|
|
Post by NOTTHOR on Feb 17, 2009 14:18:11 GMT -6
They look to be pretty damn screwed out there. With the nation's highest income tax percentage, I thought California would have been insulated from the disastrous effect of the Bush tax cuts, but I guess not. Maybe if they raise them another 5% or so, they will be insulated.
Oh wait, Arnold is allegedly a Republican. It must be the Republicans who have screwed California. Yep, that's it. Reagan and Arnold. Damn GOP actors.
|
|
|
|
Post by thunderhawk on Feb 17, 2009 14:23:40 GMT -6
They have all kinds of high taxation there, including personal property. Which is whack.
Their property tax system is archaic, if I recall correctly, which is contributing to the problem.
It's amazing that a state with that much economic activity can be that far in the tank.
|
|
|
|
Post by NOTTHOR on Feb 17, 2009 14:48:26 GMT -6
Yeah, their property tax system is crazy. The maximum amount by which property taxes can increase is 2% per year, no matter how much the property appreciates, then it resets only upon a transfer. It's a massive shift of the tax burden from old to young.
|
|
|
|
Post by iammrhawkeyes on Feb 17, 2009 14:58:27 GMT -6
Yeah, their property tax system is crazy. The maximum amount by which property taxes can increase is 2% per year, no matter how much the property appreciates, then it resets only upon a transfer. It's a massive shift of the tax burden from old to young. The funny thing is that the opposite of what you said(in italics) was a major part of the reasoning for passing prop 13 in 1978. I don't believe that this issue is behind our current problems though. |
|
|
|
Post by NOTTHOR on Feb 17, 2009 15:03:02 GMT -6
Yeah, their property tax system is crazy. The maximum amount by which property taxes can increase is 2% per year, no matter how much the property appreciates, then it resets only upon a transfer. It's a massive shift of the tax burden from old to young. The funny thing is that the opposite of what you said(in bold) was a major part of the reasoning for passing prop 13 in 1978. I don't believe that this issue is behind our current problems though. You're right, it's only a part of it. Giant spending programs and rich union benefits are what have really sunk CA's budget. |
|
|
|
Post by lpcalihawk on Feb 17, 2009 15:15:08 GMT -6
The vestment schedule for state workers is helping bankrupt the system. I walked away with quite a bit of money from my retirement account that the state matched only after 2 years of working there.
|
|
|
|
Post by iammrhawkeyes on Feb 18, 2009 0:32:10 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by Chuck Storm on Feb 18, 2009 9:54:55 GMT -6
Those who would be released would be very low risk, according to Don Specter, director of the Prison Law Office, a group that provides free legal services to California prisoners. He said the ruling would affect those in jail for three or four months because of parole violations, those getting early release dates, and those who might qualify for early release for taking part in rehabilitation programs. Well that's reassuring. I was worried they were going to let a bunch of people out that the court system had decided needed to be in prison based on a full review of their circumstances, the crimes they committed and their danger to society. If it's just parole violations (that's just a technicality, right? there's no substantive reason to jail people for parole violations), that's not a big deal. |
|
|
|
Post by iammrhawkeyes on Feb 18, 2009 12:07:25 GMT -6
It's not just parole violators, Chaz. I wonder what type of crimes the ones scheduled for early release or the ones that might qualify for early release committed? We need a few more details. It's still pretty discouraging.
|
|
|
|
Post by NOTTHOR on Feb 18, 2009 12:24:44 GMT -6
Did the "stimulus package" have some cash for building prisons or would that have undermined the liberals' soft on crime image?
|
|
|
|
Post by lpcalihawk on Feb 18, 2009 15:15:31 GMT -6
Did the "stimulus package" have some cash for building prisons or would that have undermined the liberals' soft on crime image? Cash for building rehab centers for non-violent drug offenders would have made more sense. |
|
|
|
Post by Iowafan1 on Feb 20, 2009 2:22:19 GMT -6
The funny thing is that the opposite of what you said(in bold) was a major part of the reasoning for passing prop 13 in 1978. I don't believe that this issue is behind our current problems though. You're right, it's only a part of it. Giant spending programs and rich union benefits are what have really sunk CA's budget. Both of you are dead on with this. We always hear that liberals "love the kids" and, of course, conservatives "hate the kids". All through these claims, we have liberals, both in the state and federal levels, racking up new spending bills left and right. California has been a basket case for decades. It is the reason why I left California and millions of others are leaving. The damn state is turning in to a third world country. How is that possible with the overwhelming success of individuals and businesses there?.......GOVERNMENT penalizing those successful individuals and businesses is the obvious answer. California is a microcosm of what the liberals would love the entire country to be. |
|
|
|
Post by Iowafan1 on Feb 20, 2009 2:29:26 GMT -6
Did the "stimulus package" have some cash for building prisons or would that have undermined the liberals' soft on crime image? Cash for building rehab centers for non-violent drug offenders would have made more sense. Nope.....the better answer would be to grab some of these retired U.S. Navy ships, pack as many prisoners (with fishing poles) on them as possible and anchor them 50 miles offshore (with security vessels surrounding) and let them fish for their keep. Anyone who can swim to land is a free man. Note: give all prisoners large knives. |
|
|
|
Post by iammrhawkeyes on Feb 21, 2009 0:34:07 GMT -6
Cash for building rehab centers for non-violent drug offenders would have made more sense. Nope.....the better answer would be to grab some of these retired U.S. Navy ships, pack as many prisoners (with fishing poles) on them as possible and anchor them 50 miles offshore (with security vessels surrounding) and let them fish for their keep. Anyone who can swim to land is a free man. Note: give all prisoners large knives. Great idea but minus the weed tokers. Someone has to stimulate the munchies industry. Note: No fishing poles. |
|
|
|
Post by iammrhawkeyes on Feb 21, 2009 0:40:42 GMT -6
Yes!!! Starting to get insulated out here. A sweet new deal: higher taxes! www.nytimes.com/2009/02/20/us/20california.htmlThey're cutting spending? I thought we needed some stimulatin' too. LOS ANGELES — Take-home pay for Californians is about to shrink. Jeans, hammers, burgers and fries will cost more. Public school children will make do with old textbooks and find more classmates sitting next to them. Parents will receive fewer tax benefits, and state university students will pay 9 percent more in tuition...
Left on the cutting-room floor was a proposed 12-cent increase in the gasoline tax; lawmakers filled the gap instead with $600 million in cuts and an infusion of federal stimulus money. |
|
|
|
Post by lpcalihawk on Feb 21, 2009 21:49:46 GMT -6
Cash for building rehab centers for non-violent drug offenders would have made more sense. Nope.....the better answer would be to grab some of these retired U.S. Navy ships, pack as many prisoners (with fishing poles) on them as possible and anchor them 50 miles offshore (with security vessels surrounding) and let them fish for their keep. Anyone who can swim to land is a free man. Note: give all prisoners large knives. Why don't we have public hangings and stonings, IaGoon? 1830 called, you are wanted back. |
|
|
|
Post by Norm "racerhawk" Parker on Feb 22, 2009 20:08:05 GMT -6
Cash for building rehab centers for non-violent drug offenders would have made more sense. Nope.....the better answer would be to grab some of these retired U.S. Navy ships, pack as many prisoners (with fishing poles) on them as possible and anchor them 50 miles offshore (with security vessels surrounding) and let them fish for their keep. Anyone who can swim to land is a free man. Note: give all prisoners large knives. I like this idea. Additionally, you could have the whole thing on pay per view as an additional source of revenue! |
|
|
|
Post by Iowafan1 on Feb 24, 2009 6:46:11 GMT -6
www.nvr.navy.mil/Nope.....the better answer would be to grab some of these retired U.S. Navy ships, pack as many prisoners (with fishing poles) on them as possible and anchor them 50 miles offshore (with security vessels surrounding) and let them fish for their keep. Anyone who can swim to land is a free man. Note: give all prisoners large knives. I like this idea. Additionally, you could have the whole thing on pay per view as an additional source of revenue! See what happens when great minds get together? Think they will bring down our tax burden?....or just tax us more because of the added revenue? |
|
|
|
Post by thunderhawk on Feb 24, 2009 10:39:46 GMT -6
Did the "stimulus package" have some cash for building prisons or would that have undermined the liberals' soft on crime image? The same soft on crime liberals who put 100K more cops on the streets? Or the fucking idiot kkkonservatives who think that locking up happy grass users doesn't contribute to violent offenders being released early. |
|
