Sacramento has a deficit of $4,300 per taxpayer.

[Ultrarunner]

Isn't that the promise of the Affordable Health Care Act... health coverage not tied to employment/employer?

In my area the single largest factor regarding Health Care coverage was Henry Kaiser... he needed war time workers and price and wage controls were in effect... so he offered health coverage as an incentive to get the workers he needed...

Kaiser Industries isn't building ships these days but the work Kaiser is well known in Health Care.

[shelato]

Originally Posted by wburg

A lot of that has to do with compromises made in the 1930s--factory workers could form unions and negotiate for benefits like pensions, while farm workers could not. Imagine if we had a "Medicare for all" type system, and a similarly robust public retirement system, and people would be free to start up their own businesses while still having some form of healthcare. Think of the potential for entrepreneurship and innovation if people didn't feel obliged to stick with an employer because of those sorts of benefits.

There are huge agency problems with retirement. If you set up a system like 401(K) where the individual is responsbile for saving enough of his own money for retirement, you have the problem of what do you do for the people who don't put away any money for the future. When you have employers responsible for setting aside money for pensions, you have the problems that we had in the 1970's and 80's where companies that had over-funded pensions got taken over and the money was given to shareholders, which created incentives for companies to under fund their pensions when stock markets fell. When government runs the pensions you have problems of Government leaders increasing benefits while they are running for election but not paying for the increase in benefits with higher taxes. So they tend to be underfunded like Calstars and Calpers are right now. Social Security and Medicare are legal ponzie schemes. There is no money put away and if the number of beneficiaries relative to payees goes up, you may need to raise rates dramatically.

Because none of the solutions is perfect, I think the current system is the best available option. You encourage those who will save to save for there retirement via Roth IRA's and 401Ks. You offer social security as a base line coverage for people with nothing else. You create financial incentives to encourage employers to offer some type of retirement system. But what you don't want is just one system, you want multiple different types of systems because you are not sure which system is going to work worst or relatively better.

[shelato]

Originally Posted by Ultrarunner

Isn't that the promise of the Affordable Health Care Act... health coverage not tied to employment/employer?

In my area the single largest factor regarding Health Care coverage was Henry Kaiser... he needed war time workers and price and wage controls were in effect... so he offered health coverage as an incentive to get the workers he needed...

Kaiser Industries isn't building ships these days but the work Kaiser is well known in Health Care.

The affordable care act has huge gaps in coverage. With the biggest one of the biggest ones being illegal aliens. Why that matters is that Emergency rooms are still mandated to treat anyone who comes in irrespective of ability to pay.

[wburg]

Originally Posted by Ultrarunner

Isn't that the promise of the Affordable Health Care Act... health coverage not tied to employment/employer?

In my area the single largest factor regarding Health Care coverage was Henry Kaiser... he needed war time workers and price and wage controls were in effect... so he offered health coverage as an incentive to get the workers he needed...

Kaiser Industries isn't building ships these days but the work Kaiser is well known in Health Care.

If you mean the Affordable Care Act, I'm not so sure about that--it's cheaper than what it replaced, but still a lot more expensive than a "Medicare for All" type plan (basically what is known as "single payer" in other countries.) The idea is a system that is portable between employers or without them, rather than healthcare generally being an employer-offered benefit that you pay out of pocket between jobs.

In Sacramento, Southern Pacific Railroad had its own hospital system as an employee benefit, their first hospital was Charlie Crocker's old house on 8th Street.

[WizardOfRadical]

Pay your taxes or suffer!!!!

[SFBayBoomer]

Originally Posted by KC6ZLV

According to the Assessor's report, a little less than 11% goes to incorporated cities in Sacramento County (pg 4).

http://www.assessor.saccounty.net/Fo...rt_rev1108.pdf

Assessors' reports only pertain to property taxes, just one item to consider.

Look at the County of Sacramento's Annual Financial Report and the city of Sacramento's financial report, both below:

http://www.finance.saccounty.net/Aud...R/CAFR2016.pdf

https://www.cityofsacramento.org/Fin...ting/Reporting

[the central scrutinizer]

Originally Posted by MyNewsLogin

Sacramento is projecting a $40 million deficit next year and a larger one in the following year unless we agree to additional taxes.

And now we will all get to pay for the arena the City couldn't afford to build but the oligarchs had to *have* at taxpayer expense (and that they could have easily afforded to build without any public assistance).

[sacite]

Originally Posted by the central scrutinizer

And now we will all get to pay for the arena the City couldn't afford to build but the oligarchs had to *have* at taxpayer expense (and that they could have easily afforded to build without any public assistance).

Can you prove that? If anything, the City is over collecting parking revenue beyond what it needs or agreed to fund. I think the Arena has created a surplus, to be honest. The city is in fact milking it. I’d like to see what other improvements and expenses they have planned for the future which are contributing to this deficit.

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by the central scrutinizer

And now we will all get to pay for the arena the City couldn't afford to build but the oligarchs had to *have* at taxpayer expense (and that they could have easily afforded to build without any public assistance).

How are you going to be forced to pay for it?

[MyNewsLogin]

Originally Posted by sacite

Can you prove that? If anything, the City is over collecting parking revenue beyond what it needs or agreed to fund. I think the Arena has created a surplus, to be honest. The city is in fact milking it. I’d like to see what other improvements and expenses they have planned for the future which are contributing to this deficit.

If there is such a surplus, why is the city talking about asking for multiple tax increases and extensions?


They are claiming poverty - not a surplus.