Need help fleeing high-tax liberalism in California. (Ashland: middle-class, transplants)

[Steve97415]

Originally Posted by Rpche

Yes, but I will spend most of the time in California while actually running the business through Nevada.

I love California, but it has been hijacked by high-tax liberals, and I'm tired of paying 10% of my income to fund their idiotic welfare schemes.

There's nothing "high-tax" about liberals. Oregon is a more progressive state than California by far. It's aggregate tax burden is 9.4% -- just below the U.S. average of 9.7%, placing it in the bottom half of the states.

It's California's corporate welfare policy and living-beyond-our-means mentality that is causing the California economy to founder. At least "tax and spend" results in balanced books. The Bushonomics policy of "tax-cut and spend" (tax cuts prorated to benefit the wealthiest 5% of course) is a wholesale rejection of the kind of fiscal responsibility that old-school Reeps used to promote. No more. Welcome to the free-lunch state!

[user_id]

Originally Posted by Steve97415

There's nothing "high-tax" about liberals. Oregon is a more progressive state than California by far. It's aggregate tax burden is 9.4% -- just below the U.S. average of 9.7%, placing it in the bottom half of the states.

Oregon is really not more "Progressive" than California, outside of Portland its pretty conservative. The income tax in Oregon is much greater for your average income earner than it is in California. Oregon, almost has a 9% flat tax (there are brackets, but hardly) on taxable income where as California has a real progressive income tax.

Anyhow, the aggregate tax numbers are not that helpful for individuals or businesses in determining potential tax savings.

Regardless, trying to setup your business in NV and living most of your time in California to avoid California taxes is will not work.

[fairweathergolfer]

Originally Posted by City Boy

The governor is a republican.

No. He is no Republican. He may call himself that, but Ah-hnold is a people pleasing Democrat. He treats conservative Republicans, that are fiscally responsible, badly and works mainly with and often speaks kindly of the Democrats that are, along with Ah-hnold, bleeding (and have bled) the state dry.

He didn't even go to the Republican convention. Arnold is no Republican and I am sad for anyone who thinks this is how a fiscally conservative Republican would lead. No sir.

It is time for California to hire fiscally conservative politicians. I personally would like ones that are true Republicans with fiscally conservative, business friendly backgrounds that will help our state which is rich in many resources (including her people). At this point I would like to see a few blue dog Democrats step up to the plate as well (if they even exist anymore) alongside fiscally conservative Republicans.

We Californians need to hire folks that are going to be able to lead our great state back to profit, growth, new business, and fiscal restraint. We also need to quit giving away all this free stuff to people that are not even US citizens. It is after all US citizens taxpayers money taken from our pay checks that they are giving away to others and throwing the taxpayers state down the toilet at the same time.

[DMenscha]

Originally Posted by Rpche

The things California has to offer do not come courtesy of the government.

The government, in fact, is a hindrance to the good life in California.

Ok so don't use the roads, don't go to a state park or beach, live outside your earthquake resistant home, don't ever ride public transit including using airports, don't breathe the relatively smog-free air (compared to the 70's), don't call for police or fire and most of all, assuming you attended school in CA, please forget everything you learned.

I think you'll find that the government is a hindrance to the good life everywhere, even in Nevada, even in Mexico, even in Canada, even in.........

[llowllevellowll]

Originally Posted by happ

Move to Texas; you will be much happier in the South.

I just thought I'd mention something:

Although Texas has no income tax, they do, however, have the highest property tax in the nation at about $18 per every $1,000 worth of valued property, which is much higher than in California (about 1.25% of property value).

In fact, there are 44 other states in this nation with property taxes HIGHER than California.

I think it could be much worse. Each state has a way of recooperating its losses in one sector of taxation.

Originally Posted by user_id

Oregon is really not more "Progressive" than California, outside of Portland its pretty conservative.

Right, because cities like Eugene, Ashland, and Medford aren't at all liberal. [rolls eyes]

[MotleyCrew]

Originally Posted by DMenscha

It's always amazing to me how those that "hate" California for it's ___________ always seem to either want to cheat to stay here, or just whine about it how bad it is and won't leave.

Move yourself to the Idaho Panhandle. Run your Nevada Business from there. Maybe Texas will secede and you can move there. I seem to recall some folks that claim illegal immigrants move here and suck up services without paying for them. Would you live here and enjoy what CA has to offer and not pay for it?

We left CA, but we never said we hated CA. Quite the contrary, we loved CA and I still miss what it was 30 years ago. Politicians and the want for nothing crowd destroyed it and it is almost uninhabitable as far as we are concerned. Nope, no hatred, just a heavy heart.

[BennyPhoenix]

California has been known to tax out of state residents by the percentage of time they spend/work in california. You better have a smart accountant who is familiar with what you are proposing.

[Rpche]

Originally Posted by Steve97415

There's nothing "high-tax" about liberals. Oregon is a more progressive state than California by far. It's aggregate tax burden is 9.4% -- just below the U.S. average of 9.7%, placing it in the bottom half of the states.

It's California's corporate welfare policy and living-beyond-our-means mentality that is causing the California economy to founder. At least "tax and spend" results in balanced books. The Bushonomics policy of "tax-cut and spend" (tax cuts prorated to benefit the wealthiest 5% of course) is a wholesale rejection of the kind of fiscal responsibility that old-school Reeps used to promote. No more. Welcome to the free-lunch state!

Steve, you're wrong on 2 things:

1. 85% of California's budget goes towards welfare and schools. Welfare for individuals and people who don't want to buy their own health insurance.

2. "Tax and Spend" doesn't result in balanced budgets. It's the opposite. The 2 states with the highest income taxes (California and New York) also have the biggest deficits. The 2 states with no income tax (Nevada and Texas) do not have this problem. Amazing.

[Rpche]

Originally Posted by DMenscha

Ok so don't use the roads, don't go to a state park or beach, live outside your earthquake resistant home, don't ever ride public transit including using airports, don't breathe the relatively smog-free air (compared to the 70's), don't call for police or fire and most of all, assuming you attended school in CA, please forget everything you learned.

California spends a mere 1.5% of its budget on roads.

The rest comes from the Federal Government or local governments. Since I pay more than my fair share of federal taxes, plus local sales taxes and utility taxes, I am being a productive citizen.

[krock1dk]

California is sole proof that liberalism doesnt work.