Corky52 | Jul 1 2012, 03:46 AM Post #5 |
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
|
The super pacs here are using the lack of federal balance in the ads pushing for added taxes. "Better a dollar to Sacramento than a dollar to Washington" Very good animation of tax distribution, is being shown here, Red States look like ticks gorging on the blood of California and Californians.
|
|
|
|
| Berton | Jul 1 2012, 03:48 AM Post #6 |
|
Thunder Fan
|
As you can see Pat it does no good to ask with some people. It only works for you because of your relationship with your brother. |
|
|
|
| Jim Miller | Jul 1 2012, 03:51 AM Post #7 |
|
Survived the cleansing...so far.
|
Seems to me that if all of California feels the way Corky does they should immediately stop forwarding their money to the Feds. Blame the distribution on the Feds, not the recipient. I wonder how much California would sacrifice in Fed benefits if they were to cut their ties. Come on California do it. Got any balls? Tell the Feds to go to hell. |
|
|
|
| Corky52 | Jul 1 2012, 03:56 AM Post #8 |
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
|
Not getting the replies you want, sorry 'bout that! The raising of state taxes directly impacts the amount of Federal Taxes paid, so for us Californians it is part of both the equation and the vote you are talking about. The reality is being shown that the increases in state taxes are nulled out be a reduction in Federal taxes, hard to fight with keeping your money away from the Federal Welfare Queen States. Keep California green, spend our tax money here!
|
|
|
|
| Berton | Jul 1 2012, 03:56 AM Post #9 |
|
Thunder Fan
|
|
|
|
|
| campingken | Jul 1 2012, 04:01 AM Post #10 |
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
|
Berton, Why not post a list of acceptable, to you, responses? Corky makes a valid point. CA has been sending a larger % of it's tax money out of state than many other states. |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Fire And Ice General Discussion · Next Topic » |
4:42 PM May 23
