For those wanting to move out of California, or for those that already have (Clovis: salary, income tax)

[countofmc]

I'd consider moving out if I could find a decent job. Ironically, the cities that often get mentioned - Seattle, Portland, Austin- are cities I've never visited.

Of the cities I HAVE visited, these are the cities I think I would be okay with: Las Vegas and Phoenix: Both are desert climates (I prefer this over cold/rain), and close to California (to visit family). Washington DC: I've always wanted to work for the Federal Gov't, so I'd move to DC in a heartbeat if I can get a job with the Feds.

These are the cities I have visited and I would really hate living in : New York, Houston, New Orleans, and Dallas.

[ClovisCowboy]

Originally Posted by nullgeo

Plagiarize,
Let no one else's work evade your eyes,
Remember why the good lord made your eyes,
so don't shade your eyes,
But plagiarize, plagiarize, plagiarize ...
Only be sure always to call it research.

(thank you Tom Lehrer)

Howdy, pardner.

Not bad. But to be fair, which I do on occasion I will note that TVC15 gave the link to the source, and placed the work in quotes.

True she could have blocked out the whole text like so.

But the method of citation is good enough for gub'ment work and frequently used on the internet.

Even as it doesn't meet the strict requirements of scholary citation.

In fact she went a bit futher in her citation than you in yours. But I note the humor in your post.

And will provide a link to the work.

Lyrics By XVR27 - Lehrer, Tom - Lobachevsky

And a link to far more strict rules for citations, which I certainly don't wish to follow.

Purdue OWL: MLA Formatting and Style Guide

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by nullgeo

Plagiarize,
Let no one else's work evade your eyes,
Remember why the good lord made your eyes,
so don't shade your eyes,
But plagiarize, plagiarize, plagiarize ...
Only be sure always to call it research.

(thank you Tom Lehrer)

Thank you but I prefer to spend my time Poisoning Pigeons in the Park and Rickty-Tickty-Tinning!

Thanks to my diabolical father I was introduced to Tom in the 50s.

And, yes, my taste buds may have been shot off in the war and it did take years to save enough box tops.

[nullgeo]

Originally Posted by ClovisCowboy

Howdy, pardner.

Not bad. But to be fair, which I do on occasion I will note that TVC15 gave the link to the source, and placed the work in quotes.



But the method of citation is good enough for gub'ment work and frequently used on the internet.

Even as it doesn't meet the strict requirements of scholary citation.

In fact she went a bit futher in her citation than you in yours. But I note the humor in your post.

And will provide a link to the work.

Lyrics By XVR27 - Lehrer, Tom - Lobachevsky

And a link to far more strict rules for citations, which I certainly don't wish to follow.

Purdue OWL: MLA Formatting and Style Guide

Hey "Pardner" ... It wasn't quoted or cited when I read it and responded ... Take a look at the "edit" time at the bottom of that post and see when she went in and corrected ... Yeah, that much later ... After I posted.

Note too, in my next post after the Tom Lehrer, I quoted her original post ... See? No quotation marks or indentations even? No citation reference?

As long as you are being scholarly and all and giving credit where due ...

[ClovisCowboy]

Is she one of those slippery critters then? Proceed with caution. Was paying off a sum certain debt. Which I shall explain shortly under separate cover.

[nullgeo]

Originally Posted by TVC15

For those who can't connect the dots between a link and text posted beneath the link. This (see below) is taken from the link:

Yeah. Editing an hour and a half after you were corrected is called "CYA" ... My quotation earlier shows you made no attempt to distinguish.

But, anyway, your whole attempt to show high tax costs for retirees failed by the information you selected. Demonstrating that you clearly have no grasp of the information. So why post? And your subsequent Kiplinger link also doesn't support your claim as it acknowledges several mitigating factors ... Not the least of which is that California has one of the widest bracket ranges of all states .. And, as I keep pointing out, only the highest earners pay the rates that are used to make the claim of California having some of the highest rates in the country. They are only high for the rich. Read your own links ... Carefully ... And if you can't grasp their message you might want to skip further conversation.

[TVC15]

Originally Posted by nullgeo

Yeah. Editing an hour and a half after you were corrected is called "CYA" ... My quotation earlier shows you made no attempt to distinguish.

No actually my editing was to help you connect the dots that you apparently could not connect.

I posted a link and then pulled out the most interesting points of the link and posted it below right below the link...since most people never open links or take the time to read all the details.

But since you jumped up and down and wanted to claim plagiarism...I edited to help you connect the dots.

[Sierravillian]

All the words in the world cannot dispute the pure and simple FACT, that there is no more than a 6% difference between the taxes of CA and the lowest taxed state. and, in any state with a state income tax, any statement reflecting percentage of income paid in taxes is subject to serious reduction. CA state income tax paid is easily and legally brought to near nothing.

[nullgeo]

Originally Posted by TVC15

No actually my editing was to help you connect the dots that you apparently could not connect.

I posted a link and then pulled out the most interesting points of the link and posted it below right below the link...since most people never open links or take the time to read all the details.

But since you jumped up and down and wanted to claim plagiarism...I edited to help you connect the dots.

If I couldn't "connect the dots" I wouldn't have recognized your faux-pas, and pointed it out, no?

Look, you should just stop digging. You didn't know what Tax-Freedom Day was and naturally felt foolish when I pointed that out to the readers ... so you tried to play "CYA" claiming you "misunderstood" ... no, you didn't. Then you posted some analysis from a site without quote box, quotation marks, indentation, nothing ... then came back after I pointed THAT out as well, and did your next "CYA".

And you still can't grasp the messages of your own quoted citations re: California taxes. You are out of your league in this conversation.

[TVC15]

Originally Posted by nullgeo

If I couldn't "connect the dots" I wouldn't have recognized your faux-pas, and pointed it out, no?

Look, you should just stop digging. You didn't know what Tax-Freedom Day was and naturally felt foolish when I pointed that out to the readers ... so you tried to play "CYA" claiming you "misunderstood" ... no, you didn't. Then you posted some analysis from a site without quote box, quotation marks, indentation, nothing ... then came back after I pointed THAT out as well, and did your next "CYA".

And you still can't grasp the messages of your own quoted citations re: California taxes. You are out of your league in this conversation.

Want to keep playing this game. So let's think about. Why would I say in my response to SierraVillian...I would rather pay sales tax then a personal state income tax...you make out much better? Surely this has nothing to do with Tax Freedom Day it has to do with Tax Free Day.

BTW I don't feel foolish about my mis-reading after a long days work. Tax Freedom Day vs. Tax Free Day...whatever floats your boat.

But I would surely feel foolish trying to make something out of nothing especially when it is none of my business.

Keep in mind Null just because you think something does not mean that it is.