CA income taxes increasing 2.5%?

[an]

[quote=arraya]Many people will be forced to see that the poor are not a monolith of laziness and selfishness when they become poor and others will be demanding they get thrown off a cliff. I will be interesting see the psychology unfold.

[/quote]
People only see what they want to see. Just like they see “rich” people are a monolith of laziness and selfishness who goes through life w/ a silver spoon in their mouth. That’s why it’s OK to tax “them”. It’s only unfair when “you” are now considered “them”.

[sdrealtor]

Did he really say “Poor people and illegal immigrants should be sterilized.”

What an a%%.

[sdrealtor]

Did he really say “Poor people and illegal immigrants should be sterilized.”

What an a%%.

[sdrealtor]

Did he really say “Poor people and illegal immigrants should be sterilized.”

What an a%%.

[sdrealtor]

Did he really say “Poor people and illegal immigrants should be sterilized.”

What an a%%.

[sdrealtor]

Did he really say “Poor people and illegal immigrants should be sterilized.”

What an a%%.

[DWCAP]

[quote=esmith][quote=TheBreeze] I think the state should just go ahead and declare bankruptcy so that some judge can break the union contracts and start firing CA state employees left and right as it’s obvious the legislature doesn’t have the stones to do what needs to be done.[/quote]

Please tell us which contracts you would break and which state employees you would fire to close the projected $41 billion hole in the budget.[/quote]

I am gonna pop my 2 cents in here and just say that there are no “good” cuts. Everyone talks about “cutting the fat” and “reducing waist”, but in all reality that is pure BS.
There is nothing in the budget that doesnt support a good cause or benifit someone. The path to getting funding is so painful and long that no public moneys are ever really spent on frivilous crap unless it ends up being bad/illegal decisions by public servents. In a purely budgeting sense, we never “waist” money if you only look at the positives that were generated. This is why Sacramento, or Washington DC for that matter, can never cut spending in any real fundamental way. There are too many interest groups, with too much political clout, and too many good causes.
If we want to cut the budget, itll be “good” programs that go.

[DWCAP]

[quote=esmith][quote=TheBreeze] I think the state should just go ahead and declare bankruptcy so that some judge can break the union contracts and start firing CA state employees left and right as it’s obvious the legislature doesn’t have the stones to do what needs to be done.[/quote]

Please tell us which contracts you would break and which state employees you would fire to close the projected $41 billion hole in the budget.[/quote]

I am gonna pop my 2 cents in here and just say that there are no “good” cuts. Everyone talks about “cutting the fat” and “reducing waist”, but in all reality that is pure BS.
There is nothing in the budget that doesnt support a good cause or benifit someone. The path to getting funding is so painful and long that no public moneys are ever really spent on frivilous crap unless it ends up being bad/illegal decisions by public servents. In a purely budgeting sense, we never “waist” money if you only look at the positives that were generated. This is why Sacramento, or Washington DC for that matter, can never cut spending in any real fundamental way. There are too many interest groups, with too much political clout, and too many good causes.
If we want to cut the budget, itll be “good” programs that go.

[DWCAP]

[quote=esmith][quote=TheBreeze] I think the state should just go ahead and declare bankruptcy so that some judge can break the union contracts and start firing CA state employees left and right as it’s obvious the legislature doesn’t have the stones to do what needs to be done.[/quote]

Please tell us which contracts you would break and which state employees you would fire to close the projected $41 billion hole in the budget.[/quote]

I am gonna pop my 2 cents in here and just say that there are no “good” cuts. Everyone talks about “cutting the fat” and “reducing waist”, but in all reality that is pure BS.
There is nothing in the budget that doesnt support a good cause or benifit someone. The path to getting funding is so painful and long that no public moneys are ever really spent on frivilous crap unless it ends up being bad/illegal decisions by public servents. In a purely budgeting sense, we never “waist” money if you only look at the positives that were generated. This is why Sacramento, or Washington DC for that matter, can never cut spending in any real fundamental way. There are too many interest groups, with too much political clout, and too many good causes.
If we want to cut the budget, itll be “good” programs that go.

[DWCAP]

[quote=esmith][quote=TheBreeze] I think the state should just go ahead and declare bankruptcy so that some judge can break the union contracts and start firing CA state employees left and right as it’s obvious the legislature doesn’t have the stones to do what needs to be done.[/quote]

Please tell us which contracts you would break and which state employees you would fire to close the projected $41 billion hole in the budget.[/quote]

I am gonna pop my 2 cents in here and just say that there are no “good” cuts. Everyone talks about “cutting the fat” and “reducing waist”, but in all reality that is pure BS.
There is nothing in the budget that doesnt support a good cause or benifit someone. The path to getting funding is so painful and long that no public moneys are ever really spent on frivilous crap unless it ends up being bad/illegal decisions by public servents. In a purely budgeting sense, we never “waist” money if you only look at the positives that were generated. This is why Sacramento, or Washington DC for that matter, can never cut spending in any real fundamental way. There are too many interest groups, with too much political clout, and too many good causes.
If we want to cut the budget, itll be “good” programs that go.

[DWCAP]

[quote=esmith][quote=TheBreeze] I think the state should just go ahead and declare bankruptcy so that some judge can break the union contracts and start firing CA state employees left and right as it’s obvious the legislature doesn’t have the stones to do what needs to be done.[/quote]

Please tell us which contracts you would break and which state employees you would fire to close the projected $41 billion hole in the budget.[/quote]

I am gonna pop my 2 cents in here and just say that there are no “good” cuts. Everyone talks about “cutting the fat” and “reducing waist”, but in all reality that is pure BS.
There is nothing in the budget that doesnt support a good cause or benifit someone. The path to getting funding is so painful and long that no public moneys are ever really spent on frivilous crap unless it ends up being bad/illegal decisions by public servents. In a purely budgeting sense, we never “waist” money if you only look at the positives that were generated. This is why Sacramento, or Washington DC for that matter, can never cut spending in any real fundamental way. There are too many interest groups, with too much political clout, and too many good causes.
If we want to cut the budget, itll be “good” programs that go.

[DWCAP]

[quote=esmith]
Again I’d like details on what you propose to cram down. Let’s remember that our public school spending (50% of the budget) is already one of the lowest in the nation, our prison system is at twice the design capacity, etc. [/quote]

Id like to know where you got the idea that CA school spending is amongs the lowest in the nation. From what i can find,

Ca is #23 in state spending per pupil at $7511/year in 2001 numbers, but hardly dead last.

http://www.epodunk.com/top10/per_pupil/index.html

In 2006 we were #29. Not an inprovemnet in any way, but hardly amongst the lowest.
http://www.ed-data.k12.ca.us/Articles/article.asp?title=California%20comparison

That last article I found most illuminating. I mostly ignore alot of the math they did about spending per $1000 and such. I dont find that useful due to quirks of stats.

Here is what I really was interested in:

‘California’s average teacher salary—$59,825 in 2005–06—is higher than that of any other state. However, the relatively high cost of living in California is a contributing factor. In comparisons of teacher salaries among states, both the cost of living in each state and the seniority of the workforce play a role. The American Federation of Teachers looked at average teacher salaries in 2000–01 and determined that when cost-of-living factors were taken into account, California ranked 16th in the nation.’

And:

‘Although the state’s spending on education is above the national average (by 7% for K–12 and 4% for higher education), California spends more than 20% above the average in corrections, police and fire, and health and hospitals’.

My point is basically that while CA education is by no means the best funded in the country, it isnt amongst the worst either.

[DWCAP]

[quote=esmith]
Again I’d like details on what you propose to cram down. Let’s remember that our public school spending (50% of the budget) is already one of the lowest in the nation, our prison system is at twice the design capacity, etc. [/quote]

Id like to know where you got the idea that CA school spending is amongs the lowest in the nation. From what i can find,

Ca is #23 in state spending per pupil at $7511/year in 2001 numbers, but hardly dead last.

http://www.epodunk.com/top10/per_pupil/index.html

In 2006 we were #29. Not an inprovemnet in any way, but hardly amongst the lowest.
http://www.ed-data.k12.ca.us/Articles/article.asp?title=California%20comparison

That last article I found most illuminating. I mostly ignore alot of the math they did about spending per $1000 and such. I dont find that useful due to quirks of stats.

Here is what I really was interested in:

‘California’s average teacher salary—$59,825 in 2005–06—is higher than that of any other state. However, the relatively high cost of living in California is a contributing factor. In comparisons of teacher salaries among states, both the cost of living in each state and the seniority of the workforce play a role. The American Federation of Teachers looked at average teacher salaries in 2000–01 and determined that when cost-of-living factors were taken into account, California ranked 16th in the nation.’

And:

‘Although the state’s spending on education is above the national average (by 7% for K–12 and 4% for higher education), California spends more than 20% above the average in corrections, police and fire, and health and hospitals’.

My point is basically that while CA education is by no means the best funded in the country, it isnt amongst the worst either.

[DWCAP]

[quote=esmith]
Again I’d like details on what you propose to cram down. Let’s remember that our public school spending (50% of the budget) is already one of the lowest in the nation, our prison system is at twice the design capacity, etc. [/quote]

Id like to know where you got the idea that CA school spending is amongs the lowest in the nation. From what i can find,

Ca is #23 in state spending per pupil at $7511/year in 2001 numbers, but hardly dead last.

http://www.epodunk.com/top10/per_pupil/index.html

In 2006 we were #29. Not an inprovemnet in any way, but hardly amongst the lowest.
http://www.ed-data.k12.ca.us/Articles/article.asp?title=California%20comparison

That last article I found most illuminating. I mostly ignore alot of the math they did about spending per $1000 and such. I dont find that useful due to quirks of stats.

Here is what I really was interested in:

‘California’s average teacher salary—$59,825 in 2005–06—is higher than that of any other state. However, the relatively high cost of living in California is a contributing factor. In comparisons of teacher salaries among states, both the cost of living in each state and the seniority of the workforce play a role. The American Federation of Teachers looked at average teacher salaries in 2000–01 and determined that when cost-of-living factors were taken into account, California ranked 16th in the nation.’

And:

‘Although the state’s spending on education is above the national average (by 7% for K–12 and 4% for higher education), California spends more than 20% above the average in corrections, police and fire, and health and hospitals’.

My point is basically that while CA education is by no means the best funded in the country, it isnt amongst the worst either.

[DWCAP]

[quote=esmith]
Again I’d like details on what you propose to cram down. Let’s remember that our public school spending (50% of the budget) is already one of the lowest in the nation, our prison system is at twice the design capacity, etc. [/quote]

Id like to know where you got the idea that CA school spending is amongs the lowest in the nation. From what i can find,

Ca is #23 in state spending per pupil at $7511/year in 2001 numbers, but hardly dead last.

http://www.epodunk.com/top10/per_pupil/index.html

In 2006 we were #29. Not an inprovemnet in any way, but hardly amongst the lowest.
http://www.ed-data.k12.ca.us/Articles/article.asp?title=California%20comparison

That last article I found most illuminating. I mostly ignore alot of the math they did about spending per $1000 and such. I dont find that useful due to quirks of stats.

Here is what I really was interested in:

‘California’s average teacher salary—$59,825 in 2005–06—is higher than that of any other state. However, the relatively high cost of living in California is a contributing factor. In comparisons of teacher salaries among states, both the cost of living in each state and the seniority of the workforce play a role. The American Federation of Teachers looked at average teacher salaries in 2000–01 and determined that when cost-of-living factors were taken into account, California ranked 16th in the nation.’

And:

‘Although the state’s spending on education is above the national average (by 7% for K–12 and 4% for higher education), California spends more than 20% above the average in corrections, police and fire, and health and hospitals’.

My point is basically that while CA education is by no means the best funded in the country, it isnt amongst the worst either.

[Author]

Posts