Majority of CA Voters support Jerry Brown's budget plan; 63% support tax increase (Montclair: low income, calculator)

[hoffdano]

Originally Posted by .highnlite

No credible authority states that illegals are a negative on the economy, but, rather, that they are a wash, or a positive.

And, you complain of the high taxes in California, yet they are only 3% higher than the "low tax state" of Texas.

Sure wish you boys operated on facts instead of emotion.

Where does that 3% number you quote come from?

For 2009, per capita state+local taxes in California was $4,910.
The Tax Foundation - California's State and Local Tax Burden, 1977-2009

Per capita state+local taxes in Texas was $3,197.
The Tax Foundation - Texas' State and Local Tax Burden, 1977-2009

California' per capita state/local tax burden is $1,713 or 53% higher than Texas.

[nmnita]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

Well not an increase, but a tax extension.

only in California!!!!

[VLWH]

Originally Posted by Gentoo

I agree with most of this, however I think the issue with the current tax increase/extension a popular vote isn't such a bad idea.

AB 131 would allow undocumented students access to state financial aid and Cal grants. The estimated impact of the AB 131 on the state coffers is $32.5 million

Yes, got to make sure enough money is in the state coffers for these programs. Of course if the extension/increase does not work, they will just cut services for legal residents to pay for it.

What a joke. How anyone can support a tax increase/extension is beyond me.

Half of California DREAM Act Passes First Hurdle in State Legislature (http://www.sanfernandosun.com/sanfernsun/news/6637-half-of-california-dream-act-passes-first-hurdle-in-state-legislature - broken link)

[VLWH]

Originally Posted by .highnlite

No credible authority states that illegals are a negative on the economy, but, rather, that they are a wash, or a positive.

And, you complain of the high taxes in California, yet they are only 3% higher than the "low tax state" of Texas.

Sure wish you boys operated on facts instead of emotion.

Originally Posted by hoffdano

Where does that 3% number you quote come from?

For 2009, per capita state+local taxes in California was $4,910.
The Tax Foundation - California's State and Local Tax Burden, 1977-2009

Per capita state+local taxes in Texas was $3,197.
The Tax Foundation - Texas' State and Local Tax Burden, 1977-2009

California' per capita state/local tax burden is $1,713 or 53% higher than Texas.

Great post hoffdano, 3% LOL.....

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

I dont mind paying a little more in taxes but I am incredibly weary of how our elected officials will spend it.

I dont want anymore money spent on increased bureaucracy or on hiring new state employees.\

I think that's the real key. I think most Americans wouldn't be as wary of increased taxes if it weren't for the fact that we know it will likely be wasted. This is what infuriates people the most.

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by VLWH

Yes, got to make sure enough money is in the state coffers for these programs. Of course if the extension/increase does not work, they will just cut services for legal residents to pay for it.

What a joke. How anyone can support a tax increase/extension is beyond me.

Half of California DREAM Act Passes First Hurdle in State Legislature (http://www.sanfernandosun.com/sanfernsun/news/6637-half-of-california-dream-act-passes-first-hurdle-in-state-legislature - broken link)

Here's an idea that swims around in my head from time to time. I wonder if the elected officials votes were anonymous, if their voting patterns would change? Think about it, politicians whether dems. or reps. tend to vote with their parties for fear of being ostracized. I wonder if this fear were eliminated, would they be more inclined to vote with their heads a bit better?

My response is mostly unrelated to yours but I'd like to see your point of view.

[Curmudgeon]

In my humble experience of about 20 years doing legislative, including fiscal, analysis for the state, more money nominally went to the program for which it was intended and way too much was siphoned off for new and non-vital programs and pork.

The Legislature never saw a penny of the people's money it didn't want and couldn't spend.

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by Gentoo

Here's an idea that swims around in my head from time to time. I wonder if the elected officials votes were anonymous, if their voting patterns would change? Think about it, politicians whether dems. or reps. tend to vote with their parties for fear of being ostracized. I wonder if this fear were eliminated, would they be more inclined to vote with their heads a bit better?

If that occurred there would be no accountability, the constituents would have no idea of whether or not their representatives were really representing them and their views and there would be so much hanky-panky going on with the parties that the state would end up in an even worse mess.

As always, just one man's opinion!

[VLWH]

Originally Posted by Gentoo

Here's an idea that swims around in my head from time to time. I wonder if the elected officials votes were anonymous, if their voting patterns would change? Think about it, politicians whether dems. or reps. tend to vote with their parties for fear of being ostracized. I wonder if this fear were eliminated, would they be more inclined to vote with their heads a bit better?

My response is mostly unrelated to yours but I'd like to see your point of view.

Interesting idea, sort of like survivor. It's certainly worth a try.

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

If that occurred there would be no accountability, the constituents would have no idea of whether or not their representatives were really representing them and their views and there would be so much hanky-panky going on with the parties that the state would end up in an even worse mess.

As always, just one man's opinion!

Makes sense either way and you having worked closely in the Ca. government, your opinion is certainly one to consider