Carl's Jr wants to move its Headquarters (Los Angeles, Santa Barbara: houses, taxi)

[Oerdin]

Texas has a deficit of about $25 billion so it isn't like they're doing any better. In fact because their economy is smaller and their population is smaller their deficit is actually worse on a per capita basis.

[yeahthatguy]

Originally Posted by TimC2462

Comparing tax burden between states is a moot point when expenditure isn't being addressed. i.e. How much tax money is spent on services that are aimed to benefit the taxpayer themselves?

Consider that as of 2009, the Census Bureau reported that California has a population of 36,961,664 while Texas has 24,782,302.

Tax Foundation published their survey findings on how much money per capita each taxpayer is paying to their state.

California's (http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/sl_burdens_california-20110223.pdf - broken link)per capita to the state in 2009 is $3,874. In comparison, Texas (http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/sl_burdens_texas-20110223.pdf - broken link)is $2,248.

Yet, with California's population being larger than Texas by 12,179,362 -- one would think that the extra tax revenue due to the higher population of taxpayers, right?

Wrong. Explain why California has a budget deficit of 26.6 billion dollars. Where is our tax money going to?

Tim. Some people like to read self-serving biased articles .. Regurgitate what they read and not look into things further. No matter how much you point out the discrepancies, they wont get it ... They'll say 'but but' and find some other foolish contrived statistics/%'age/# to feed their confirmation bias.

[yeahthatguy]

Originally Posted by Oerdin

Texas has a deficit of about $25 billion so it isn't like they're doing any better. In fact because their economy is smaller and their population is smaller their deficit is actually worse on a per capita basis.

more surface level data from some garbage main stream media outlet.
"Lawmakers in Texas have unveiled a new state budget that will eliminate $31-billion in spending in order to close the state's budget, which is estimated to be as high as $27-billion."
And look how they 'adjust' to changes in economic conditions.. They pair down govt. without the dumb idea of taxing people more when the economy is in the trash bin.... O' and remind me who has a rainy day fund for 'changes in economic conditions' and who doesn't.

But feel free to refer to a number. By all means, that captures things perfectly...


The state comptroller projects that Texas would have about $72 billion in general revenue available for this fiscal 2012-13 budget, a $10-billion decline from two years ago.

-> Under the plan, spending on public education will be slashed by 13 percent, while spending on higher education will be cut by 7.6 percent.
-> Spending on health, human services and government services would see funding decline by almost 25 percent.
-> The new budget envisions the elimination of almost 9300 government jobs while Medicaid providers would suffer a 10 percent reduction in rate
-> Funding to help for the defense of poor people in court would fall by 15 percent; while the state agency that supervises paroles would see its spending support slip by 21 percent
-> Legislators were dissuaded from raising taxes by Republican Party leaders, and they also did not touch the state’s $9.4-billion projected “rainy day fund.”


Have a spending problem? Cut spending.. Cut more than what you project you need to cut to make sure you are o.k.. Always keep money saved up for rain.

But in California, since the sun is soo bright and beautiful, tax the living crap out of people. After all, they are too busy enjoying the weather to care.


"Texas families have had to set priorities and make difficult decisions in order to live within their means," said Talmadge Heflin, director of the Center for Fiscal Policy at the Texas Public Policy Foundation. "The introduced budget is a positive sign that the Texas Legislature is committed to doing likewise."

[.highnlite]

Back this claim by showing the tax implications in CA vs. TX for someone who makes $100k a year and (single-income not married) .. Here, I am giving you a head start :
Income tax
CA
2010 Tax Calculator
Your tax is $ 7,257
No income tax state (i.e TX) :
$0 ...

You can break it down, but, that does not change the simple fact that everyone pays a total tax burden.

But, you need to feel like you will do better in another state, that is fine, people believe all sorts of crap.

What ever taxes we pay, is well worth it to live in California. Now I know you like to drop hints about your income, (uncouth) but, I will tell you, you pay vastly less than we do, and we are happy as clams here in California.

My only major complaints are that there are too many fences and locked gates on private land around our local public land.

Remember, Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, you are right.

[.highnlite]

Originally Posted by yeahthatguy

Tim. Some people like to read self-serving biased articles .. Regurgitate what they read and not look into things further. No matter how much you point out the discrepancies, they wont get it ... They'll say 'but but' and find some other foolish contrived statistics/%'age/# to feed their confirmation bias.

Actually there, if you whine about taxes, you either have an income problem or a bad accountant.


Taxfoundation.org, have fun kids.

[yeahthatguy]

Originally Posted by .highnlite

Actually there, if you whine about taxes, you either have an income problem or a bad accountant.
Taxfoundation.org, have fun kids.

My efforts to get people to see the waste/fraud/abuse of CA's government in way of tax revenue is not whining. If you think it is, you don't care to know about it or act on it because you don't care to know about its impact on your beloved state or are ignorant about how it already is/will.

My efforts end come June (if there is a vote)/decision to extend the tax increase. And I will make a decision as to when to leave... It is not about the short term change that will come about via this tax extension but more about the long term direction of this state based on it....

So, don't worry.. if you have your way, there will be lots of more free land to roam (what you desire) and tons more deficit burden for you to take on (what you don't realize) ... You have an objective which you make clear in all your posts : Get all of the hardworking modern day people out of California so you can enjoy the beauty of the barren land...

I don't care for it as don't most people who live in modern day California ... If i feel something is right, i do my research and verify it isn't.. Then I take up efforts to make others aware of it.. In hopes to have people make more informed decisions. It's clear those that don't want people to make informed decisions (become more educated on a matter) will try to detract from my effort and call it 'whining'. But hey, it's a free country

[yeahthatguy]

Originally Posted by yeahthatguy

Originally Posted by yeahthatguy
Tim. Some people like to read self-serving biased articles .. Regurgitate what they read and not look into things further. No matter how much you point out the discrepancies, they wont get it ... They'll say 'but but' and find some other foolish contrived statistics/%'age/# to feed their confirmation bias.

Originally Posted by .highnlite

Actually there, if you whine about taxes, you either have an income problem or a bad accountant.


Taxfoundation.org, have fun kids.

P.S - My comment was w/ respect to the remark about the $25 billion Texas budget deficit. I think i later clarified how it is being resolved by Texas. As for your remark about 1-2% difference in tax burdens (which I assume your remark is about) , I already clarified how this covers the full range of incomes and fails to namely accurately reflect the tax burden of anyone who makes a decent amount of income. So, thanks for linking to the main page of taxfoundation.org .

[TimC2462]

Originally Posted by yeahthatguy

P.S - My comment was w/ respect to the remark about the $25 billion Texas budget deficit. I think i later clarified how it is being resolved by Texas. As for your remark about 1-2% difference in tax burdens (which I assume your remark is about) , I already clarified how this covers the full range of incomes and fails to namely accurately reflect the tax burden of anyone who makes a decent amount of income. So, thanks for linking to the main page of taxfoundation.org .

Texas has addressed their budget deficit by slashing spending without raising taxes. People can criticize the state of Texas for its philosophy on civil services, but at least they managed to slash the budget deficit.

The same can't be said for California due to the legislature playing silly politics while being divorced from reality.

And BTW, my previous post on the per capita was taken right out of Taxfoundation.org. I even provided the links to the sources. Funny that no one bothered to check them out.

[yeahthatguy]

Originally Posted by TimC2462

Texas has addressed their budget deficit by slashing spending without raising taxes. People can criticize the state of Texas for its philosophy on civil services, but at least they managed to slash the budget deficit.

The same can't be said for California due to the legislature playing silly politics while being divorced from reality.

And BTW, my previous post on the per capita was taken right out of Taxfoundation.org. I even provided the links to the sources. Funny that no one bothered to check them out.

We are on the same page ... My comment was too Oerdin's post that said.. o' hey look.. texas has a $25 billion deficit too... for which i showed how texas is handling it (just like you)

I agree 100% w/ your view Tim and yes you provided direct links to your data which I have covered in previous research efforts !

Cheers mate

[.highnlite]

So, don't worry.. if you have your way, there will be lots of more free land to roam (what you desire) and tons more deficit burden for you to take on (what you don't realize) ... You have an objective which you make clear in all your posts : Get all of the hardworking modern day people out of California so you can enjoy the beauty of the barren land...

Look, half the state is already empty, (not barren) but land where people cannot live, by law, so we don't really need more public land, we need less people, the few people the better the quality of life.

Hardworking people can stay, ranchers, farmers, oilmen Fishermen etc. people with calluses on their hands.. The city slickers are welcome to Texas and Texas will welcome them.