The Great California Exodus Accelerates (Los Angeles, San Francisco: camps, demographics, commercial)

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by jmgg

Sorry Tulemutt, you're reinforcing my post. The high numbers of lower and middle income adults you are losing add up. Keep in mind, these adults are TAXPAYERS. Yes, losing the high income people work against you as well, but even using your logic (of which I concur) the losing of the high numbers in the middle income and below taxpayers are what is really going to hurt the most.

Keep this in mind. The lower and middle income people are what's holding together your many less afluent neighborhoods. When they move out, look with what you're stuck with.

I didn’t “reinforce” a single thing you wrote.

By the way, just another example of how your lack of knowledge about California is dis-serving you in this conversation: California has a progressive tax tiering system in which the low income pay nothing to near nothing … and low-middle to mid-middle pay only modestly at best. Our infamous *high taxes* are really only for the very wealthy.

What holds California together is still all the things that grew it into the juggernaut it remains today … in spite of the spiteful hate so constantly leveled at it by outsiders.

[beach43ofus]

High income earners flee, and take hundreds of Millions with them in lost tax revenues:

https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/ca...27/id/1128762/

[blameyourself]

Originally Posted by beach43ofus

High income earners flee, and take hundreds of Millions with them in lost tax revenues:

https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/ca...27/id/1128762/

Yawn, 2nd verse same as the first. That's already been covered (post #1469) and the number is statistically insignificant when taken into context with the total tax revenue in CA. It's too bad we have to keep repeating things because people refuse to read the thread.

[artillery77]

Originally Posted by jmgg

Where in your attached article is there a determination of Impoverished? You obviously have your own definition. So, even in your article, people MAKING (once again they're working here) for example $ 100,000 is designated as lower income in San Francisco and a few other places. With your ridiculouse COL, do you think that most of these people are going to STAY in California if they have any choice at all?

Unless these folks refuse to better their situation for some personal reason, they're going to join the"Get out of California or Bust" conga line. There are nice places all over America that with a $ 100,000 income they can own AND NOT GET TAXED OUT OF a nice home, a couple cars and can shop where the merchandise isn't protected behind lock and key since brazen theft is actually a punishable crime.

Hey jmgg. I appreciate your comments on the South Dakota board. It's true that I would be a hopeful emigrant back to where I grew up, and like most people, I want to highlight the good things that are in South Dakota. The healthcare, the communities, the ease of keeping strong ties with family and friends. It is a lifechoice for me to consider leaving....but because the economy of South Dakota is so weak, I wouldn't entertain doing this prior to having made my money. South Dakota loves to grow economic monopolies over areas. It couldn't be further removed from California's disruption based economy.

Whether 200,000 of 2,000,000 people flee a year, it really won't matter. The innovation jobs are here, because the innovation is here, because the prospects and the financing and the people and the mindset....are here. That will constantly attract people to the area. More importantly, it will attract people who want to become overachievers. We are not attracting war refugees who want to work in a turkey plant in Huron. We are attracting the tops from countries around the world. Those tops are literally beating each other out in acquiring space and resources....hence the purchase price of everything.

The government is misrun, sure. Red, Blue or Progressive can agree to that. I'm sure California government wastes more money than the entire amount taxed in the State of South Dakota each year. it's disappointing, but just not that big of a factor. What's much more important is how much VC is flowing into NorCal.

But even in agriculture, California is crushing South Dakota. It always amazes me how many South Dakota farmers/ranchers almost insist upon raising commodity everything and then wondering why they don't get further ahead. Those "silly" labels of something being GMO free, organic, grass-fed, renewable etc may seem idiotic, but that's what the consumer wants. That's what gets a higher price in the marketplace.

Covid slowed my consulting practice, so I took work doing the books for a local meatpacking plant. First off, there's a reality here that I can switch from semiconductors to meat, and it's fine. The point is while South Dakota's lamb was dying from covid.
https://www.sdnewswatch.org/stories/...sing-capacity/
We ran imported lamb from New Zealand to record profits and raised our prices. We could not bring enough of it in.

I enjoy both South Dakota and California. But South Dakota telling California how to run an economy is like me explaining to Michael Phelps how he ought to swim. Tolerated if nice, but at the end of the day...its not the State's strong suit.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by beach43ofus

High income earners flee, and take hundreds of Millions with them in lost tax revenues:

https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/ca...27/id/1128762/

You use a “story” from Newsmax as your source? And ultra-ultra-Right Newsmax cites a ‘study’ done by a commercial real estate listings tool as validation?

Lolololololol … you must be joking?

[sav858]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

You use a “story” from Newsmax as your source? And ultra-ultra-Right Newsmax cites a ‘study’ done by a commercial real estate listings tool as validation?

Lolololololol … you must be joking?

Their data comes from the IRS. Are you saying the IRS is wrong?

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by sav858

Their data comes from the IRS. Are you saying the IRS is wrong?

No, not saying the IRS is wrong. I’m saying that Newsmax has an obvious, known anti-California / left-coast agenda … and an on-line commercial real estate app creator is not a known qualified source to conduct an unbiased “study”. I have no idea what criteria and methodology the actual “study” may have used, since it isn’t disclosed, other than to claim it drew figures from the IRS. Without a research reputation, any entity is subject to question. So my lol in this case is that the poster, who has in the past waged a distinctly anti-California campaign in these forums, has used a seriously far-right source which quotes an unknown app creator as validation for its messaging.

Hilarious, really. Even if the “study’s” figures support the claims, the sourcing is asking for doubt. Figures require context to be well interpreted.

[sav858]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

No, not saying the IRS is wrong. I’m saying that Newsmax has an obvious, known anti-California / left-coast agenda … and an on-line commercial real estate app creator is not a known qualified source to conduct an unbiased “study”. I have no idea what criteria and methodology the actual “study” may have used, since it isn’t disclosed, other than to claim it drew figures from the IRS. Without a research reputation, any entity is subject to question. So my lol in this case is that the poster, who has in the past waged a distinctly anti-California campaign in these forums, has used a seriously far-right source which quotes an unknown app creator as validation for its messaging.

Hilarious, really. Even if the “study’s” figures support the claims, the sourcing is asking for doubt. Figures require context to be well interpreted.

It's just presenting data from the IRS though, why the conniption fit? Are you unable to extract facts from bias? Interesting though you don't seem to have the same level of scrutiny for perceived left-wing biased sources. Partisan much?

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by sav858

It's just presenting data from the IRS though, why the conniption fit? Are you unable to extract facts from bias? Interesting though you don't seem to have the same level of scrutiny for perceived left-wing biased sources. Partisan much?

Lol. What “conniption fit” did I have? I chuckled at the obviousness of the poster’s choice to support his on going campaign to showcase California as a failing state.

Unable to extract facts from bias? Mmmm, sure … by multi-sourcing, it can be done. Without trustworthy context, extraction can be difficult or even impossible, of course. None of that was provided in the post in question, nor by its citations. None. You seem to frequently dismiss context as an important factor in issues.

As for my scrutiny of ‘left-wing sources’ … like what? If you can find examples of me embracing MSNBC or Democracy Now podcasts, I’ll think that through with you in greater detail, if you’d like.

Nah, not partisan. But I readily admit that today’s GOP and ultra-right is seriously easy pickings for ridicule… much more fun than the lightweight left. There are plenty of true conservatives I enjoy and take seriously. But when it comes to brain-dead level True Believers, the Newsmax crowd really stand out as targets.

[sav858]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

Lol. What “conniption fit” did I have? I chuckled at the obviousness of the poster’s choice to support his on going campaign to showcase California as a failing state.

Unable to extract facts from bias? Mmmm, sure … by multi-sourcing, it can be done. Without trustworthy context, extraction can be difficult or even impossible, of course. None of that was provided in the post in question, nor by its citations. None. You seem to frequently dismiss context as an important factor in issues.

As for my scrutiny of ‘left-wing sources’ … like what? If you can find examples of me embracing MSNBC or Democracy Now podcasts, I’ll think that through with you in greater detail, if you’d like.

But I readily admit that today’s GOP and ultra-right is seriously easy pickings for ridicule… much more fun than the lightweight left. There are plenty of true conservatives I enjoy and take seriously. But when it comes to brain-dead level True Believers, the Newsmax crowd really stand out as targets.

Sure but in the process you're dismissing real, legitimate data. There is a link to the raw data in the article....

More recently I would say the Hate Crime thread and clinging to the "credibility" of the LA Times.

Nah, not partisan.

Sure....LOL