U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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)
 
Old 05-31-2012, 09:07 AM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
66,305 posts, read 33,652,276 times
Reputation: 14179

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by soulseoul View Post
It taxes those making 250k or more...a a .25% increase on sales tax for a limited time.

No wonder Austin TX is still booming and never felt the recession!

All of California is moving here, including a lot of businesses.
Silicon Valley has transplanted here.

We have no State income tax and low local business taxes.


The Austin-area unemployment rate dropped in April to 5.5 percent, the lowest the regional unemployment rate has been in more than three years, the Workforce Solutions Capital Area Workforce Board said Friday.
Austin jobless rate drops again - Austin Business Journal




Leaving Cali for TX....

The unemployment rate, however, dipped last month to 10.9% from 11% in March, the result of discouraged workers leaving the labor force, according to the department.

Indeed, the state has gained 175,600 jobs over the last year, through April, and the unemployment rate has fallen from 11.8% a year earlier.

California's unemployment rate remains well above the national rate, which was 8.1% in April. Only two states have higher jobless rates: Nevada at 11.7% and Rhode Island at 11.2%.

In Los Angeles County, the unemployment rate fell to 11.6% from 11.8% in March. In the Inland Empire, the rate fell to 11.7% from 12.7% in March, largely because more workers there left the labor force.
April job losses end state's eight months of gains - California
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-31-2012, 09:24 AM
 
Location: Wasilla, Alaska
17,850 posts, read 20,189,687 times
Reputation: 6487
Quote:
Originally Posted by nullgeo View Post
I haven't read all 170 relies to this thread ... but I assume by now someone besides me must have noted:

- the differences between Greece (thread subtitle) and California include that the debt - to - income / GDP ratio in California is well within a healthy range ... not so at all for Greece.

- California is also the world's 8th largest economy, and thriving (see below)

- the sole reason for California's economic stumble is the collapse of the housing bubble, which had zero root in California policy or management -- and prior to which California, for all its need to clean up many wasteful budget items, was on a roll ... and in spite of which, California remains the nation's #1 GDP state and the highest contributor to the Federal GDP -- a net contributor helping support other states that receive more Federal aid than they pay to Washington, D.C. in taxes collected (mostly red states).

- California also has resources, both natural and human, that exceed anything in Greece ... indeed, exceed pretty much every other state in our union ... and which resources aren't going away because of a nasty case of economic indigestion.

I wonder if the Chicken-Little folks who dash about in terror, and others who love to point fingers and laugh, ever study history to grasp the concept that changing conditions and crisis occur constantly all around the world, including disastrous ones ... and that people with resources simply roll up their sleeves, grit their teeth a bit, and get about the struggle of rebuilding. Over and over and over and over and over and over.

It's called life.
California WAS the eighth largest economy, during the 1970s. Today, California's GDP is fourteenth in the world, just before Brazil. Businesses are fleeing California in droves. During biblical times, this would have been called a mass "exodus."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2012, 09:31 AM
 
7,150 posts, read 8,781,561 times
Reputation: 3806
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glitch View Post
California WAS the eighth largest economy, during the 1970s. Today, California's GDP is fourteenth in the world, just before Brazil. Businesses are fleeing California in droves. During biblical times, this would have been called a mass "exodus."
I have read differing views and statistics on this ... however, the most common range, cited by reputable sources puts California still in the 8th range -- at least as of 2011.

California economy ranking in the world - California Economy | EconPost
California economy world ranking

According to U.S. Department of Commerce estimates, California’s GDP (gross domestic product) was $1.89 trillion. And that puts California as the world’s eighth largest economy in 2009.
Since the 1970s, California has ranked 7th biggest world economy, although for a couple of years in 1984 and 1985, California was the 5th largest economy in the world.
California economy ranks behind Italy

The California economy currently ranks eighth just behind Italy and ahead of Brazil and Spain.


California economy among world economies

Gross domestic product in $ trillions Rank Country / State GDP 1 United States (without California) 12.3 2 Japan 5.07 3 China 4.98 4 Germany 3.33 5 France 2.65 6 United Kingdom 2.17 7 Italy 2.11 8 California 1.89 9 Brazil 1.57
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2012, 09:36 AM
 
Location: Chandler, AZ
5,802 posts, read 5,451,225 times
Reputation: 3113
Glitch is indeed correct; passing Prop. 13 was the smartest thing that the citizens of this state have done in the past 40 years.

Listening to those free-spending Democrats whining about how devastating Prop 13's passage has been to this state's finances a mega-crock, given the supercalifragilistic increase in the state's population between 1978 & 2012.

Our schools are going to continue to suck here and natrionwide until the Democrats decide that challenging teachers via annual competency exams should be priority #1 as opposed to keeping them employed with a very short route to tenure.

Have they forgotten about Prop. 98?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2012, 04:48 PM
 
249 posts, read 163,561 times
Reputation: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
No wonder Austin TX is still booming and never felt the recession!

All of California is moving here, including a lot of businesses.
Silicon Valley has transplanted here.

We have no State income tax and low local business taxes.


The Austin-area unemployment rate dropped in April to 5.5 percent, the lowest the regional unemployment rate has been in more than three years, the Workforce Solutions Capital Area Workforce Board said Friday.
Austin jobless rate drops again - Austin Business Journal




Leaving Cali for TX....

The unemployment rate, however, dipped last month to 10.9% from 11% in March, the result of discouraged workers leaving the labor force, according to the department.

Indeed, the state has gained 175,600 jobs over the last year, through April, and the unemployment rate has fallen from 11.8% a year earlier.

California's unemployment rate remains well above the national rate, which was 8.1% in April. Only two states have higher jobless rates: Nevada at 11.7% and Rhode Island at 11.2%.

In Los Angeles County, the unemployment rate fell to 11.6% from 11.8% in March. In the Inland Empire, the rate fell to 11.7% from 12.7% in March, largely because more workers there left the labor force.
April job losses end state's eight months of gains - California

Irvine, CA has roughly the same unemployment rate as Austin, TX. (6.0 vs. 5.5%). San Francisco, CA is 1 percentage point higher than Dallas and Houston (8% vs. 7%).

The thing is that places like the IE and Los Angeles that were MUCH more heavily tied to housing sector will, obviously, have higher unemployment rates. Austin is not as tied as LA or the IE. The biggest industry in the IE was construction. Of course it stands to reason that cities like Irvine and San Francisco will not be as hurt since they not as linked to housing as say Riverside or Stockton.

If ALL of California were moving there, we would expect to see large numbers of higher wage jobs. What we have instead is a larger increase in low wage labor in TX. The growth of low wage labor (at or below min. wage) has been remarkable to say the least. From 2007 to 2010, Texas has seen an increase of 150% in low wage labor. This has depressed wages in Texas to give an average wage of $11.20 per hour vs. $12.00 nationally. So really much of the growth has more to do with the type of jobs coming to Texas.

CA should keep it's greatest assets viable, the UC system. It's really the economic engine of the state. When comparing the number of research universities, CA easily beats TX. VERY easily. Thus, it's important to reduce tuition in order to maintain our edge in education.

By temporarily raising taxes by a small percentage, it will help mitigate the effects of cuts. We've seen that austerity alone is a bad idea. Simply put, it doesn't work. You need to raise revenue. If the top percentages are benefiting by an educated workforce, then they should help pay.

Prop 13 really has nothing more than help raise housing prices, protect corporate interests, and made this stupid 2/3 vote for taxes.

Look, I'm in favor of cuts. I just feel that we need a temperate approach instead of being extremely draconian. The poorest have suffered the worst, we all need to pitch in. It's time for those that are doing okay (like my family) to help pitch in. That's right. My family is in favor of temporarily raising taxes on itself in order to ensure my nephew has a good school to attend, decent universities, and to make sure that the wealth gap doesn't spiral out of control. It just doesn't make sense to be this anti-tax.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2012, 05:11 PM
 
249 posts, read 163,561 times
Reputation: 77
A survey of CA voters indicate that 64% would pay higher taxes if it went to public education. Right now, we are facing the prospect of having a 3 week shorter school year. The fat is pretty lean now, let's not start cutting the muscle and bones.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2012, 05:33 PM
 
8,487 posts, read 5,892,010 times
Reputation: 1114
Seems this problem could be solved easily. From an accounting standpoint anyway. Talking about budgets w/o talking about real finances seems illogical to me.
CA CAFR shows $600 billion tax surplus, 1 ... - Examiner.com
CA Gov. Brown lies: monetary, credit reform funds ... - Examiner.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2012, 05:42 PM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
66,305 posts, read 33,652,276 times
Reputation: 14179
Quote:
Originally Posted by soulseoul View Post
A survey of CA voters indicate that 64% would pay higher taxes if it went to public education. Right now, we are facing the prospect of having a 3 week shorter school year. The fat is pretty lean now, let's not start cutting the muscle and bones.

This is how California works...

Get it for education. Shift it to entitlements and then scream another day we need more for education. To do it all over again.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2012, 05:46 PM
 
249 posts, read 163,561 times
Reputation: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
This is how California works...

Get it for education. Shift it to entitlements and then scream another day we need more for education. To do it all over again.
Not even close to reality. Again teacher layoffs are real and affect CA classrooms. We've cut down on special education services (I had reduced hours) which truly hurt many families.

I guess if you want a truly unequal society in which the rich control all and have all the benefits simply because they can afford it, reduced taxation is great. I just believe in having a middle class.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2012, 05:52 PM
 
69,372 posts, read 55,403,704 times
Reputation: 9358
Quote:
Originally Posted by soulseoul View Post
A survey of CA voters indicate that 64% would pay higher taxes if it went to public education. Right now, we are facing the prospect of having a 3 week shorter school year. The fat is pretty lean now, let's not start cutting the muscle and bones.
Dont most public education come from local property taxes, and not the state taxes? I know around here they do, so I'm not sure what people willing to pay more locally, has to do with the states financial problems.
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:

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 > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:36 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