to mention raising his property tax. LOL
Let me help dispel your confusion. Prop 13 not only capped property taxes but required apportionment to districts in each counties. In other words, Prop 13 BARRED THE STATE from using any portion of property tax revenues for the general budget, no matter how dire the need. Get rid of Prop 13 and you not only lose the cap, but the state can use those funds as part of its general budget, as it did prior to Prop 13. Let’s go deeper. You seem to be assuming that property tax revenues adequately fund local governments. Wrong. Look at Gov Brown’s budget again – he has budgeted funds for local governments over and above property tax revenues. And local govs are raising taxes and fees to cover the shortfall. You could eliminate just the cap and the state would no longer have to pay these extra funds. Getting rid of Prop 13 to balance the budget is not just my idea, by the way. You may remember this effectively is what Warren Buffett proposed during the financial crisis but Arnold squelched him. As to Gov Brown’s balanced budget, I am amazed you fell for that. Take a look at the items that are “off-budget” –like California’s 72 billion unfunded retiree health benefits - and tell me if you still think he has balanced the budget. It is sort like me proclaiming my stock portfolio is up 80%, which is true is you only count GE, Teco, and Apple. Add in Dryships, FCX, and Hi Crush and you get another story.Are we clear now?
Are we clear
I was in the neighborhood so figured I'd drop by and say hi!
And since I'm passing through ... I figure I'll throw out a bomb (metaphorically) while I'm at it.
This whole idea of universal franchise really doesn't make sense to me.
...to vote, you're a good little disciple of Paul Weyrich, co-founder of the Heritage Foundation, the Moral Majority and ALEC.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPsl_TuFdes
And you probably long for these days:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1YRUUFYeOPI
Good luck with that. While you're at it, maybe you can work on repealing the 15th and 19th Amendments.
between voting for lawmakers, as opposed to voting for the law or policy. There is a big difference between the use of initiative and referendum at the state and local level to decide policy issues, and allowing universal suffrage to elect your Congressman.
For example, in California, the voters were allowed to vote to cap the property tax, which more than any other measure is the cause of California’s inability to pay its bills. We even have prominent posters on this Board who believe Obamacare should be repealed because it is “unpopular.”
When you grant universal suffrage to decide complex policy matters like taxation and health care, you have uniformed people making the decision and they usually make it in terms of their self interest rather than the community self interest. All those guys who voted for Prop 13 just wanted to lower their property tax bills – they did not give a thought as to how the state could replace the revenue. Years later, we see the spectacle of prisoners being turned loose bc the state can not afford to house them. If we allow the inmates to decide health care, we will see equally bad consequences.
So I agree with you on the initiative and referendum level. But I don’t see how you can be a democracy unless you allow universal suffrage to elect lawmakers. The old cliché – it is the worse possible system, except for all the others – seems to apply here
and get away from the theme of the OP, but if you lived in California, you would understand the current budget status, and where property tax revenue goes.
Even though my taxes have gone up, I'm going to give a shout out to Gov. Brown, a Democrat no less, and what he has done over the past few years.
California's 2015/16 budget revenue is projected at $160B, which is a bit more than the previous year. CA will operate a surplus budget for 2 years in a row. Not a lot, about $2.5B, but a surplus nevertheless. CA tax sources include income, sales, corporate, cigarette, motor vehicle, insurance, alcohol and other. Notice property tax is not included at the STATE LEVEL. And INCOME TAX is the largest source of tax revenue.
All Revenue From Property Taxes Is Allocated to Local Governments. Property tax revenue remains within the county in which it is collected and is used EXCLUSIVELY by local governments.
I get it, you hate drones and guns, and love Duke basketball. But do me a favor? Get off your persistent CA bashing re property tax when you REALLY DON"T have a FRIGGING clue what you are talking about. Your ignorance on this topic is getting embarrassing.
Since you are the board version of Saul Goodman, and a poor one at that, you'll understand the reason for ALL CAPS. Just like in contracts, it means I'M YELLING AT YOU. Actually I'm yelling at your ignorance.
For example, in California, the voters were allowed to vote to cap the property tax, which more than any other measure is the cause of California’s inability to pay its bills. We even have prominent posters on this Board who believe Obamacare should be repealed because it is “unpopular.”
When you grant universal suffrage to decide complex policy matters like taxation and health care, you have uniformed people making the decision and they usually make it in terms of their self interest rather than the community self interest. All those guys who voted for Prop 13 just wanted to lower their property tax bills – they did not give a thought as to how the state could replace the revenue. Years later, we see the spectacle of prisoners being turned loose bc the state can not afford to house them. If we allow the inmates to decide health care, we will see equally bad consequences.
So I agree with you on the initiative and referendum level. But I don’t see how you can be a democracy unless you allow universal suffrage to elect lawmakers. The old cliché – it is the worse possible system, except for all the others – seems to apply here.
...proven himself over and over to be an ignoramus on any number of subjects.
to mention raising his property tax. LOL
Let me help dispel your confusion.
Prop 13 not only capped property taxes but required apportionment to districts in each counties. In other words, Prop 13 BARRED THE STATE from using any portion of property tax revenues for the general budget, no matter how dire the need. Get rid of Prop 13 and you not only lose the cap, but the state can use those funds as part of its general budget, as it did prior to Prop 13.
Let’s go deeper. You seem to be assuming that property tax revenues adequately fund local governments. Wrong. Look at Gov Brown’s budget again – he has budgeted funds for local governments over and above property tax revenues. And local govs are raising taxes and fees to cover the shortfall. You could eliminate just the cap and the state would no longer have to pay these extra funds.
Getting rid of Prop 13 to balance the budget is not just my idea, by the way. You may remember this effectively is what Warren Buffett proposed during the financial crisis but Arnold squelched him.
As to Gov Brown’s balanced budget, I am amazed you fell for that. Take a look at the items that are “off-budget” –like California’s 72 billion unfunded retiree health benefits - and tell me if you still think he has balanced the budget. It is sort like me proclaiming my stock portfolio is up 80%, which is true is you only count GE, Teco, and Apple. Add in Dryships, FCX, and Hi Crush and you get another story.
Are we clear now?
Are we clear