U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-17-2010, 01:07 AM
 
Location: Conejo Valley, CA
12,476 posts, read 17,455,110 times
Reputation: 4321

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultrarunner View Post
California may not have a Gross Revenue Tax... but, my city does.

Oakland Gross Revenue Tax tops out at $24 per $1000.
Yeah some cities have additional taxes, for some reason (it starts with a L) the city level taxes seem to be much more aggressive in the north than the south. In Los Angeles depending on what you do its anywhere from $1~$2.5 per $1000 and that is considered rather high in this neck of the woods. Most of the cities surrounding LA just collect a nominal amount to fund the business license division of the city.

The state level tax in Texas is anywhere from $5 to $11 per $1000 depending on what you do. But there can be additional taxes at the local level as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-17-2010, 01:20 AM
 
Location: Central Bay Area, CA as of Jan 2010...but still a proud Texan from Houston!
7,484 posts, read 8,707,756 times
Reputation: 8885
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
The voters will do nothing to fix the state's problems, it will take a motivated and powerful leader.
++


Are you motivated and powerful?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2010, 01:24 AM
 
Location: Conejo Valley, CA
12,476 posts, read 17,455,110 times
Reputation: 4321
Quote:
Originally Posted by TVC15 View Post
Texas is quickly working on the buget deficit. Also people who rent are indirectly paying but I would doubt it is even 3%.
The landlord is going to be paying ~3% of the appraised value of the building he/she is renting.

California is also working on its budget deficit, it has made numerous cuts in spending. At this point only very difficult spending cuts are left.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TVC15 View Post
I have to pay 1.64 % of my gross income to be a member of this Union! I had much better benefits in Texas than I do here and without a Union.
Sure and (at least in my view) its the public unions that are really killing the state, not the environmental regulations, higher overall tax burden, etc.

It would be nice if California would become a right to work state like Texas, but that is unlikely to occur. I've never paid into a union personally, 1.64% seems ridiculous. That is for a private company?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2010, 01:33 AM
 
Location: Central Bay Area, CA as of Jan 2010...but still a proud Texan from Houston!
7,484 posts, read 8,707,756 times
Reputation: 8885
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
The landlord is going to be paying ~3% of the appraised value of the building he/she is renting.

California is also working on its budget deficit, it has made numerous cuts in spending. At this point only very difficult spending cuts are left.


Sure and (at least in my view) its the public unions that are really killing the state, not the environmental regulations, higher overall tax burden, etc.

It would be nice if California would become a right to work state like Texas, but that is unlikely to occur. I've never paid into a union personally, 1.64% seems ridiculous. That is for a private company?
No not a private company! Insane isn't it!

Texas is also an AT WILL state.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2010, 01:38 AM
 
Location: Conejo Valley, CA
12,476 posts, read 17,455,110 times
Reputation: 4321
Quote:
Originally Posted by TVC15 View Post
No not a private company! Insane isn't it!
Yes, its insane and pretty much amounts to extortion. Unions made sense before there were minimum wage laws, strong worker regulations, social security, medicare, etc. But now they are largely just vehicles for extortion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2010, 01:40 AM
 
Location: Central Bay Area, CA as of Jan 2010...but still a proud Texan from Houston!
7,484 posts, read 8,707,756 times
Reputation: 8885
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
Yes, its insane and pretty much amounts to extortion. Unions made sense before there were minimum wage laws, strong worker regulations, social security, medicare, etc. But now they are largely just vehicles for extortion.

I totally agree!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2010, 01:56 AM
 
26,134 posts, read 28,529,259 times
Reputation: 24854
Quote:
Originally Posted by wehotex View Post
I would have voted for him too except that he was just too dang anti-gay. Why can't there ever be a candidate that's no so harsh on gay folk, but fiscally responsible at the same time?
I'm gay and agree with your sentiment. But think about it like this....what good does gay rights do you if you are paying through the nose in taxes and getting little for it???? What good does it do those who are forced to move out of state because of high unemployment and the high cost of living, both of which are at least partly due to decades worth of policies at the state and local levels, that are hostile to the middle class?

If California ends up a total financial basket case (not out of the question)--a sort of US version of Greece, what good will gay rights do us?

I hate much of the social agenda of conservatives....but they are better when it comes to financially sound policy. It's time for sound economics to trump a socially liberal agenda. (Actually, it was time for that a decade ago, but better late than never).

As a personal example, I work in the public sector and 1/3 of my co workers got lay off notices (no exaggeration). I wasn't one of them. But I can't help but think to myself... "What about next year????". If I get a laid off, I will most likely be forced to move to a lower cost state...probably one of those conservative states liberals and gays love to hate....but if I can't afford to live here, which state is actually more welcoming to people like me? It's not the simple, clear cut answer the gay rights crowd would have you believe.

Last edited by mysticaltyger; 05-17-2010 at 02:06 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2010, 09:22 AM
 
Location: Oregon
1,458 posts, read 5,268,705 times
Reputation: 1410
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimhcom View Post
Plunge in state revenue dashes hopes of an easy budget fix - latimes.com

It seems that the positive spin on California’s economy and improving budget picture has been just that...spin. As tax revenues come in at far lower levels than overly optimistic projections, the residents of California are looking at more cuts in services, layoffs, and tax increases in their future.
The proposed boycotts against AZ didn't help CA either.

That just serves to prompt retaliation against CA by people who will cancel tourism / travel plans.

If only government officials would focus on real needs more.

Oregon isn't much different.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2010, 09:34 AM
 
15,737 posts, read 9,259,225 times
Reputation: 14227
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nineties Flava View Post
That's because the tax dollars aren't being spent right regardless... thanks to laws like Prop 13 and others, merely raising taxes won't raise the quality of public services. So basically what I'm saying is... repeal laws like Prop 13 and then raise taxes.
Since raising taxes won't solve the problem, how is it that your solution is to raise taxes? How about fixing the problem with the system NOW, then take the next step if it needs to be taken.

Do you own a home? Do you pay any taxes? Do you get govt assistance? Are you a state employee?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2010, 09:39 AM
 
15,737 posts, read 9,259,225 times
Reputation: 14227
Quote:
Originally Posted by wehotex View Post
I would have voted for him too except that he was just too dang anti-gay. Why can't there ever be a candidate that's no so harsh on gay folk, but fiscally responsible at the same time?
Ah, the curse of the "one issue voter". I don't get people that just CAN'T ignore one issue when they vote. But that issue has little to do with the health of the economy in the state. Instead, they vote their "heart", to the detriment of their wallet. I have gay friends that would never vote for someone against gay marriage. Yet, as business owners, they complain all day long about taxes, regulation and the poor economy.

Can you give me proof that he's anti-gay. That's a pretty broad accusation. Being pro same-sex marriage doesn't make anyone anti-gay, so I'd like to see the other issues that make him anti-gay.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:57 AM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top