just one more example of what republikkon "leadership" brings..anyone wondering how the recall of CA's last Dem governor is going now?
Replacing him with a B grade republikkon actor is working out for ya, eh?
How bout some more outstanding puke "ideas"? Nothing like repuke "thinking" to find solutions....
maybe one of TLC's crack troll patrol can solve CA's puke problem? check with shit brain pete or bagel boy, they seem to think they have all the answers....
Posted by headxray at May 30, 2009 05:10 AMI read that article as Arnold basically saying, "Fine, you don't want to raise taxes - here's the consequences. We're going to make it to public services as public as possible. I've had enough of this bullshit."
Posted by idiosynchronic at May 30, 2009 06:21 AMArnold is finaly "blowing up the boxes.". That is why he was elected in 2003. He tried initiatives, tax hikes, and working with the legislature. Nothing worked. Finaly, he asked the voters if they wanted to pay more in taxes or cut programs. Voters decided that the state needs to live within its means and not raise taxes in a state that already has one of the highest tax burdens in the country.
Arnold is doing what the voters asked him to do.
Posted by Dennis at May 30, 2009 08:17 AMI wonder if they get it yet?
Posted by VaLiberal at May 30, 2009 09:42 AMVoters decided that the state needs to live within its means and not raise taxes in a state that already has one of the highest tax burdens in the country.
From my friends and Family in CA, it's the 2/3 vote holding everything up. Allowing the minority party to stop law making or even working with Democratic counter parts on compromise.
It comes down to wanting the lawmakers to do their fucking jobs. They have repeatly voted on issue after issue, time for CA lawmakers to do what they get paid for.
The AZ repuke lawmakers did shut down some state parks here. They were ridiculed so badly, that most of the parks were reopened. These state parks do generate revenue people, especially if you're a tourist state.
From my friends and Family in CA, it's the 2/3 vote holding everything up. Allowing the minority party to stop law making or even working with Democratic counter parts on compromise.
That is what is holding up the Democrats from raising taxes higher.
So they put it to a vote thinking that California, being a "progressive" state, would vote to pay their fair share in taxes for all the services the state provides.
The initiatives failed. Approx 70% voted against higher taxes.
When you talk about the 2/3rds vote "holding things up" please tell me who those legislators voting for tax hikes are representing? Because 70% of people just voted against tax hikes two weeks ago!
Posted by Italy at May 30, 2009 10:49 AMBecause 70% of people just voted against tax hikes two weeks ago!
Wrong. 70% of the 20% of the people who could be bothered enough to vote voted against the ballot measures.
Posted by snark at May 30, 2009 12:01 PM70% of the 20% of the people who could be bothered enough to vote voted against the ballot measures.
The 80% who didn't vote don't believe anything to do with taxes impacts them. California has a very progressive tax system, where the rich pay almost all of the taxes. The 20% who voted are those who pay the taxes to run the state.
So yes, the people who do pay taxes voted overwhelmingly to not raise their taxes even more.
Posted by Italy at May 30, 2009 12:20 PMAs a Californian, I call "b.s." on the "California makes rich people pay too much tax!" meme. It's not true.
From the LA TIMES:
"California's wealthiest residents shoulder the lightest burden of any income group in the state. The top 1% of California income-earners (average 2007 income: $2.3 million) paid 7.4% of their income in various state taxes last year, counting the federal deduction for state taxes. The highest rate was paid by the poorest residents. Those earning $20,000 or less, with average income of $12,600, forked over 10.2% of their earnings in sales, excise, property and other levies.
This year's budget deal increased the disparity, raising the effective rate on the rich to 7.8%, but that on the poor to 11.1%."
Overall California's taxes are 18th in the nation.
The initiatives on the ballot in the recent election were widely disliked by left and right alike. They do not address the real problem, the aforementioned 2/3 rule that has made meaningful reform impossible.
Posted by otherlisa at May 30, 2009 05:29 PMIf the "otherlisa" was correct, more millionaires would be moving into California than leaving. I don't thinks so. There was this tax increase in the state of Maryland looking to soak the rich. They went looking for those rich bastards a year later and found that they had 30 percent fewer of them. Where did they go? Anywhere but Maryland, NJ, NY, Mass, California, or Illinois. Maybe New Hampshire, or Texas, Florida?
Some want to blame prop 13. Maybe it's the blame, well it could have been had it been out there all by itself. Seems the state found work-arounds to prop 13. They got their blood from other venues taking away any benefit derived from locking property values.
Seems also that the governator et al. wants to punish the citizens of California for their voting record. We'll cut programs that most of the people want in order to get their attention, make them want the higher taxes for those programs. How Austrian of them..."they just aren't worthy of the effort the state is making for their own good."
***
"The Obama administration has informed a federal judge it will continue to invoke the "state secrets" privilege in a legal battle with an Islamic charity suspected of funding terrorism."CNN
" "The government does not take this position lightly," Justice Department lawyers told Judge Vaughn Walker, who has been unsympathetic to the government stance.
"An assertion of the state secrets privilege to preclude further litigation is an extremely significant step that requires in-depth consideration and debate at the highest levels of our government," the Justice document says."
Good old AG Holder, continuing Bush policies...
Posted by peter at May 30, 2009 09:26 PMOtherlisa is wrong and using the usual liberal deceptions. If you don't know the truth, repeat the liberal lies, eh lisa?
Left-leaning research groups raise the red herring that the lowest 20 per cent of income brackets pay more of their income -- 11.7 per cent, to be exact -- in taxes, while the top four per cent pay only 7.1 per cent of their income in taxes. This mischievous use of statistics ignores the fact that more than half of Californians with incomes below $50,000 pay no income tax at all.
http://www.vancouversun.com/Business/Taxing+rich+doesn+work+just+California/1480304/story.html
Furthermore
Unfortunately, successive governments there have capitulated to demands to "tax the rich" with the result that the top one per cent of taxpayers carries nearly half the entire tax burden, while the bottom 80 per cent pay only 13 per cent of income taxes.Posted by Italy at May 30, 2009 10:34 PMCalifornia has shown clearly that reliance on a handful of wealthy taxpayers to cover the lion's share of tax liability is bad long-term policy. Rather than enjoying the steady revenue from a broad base of tax filers with diverse sources of income, government has become captive to the volatility wealthy taxpayers experience in the market.
good old petie spewing shit brain ignorance whenever he sticks his head up for air....day just isn't long enough to spew your quota of propaganda, asswipe? did you bring the new troll with you?
Posted by headxray at May 31, 2009 03:04 AM