U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
Old 09-17-2012, 06:43 PM
 
Location: Spokane, WA
225 posts, read 212,138 times
Reputation: 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by .highnlite View Post
Easier to get huffy than to do any research, I suppose. Research is good for people to do. It is how they learn things, and how the get the data to corollate their thinking with the ideas and facts in the bigger world.
Go to a college campus and teach people how to do research if that is your goal. Teaching people to do research is not the intent of this forum. City-Data.com has tons of data available to all of our readers. The readers do not need other readers calling them stupid and uneducated because they are exploring the experience of other members on this site. The threads on this forum are for sharing experiences, not putting down the readers. Thank you for calling me huffy, but you do not know me well enough to make that claim. I worked 60 to 80 hours a week while completing my college education, which I paid for on my own. I know how to research and I also know how to listen to experienced people who share their experiences with me.
Have a great day!! Cheers!!

 
Old 09-17-2012, 08:53 PM
 
Location: San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara Counties
6,390 posts, read 3,147,851 times
Reputation: 2622
Quote:
Originally Posted by OGTSO View Post
Go to a college campus and teach people how to do research if that is your goal. Teaching people to do research is not the intent of this forum. City-Data.com has tons of data available to all of our readers. The readers do not need other readers calling them stupid and uneducated because they are exploring the experience of other members on this site. The threads on this forum are for sharing experiences, not putting down the readers. Thank you for calling me huffy, but you do not know me well enough to make that claim. I worked 60 to 80 hours a week while completing my college education, which I paid for on my own. I know how to research and I also know how to listen to experienced people who share their experiences with me.
Have a great day!! Cheers!!
Defensive too. And imagining stuff that was never stated nor implied. Must be fun around your house.

I will preach a little too. "The Lord Helps those who help themselves".

Quote:
I also know how to listen to experienced people who share their experiences with me
Apparently not.
 
Old 09-18-2012, 10:17 AM
 
3,529 posts, read 884,340 times
Reputation: 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by .highnlite View Post
Yet, my source is a very conservative and respected tax, even, anti tax, organization. The only reason I do not identify it, is that when one, in this case you, are simply told a fact, research shows it easily goes in one ear and out the other. When one does research and determines the facts for themselves, the learned information 'sticks" much better.

What I have found curious, is that the other poster disputed my figures apparently made no effort to determine the true facts, but merely acted on anecdotal information. If I am presented data I disagree with, I get to work to discover for myself, the facts.
Hi,

I have been following this thread for a while.

The posters info is NOT anecdotal, it is factual based on their own experience. It disagrees with the study you reference. That means YOU need to check the studies figures, assumptions and parameters. The one posting have FACTS in front of them. How those reconcile with YOUR posted data is the question.

You are telling the wrong people to do the research. You need to research the claims of the data you posted to see why in real world situations, they are in disagreement with facts.
 
Old 09-18-2012, 10:18 AM
 
3,529 posts, read 884,340 times
Reputation: 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by OGTSO View Post
Go to a college campus and teach people how to do research if that is your goal. Teaching people to do research is not the intent of this forum. City-Data.com has tons of data available to all of our readers. The readers do not need other readers calling them stupid and uneducated because they are exploring the experience of other members on this site. The threads on this forum are for sharing experiences, not putting down the readers. Thank you for calling me huffy, but you do not know me well enough to make that claim. I worked 60 to 80 hours a week while completing my college education, which I paid for on my own. I know how to research and I also know how to listen to experienced people who share their experiences with me.
Have a great day!! Cheers!!
Some people do research on the web and not in real life situations. They want others to validate their conclusions, not have to support their own, when challenged.
 
Old 09-18-2012, 12:55 PM
 
Location: Spokane, WA
225 posts, read 212,138 times
Reputation: 218
Default Stated and implied.....

[quote=.highnlite;26136969]Defensive too. And imagining stuff that was never stated nor implied. Must be fun around your house.
I will preach a little too. "The Lord Helps those who help themselves".

This is directly from the terms of use in City-Data.com:
"Our opinions on a location or issue are just that, opinions. Highly subjective. Personal preferences. Quirks, even. Leave wiggle room for dialogue, others may not see things the same as you, or been there as long as you, and any one of us can be wrong. Pouncing on someone you disagree with runs contrary to the spirit of this board and its members. We are here to help each other."
This is directly from the terms of use of this forum. You should really read the terms of use for City-Data.com. I am surprised the moderator has not removed more of your posts at this point. I don't know how reading and following the terms of service for this forum is "imaging stuff that was never stated or implied" when in fact it is stated and implied in the terms of use.
Yes, I do get defensive when you attack my personal experiences as invalid because they do not match up with your beloved Tax website. Have you ever considerd that maybe the state of California gives this website money to post inaccurate tax burden numbers to keep people from leaving their state? Do you blindly trust that website as the ultimate truth?
It is always fun around my house, thanks for noticing, my friend(talk about imagining stuff). Have a splendid day with Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Cheers!!
 
Old 09-18-2012, 02:47 PM
 
Location: San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara Counties
6,390 posts, read 3,147,851 times
Reputation: 2622
Quote:
Originally Posted by expatCA View Post
Hi,

I have been following this thread for a while.

The posters info is NOT anecdotal, it is factual based on their own experience. It disagrees with the study you reference. That means YOU need to check the studies figures, assumptions and parameters. The one posting have FACTS in front of them. How those reconcile with YOUR posted data is the question.

You are telling the wrong people to do the research. You need to research the claims of the data you posted to see why in real world situations, they are in disagreement with facts.
I don't have to, I am comfortable with the figures I posted, they are accurate. Ya'll quibblers, quibble, but don't fact check me, I find that humorous, and odd. It took me roughly 30 seconds to come up with my data, data used all over this country by actual economists.

I don't have to reconcile, but I do get to watch in dumbfounded unbelief at those who argue without substantiation. To address the problem the poster from Washington has with his data, is that it is subjective, not objective, in a state without an income tax, other taxes fill the void.

Now, if one does not buy anything one does not pay sales tax.
Now, if one buys lots of stuff, one pays lots of sales tax.

Any discussion of taxes paid by an individual in which sales tax is a component is anecdotal, unless all receipts are posted with the yearly sales tax total, see the problem.

Now the data I posted is an average of all tax payers, of course, could one individual vary from the average, like, well, of course, that is in the nature of averages, so once again, any statement about a particular tax payer dollar amount or percent of income, must be anecdotal, unless of course, all taxes paid by that taxpayer are listed.

Now, do you understand my use of the term anecdotal?
 
Old 09-18-2012, 02:54 PM
 
Location: Conejo Valley, CA
12,257 posts, read 10,002,291 times
Reputation: 4009
Quote:
Originally Posted by OGTSO View Post
I had a job making 100k and a nice 1,800 sq. ft. house on a 8,000 sq. ft. lot with a swimming pool. My property taxes in California were around $4,000 a year and my California state income tax liabiliity was around $10,000 a year.
If you were paying $10,000 in income taxes on an income of $100,000, well, you should've hired someone that knew how to do taxes....that is far more than what you should have paid.

Also, if one does apples-to-apples comparisons of real estate, California real estate isn't dramatically more than the rest of the country. Of course, everyone is doing apples-to-oranges comparisons. "Oh gee, this house on a swamp in the middle of no-where is so much cheaper than Orange County!!".

Anyhow, I've lived in other states and have done detailed comparisons between California and some other states and this is what I always find:

- The tax burden for low/mid income Californians is less than/equal to most comparable states.
- The tax burden starts to become higher in California once households start to make over $100,000 a year.
- Taxes related to business are often higher in other states. For example, I found that if I moved my business to Texas I'd pay more in taxes, not less. That is because property taxes in Texas are rather high and they have a business revenue tax (where as California only taxes profit).

Last edited by user_id; 09-18-2012 at 03:05 PM..
 
Old 09-18-2012, 04:09 PM
 
754 posts, read 635,707 times
Reputation: 755
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
If you were paying $10,000 in income taxes on an income of $100,000, well, you should've hired someone that knew how to do taxes....that is far more than what you should have paid.

Also, if one does apples-to-apples comparisons of real estate, California real estate isn't dramatically more than the rest of the country. Of course, everyone is doing apples-to-oranges comparisons. "Oh gee, this house on a swamp in the middle of no-where is so much cheaper than Orange County!!".

Anyhow, I've lived in other states and have done detailed comparisons between California and some other states and this is what I always find:

- The tax burden for low/mid income Californians is less than/equal to most comparable states.
- The tax burden starts to become higher in California once households start to make over $100,000 a year.
- Taxes related to business are often higher in other states. For example, I found that if I moved my business to Texas I'd pay more in taxes, not less. That is because property taxes in Texas are rather high and they have a business revenue tax (where as California only taxes profit).
FWIW, I'm in San Antonio, Texas now and, like a Salmon going upstream, am moving to CA in the next few months. For a house appraised at $164,000, my taxes are $4,431.00 - an effective tax rate of 2.7%

My car tags run about 60-100 for each vehicle. When you factor in that sunk cost toward CA tags, figured to be around 100-150 each, it's not that bad.

If they don't get you one way, they get you another - no matter where you live.
 
Old 09-18-2012, 04:42 PM
 
Location: San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara Counties
6,390 posts, read 3,147,851 times
Reputation: 2622
Tis true, the diff between CA and the "low tax" state of Texas is less than 4%.
 
Old 09-18-2012, 04:50 PM
 
754 posts, read 635,707 times
Reputation: 755
Of course, $164K gets you more house in Texas than in most parts of California. It comes down to choice of lifestyle - I hate California's politics, but love the lifestyle it provides for me and my family. So I have a little smaller house - or have to adjust budget priorities some - but California just works for us despite its flaws. I've learned that Texas - for all the great things I've heard about it - isn't all it's cracked up to be either. That's not a slam, because it's a nice place if you like the lifestyle, but it just doesn't fit ours. And yes, I lived in California for 8 years prior to a job transfer to Texas.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2011 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:55 PM.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top