California Special Election May 19 (taxes, live in, budget)

[sav858]

Originally Posted by Lovehound

You are the only one discussing a tax rate increase except for rebuttals. The rest of us are discussing more taxes.

Yes b/c I consider a tax increase an increase in the rate. I've stated that so many times by now and am running in circles with you here. You obviously don't see it that way and I do, get over it already and move on so I don't have to keep repeating myself.

I was referring to this topic. Do you see any posts that agree with you?

Not sure but I've seen plenty of reputation comments on my posts in here, so those people must agree with me or at least like what I said. That's nice you feel validated by anonymous internet comments though. And it looks like most voters disagree with me but I'll still stand by what I believe and think, follow the group mentality if that's your thing though.

Voting YES will cost us more in taxes over the long run. Voting NO will cost us less in taxes over the long run.

Go ahead and believe that b/c I do not. We'll be in the same exact position we've always been in if these props fail, which they probably will. And that position has brought us past deficits and tax increases, like the one we are currently live with.

But I guess you think doing things the same way will somehow produce different results.

[dcashley]

Originally Posted by sav858

An increase in WHAT? The rate or the revenue? An increase in revenue does not always come from an increase in the rate.
So what do you call it when the TAX rate stays the same but tax REVENUE goes up? How is that a "tax increase"?

An increase means more taxes. If it comes from tax rates increasing--that's an increase. If it comes from more things to tax but the same rate--that's an increase. If tax collections go up -- it is an increase in taxes. This is simple "increase" equals "up".

So you're arguing sales tax increases hurt the economy but apparently income tax increases do not?

I didn't say that. I said sales taxes over about 8% hurt every economy that they've been enacted in. I also said SOME income taxes help the economy. We have gone beyond the 8% sales tax barrier, and we have far too many income taxes which do not provide for future returns on the investment. Therefore our current taxes are too high overall.

So according to you income taxes help the economy, so why are you voting No when Prop 1A calls for maintaining the current income tax increase if you believe its good for the economy?

Asked, and answered.

VOTE NO!

Yes and look at where not having a strict spending cap and rainy day funds got us: BUDGET DEFICITS and TAX INCREASES. I don't get why so many people want to maintain the status quo when it is exactly that which gets us into this mess every damn year it seems. We had the same budget problems in the past and unless anything changes will have them in the future.

Spending caps only work if they are real. These spending caps can be overcome by a vote of the legislature--they are just words, and will require an additional clause in every budget bill. That is all they are. This is bogus....really bogus.

So go ahead and vote no but don't expect anything to change with this state and how its run.

EVERYONE VOTE NO. Doing so won't fix our insanely broken government--but it is a start. A small start. But a start.

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by happ

Both the Democratic & Republican parties are in favor of the May 19 initiatives & that, alone, should suggest that these proposals need to be voted in [except No on # 4 & 5].

In my 17 year of experience working with (not for) the Legislature on both sides of the political spectrum, if the parties are in favor of it (which, actually, the Republicans are not but for a handful) that's every good reason to vote "NO!" If they like it, it doesn't bode well for the rest of us or the state as a whole.

Of course, if you support a variety of special interests...

[dcashley]

Originally Posted by sav858

Yesbut I've seen plenty of reputation comments on my posts in here, so those people must agree with me or at least like what I said. .

I rep'ed you when I thought you were arguing VOTE NO.

[Lovehound]

Originally Posted by dcashley

I rep'ed you when I thought you were arguing VOTE NO.

LMFAO!!!

There ya go sav858!

Whether or not you think it is or is not an increase, everybody in this topic except you is voting NO, and you admit that it's probably going down in defeat. That's good enough for me.

We should start a new political party: the "No Party."

In fact, let's have a party if all the measures fail!

[dcashley]

Originally Posted by Lovehound

LMFAO!!!

There ya go sav858!

Whether or not you think it is or is not an increase, everybody in this topic except you is voting NO, and you admit that it's probably going down in defeat. That's good enough for me.

We should start a new political party: the "No Party."

In fact, let's have a party if all the measures fail!

I'm going to have a party right NOW!... I just voted (absentee) and I beleive that Caifornians as a whole are too smart to allow their "loved" politicans to pull the wool over their eyes with these bogus propositions.

[sav858]

Originally Posted by dcashley

An increase means more taxes. If it comes from tax rates increasing--that's an increase. If it comes from more things to tax but the same rate--that's an increase. If tax collections go up -- it is an increase in taxes. This is simple "increase" equals "up".

It's not that simple b/c you are not specifying what is increasing, the rate or the revenue.

Tax revenue can increase w/o any increase in the rate from people making more and/or spending more. And that is one of the biggest fundamental problem with CA's budget imo, it is way too dependent on sales tax and income taxe revenue. The revenue from those taxes are very volatile and swing with the economy. And that will not change b/c of Prop 13, so the only way I see mitigating that is placing a spending cap and rainy day fund so we don't get screwed in bad years, like now.

Spending caps only work if they are real.

They only work if there is an actual cap in place too.

These spending caps can be overcome by a vote of the legislature

So can increasing taxes, which they just did. Voting No doesn't prevent them from raising taxes in the future. And w/o a spending cap and rainy day fund, it just gives them more reason to IMO.

[sav858]

Originally Posted by dcashley

I'm going to have a party right NOW!... I just voted (absentee) and I beleive that Caifornians as a whole are too smart to allow their "loved" politicans to pull the wool over their eyes with these bogus propositions.

You know whats also funny is how Californians vote to spend more money but won't vote to raise the revenue for all those expenses then try to blame everyone else but themselves. Apparently many of us believe we can have our cake and it eat it too!

I really wouldn't call CA voters smart considering the mess we're in.

[Lovehound]

I think I'll have a party today too, but I have a rule that I never drink before 5:00 p.m. and I rarely violate that by more than an hour. Well... at least no more than once per day.

In fact I just filled out my vote by mail application, going to mail it tomorrow, and we have until May 12th for the registrar to receive it. I'll turn it around as soon as I get the ballot. I realized that I like voting, I feel that it my duty and responsibility, but I don't like going to the polling place. It's worth the cost of a first class stamp.

Do they count the absentee ballots before the election?

[sav858]

Originally Posted by Lovehound

Whether or not you think it is or is not an increase, everybody in this topic except you is voting NO, and you admit that it's probably going down in defeat. That's good enough for me.

Apparently you missed the second post in this thread or anything Happ has posted, but you seem to enjoy that group mentality anyways.