Democrats realize raising taxes is a bad idea (San Luis Obispo, Industry: hotels, buying)

[hoffdano]

An interesting quote from the article:

Opponents of the program have pointed to a June analysis prepared by the non-partisan Legislative Analyst’s Office that found the program “appears to result in a net decline in state revenues.”

I think the point raised by the OP is valid. California wants to raise taxes on its citizens essentially across the board, but wants to reduce taxes on Hollywood.

What would California do if Chevron asked for a tax break? Why doesn't California take steps to stop Apple from avoiding CA taxes through its manipulation of various tax codes through Braeburn Capitol? Apple won't move any of its R&D out of CA.

[nullgeo]

Originally Posted by hoffdano

An interesting quote from the article:



I think the point raised by the OP is valid. California wants to raise taxes on its citizens essentially across the board, but wants to reduce taxes on Hollywood.

What would California do if Chevron asked for a tax break? Why doesn't California take steps to stop Apple from hiding taxes through its manipulation of various tax codes through Braeburn Capitol? Apple won't move any of its R&D out of CA.

It is a valid concern and point to ponder and study.
But, speaking of points: most incentivizing tax breaks, anywhere -- Texas, Nevada, N. Dakota, Timbuktu -- to retain or attract industry come at some cost to the offering state initially. Short-term costs need to be balanced by long-term potentials.

In the case of California and any industry right now, the people of the state need to ponder what the immediate losses of industry will be during this time of struggle. A modest loss of net revenue over the several next years compared to lots of layoffs and losses to ancillary businesses is a chain of reaction that may be cheaper to finance through smaller revenue losses for the short term, until California rebalances in a greater variety of ways.

[Curmudgeon]

The first thing California has to do besides the obvious (overspending) is wean itself from its out-of-balance reliance on income taxes as those are and almost always have been unreliable, especially at times of high unemployment as now. Of course it wouldn't hurt to get rid of Props. 13 and 58 either, direct the revenues back to the counties and then do away with the several realignment programs that invariably become insufficient while building ever-larger bureauocracies at the state level to maintain them.

But it won't happen!

[Shooting Stars]

Interesting national map, yeahthatguy. Looks like I'm in the right place at the right time.

I don't see this economic crises ending soon, so I'm amazed at any state that doesn't care about losing businesses while raising taxes at the same time. The math simply doesn't work.

[ZhugeLiang]

People who whine about crony capitalism and "tax cuts for the rich" and then look the other way just because it's Hollywood always have me howling with laughter.

[nullgeo]

Intersting comments:

Originally Posted by Shooting Stars

Interesting national map, yeahthatguy. Looks like I'm in the right place at the right time.

I don't see this economic crises ending soon, so I'm amazed at any state that doesn't care about losing businesses while raising taxes at the same time. The math simply doesn't work.

Please show us some sources for your claim that California "doesn't care about losing businesses".
And where will the money come from to cover the cost of "saving businesses" -- if the population doesn't support the efforts to recover?

Originally Posted by ZhugeLiang

People who whine about crony capitalism and "tax cuts for the rich" and then look the other way just because it's Hollywood always have me howling with laughter.

Fleabag hounds howl at sirens and the moon, too, when they mistake them for reality.
Speaking of reality -- show me where I "look the other way just because it's Hollywood".
Personally, I don't care whether they get the tax break or not.
I simply find the hypocrisy of some posters here hilarious.
"Make California business-competitive! or we'll all go down the toilet! (er, if it doesn't cost me a dime, that is)"

[ZhugeLiang]

Nullgeo, please stop. I'm actually starting to feel bad for how thoroughly you got taken apart already by yeahthatguy, even if you did bring it on yourself.

Same old story, ytg counters with facts, you counter with your rhetorical bubble. User_Id learned what a fruitless task that is which is why they don't bother to engage in discussion with ytg anymore, too bad you still haven't gotten the message. Some animals you just don't need to set traps for I suppose.

People like yourself claim to stand up for the little guy, but apparently they're nothing but whiners when things get too rough on their wallets (waits for your usual "well, it's a good thing they weren't fighting in my company back in the war, blah, blah, blah" rant). Or when they leave CA for a better life, "screw 'em, they just couldn't hack it!"

And all the while you're actually defending straight up cronyism while making a logically inept comparison to making CA more business friendly. Are you actually reading back over the stuff you're posting? I recommend you do.

[hoffdano]

Originally Posted by nullgeo

It is a valid concern and point to ponder and study.
But, speaking of points: most incentivizing tax breaks, anywhere -- Texas, Nevada, N. Dakota, Timbuktu -- to retain or attract industry come at some cost to the offering state initially. Short-term costs need to be balanced by long-term potentials.

In the case of California and any industry right now, the people of the state need to ponder what the immediate losses of industry will be during this time of struggle. A modest loss of net revenue over the several next years compared to lots of layoffs and losses to ancillary businesses is a chain of reaction that may be cheaper to finance through smaller revenue losses for the short term, until California rebalances in a greater variety of ways.

I agree with you on tax incentives. But attracting a new business with tax incentives is a bit different than tax incentives for an existing one. A new business, even with tax breaks, should produce a net positive in tax revenue since they didn't exist before. In Texas, those tax breaks are usually property taxes.

Once a business establishes roots, there is some "stickiness" or inertia that keeps them put.

Don't assume that everyone in Texas approves of tax incentives. Austin recently gave Apple a lot of incentive to increase their footprint here - mostly for support and sales people. A lot of people opposed those breaks because the thinking was Apple would come here anyway. Apple played hardball, and the politicians gave in. The state of Texas invested $25M to entice Formula 1 to come to Austin for the next ten years. Will it pay off? We'll find out soon.

I think the issues here on this thread are twofold:

- raising taxes on everyone while reducing them for an established California industry
- whether or not THIS PARTICULAR industry benefited from its clear association with the Democratic party

[tetka_grunya]

Originally Posted by hoffdano

- whether or not THIS PARTICULAR industry benefited from its clear association with the Democratic party

in other countries this practice calls "corruption" in goverment...

[Shooting Stars]

Originally Posted by nullgeo

Please show us some sources for your claim that California "doesn't care about losing businesses".

You're kidding, right?

Originally Posted by nullgeo

And where will the money come from to cover the cost of "saving businesses" -- if the population doesn't support the efforts to recover?

Considering CA citizens are already among the most highly taxed, and CA life is expensive and jobs are being lost, when will they crack? It will only cause the exodus to grow larger, so it will backfire.

Recover from what? The endless checkbook the CA government has overdrawn?

Attract more businesses with lower taxes and you get more revenue. The map that was posted is a shining example of how that works. Only a stubborn person refuses to see what the map shows in living color.