Prop 30: Southern California vs Texas

[EconProf]

Amen Ctr70.
Reminds me of one definition confirmed by the recent election: majority rule democracy is when two wolves and a lamb vote on what to eat for lunch.

[EconProf]

Californians are also fleeing to….Mexico.
CalWatchdog.com, a site I would recommend to all Piggs, has great articles specific to CA’s economy and politics.
It has a current piece about how Mexico’s economy is so thoroughly outperforming America’s by many measures. Unemployment of 5% vs. CA’s 10%, for starters (though probably tainted by measurement differences). A GNP growth rate in recent years about double America’s. A growing middle class vs. our hollowing out of the middle class. And while absolute measures of standard of living still hugely favor the US, it is the trends that count in the long run.
We’ve all learned that the net migration between our two countries of Mexican nationals is now essentially zero. Could it soon be a net flow to Mexico?
The CalWatchdog.com article pointed out that many Americans of anglo descent live illegally in Mexico. They estimate the number at one million now. I guess the Mexican Border Patrol will have to ramp up and keep the illegal gringos and their coyotes from sneaking accross at San Ysidro, LOL.

[an]

[quote=ctr70]Your forgetting prosperous countries like South Korea, New Zealand, Japan, Hong Kong, Singapore, Uraguay, Malaysia, and Australia (just to name a few), that have lower personal tax rates than the U.S. I especially like Hong Kong tax rates capped at 15% no matter what a persons income is. [/quote]Don’t forget Canada. http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/fq/txrts-eng.html Their top tax rate is 29% but the bottom tax rate is 15%.

[SK in CV]

[quote=CA renter]

We’re in total agreement about both parties not really helping the middle class, and I also agree that many government policies redistribute wealth. This is where things grey, as one could make the argument that the redistribution of wealth is unjust, unethical, etc. because the wealthier person worked harder and earned his/her wealth (which isn’t necessarily true at all). [/quote]

I’m way late to this thread, so my apologies for brining up day old topics, but this one struck a nerve.

All government activities, if paid for by general revenue dollars, redistribute wealth. Every single one of them. Unless the benefits of an expenditure are evenly distributed, wealth has been redistributed. That’s true even if taxes are truly flat ($x per person). In a system more commonly referred to as a flat tax (X% of income per person), there is always redistribution, irrespective of how benefits are distributed. Same with a progressive system (which our current system is, partly only in theory).

So when “redistribution of wealth” is discussed, it is always wrong to point at a single change and call it redistribution. It can only change the degree of redistribution. There is no system of income tax that is not redistribution of wealth.

[ltsddd]

[quote=EconProf]Californians are also fleeing to….Mexico.
CalWatchdog.com, a site I would recommend to all Piggs, has great articles specific to CA’s economy and politics.
It has a current piece about how Mexico’s economy is so thoroughly outperforming America’s by many measures. Unemployment of 5% vs. CA’s 10%, for starters (though probably tainted by measurement differences)
[/quote]

Mexico’s 5% unemployment rate sounds impressive until you dig a little deeper. This will help put it in perspective.

“Historically, from 2000 until 2012, Mexico Unemployment Rate averaged 3.7 Percent reaching an all time high of 5.9 Percent in May of 2009 and a record low of 2.2 Percent in November of 2002.”

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/mexico/unemployment-rate

I agree with you that the measurement systems are different.

[quote=EconProf]

A GNP growth rate in recent years about double America’s. [/quote]

That’s not what I am seeing according to this chart

chart

Mexico’s GNP: 1.52T(’09), 1.63T(’10), 1.72T(’11)
US’s GNP: 13.9T(’09), 14.63T(’10), 15.23T(’11)

YOY Growth (Mex vs US): 5% vs 7% and 6.5% vs 5%

[The Truth]

The sad thing in CA, and what makes us seriously ponder whether it’s worth staying here, is how much it’s rubbed in your face every day. The state takes more and more of our money. But yet, the roads are horrible, crime is getting worse, and gang activity is ignored while teachers get obscene pay for working part of the year even though public schools suck, lifeguards can make $150K+, admin workers at Long Beach hold out because nearly $200K is not enough, prison guards can make nearly $200K. Public sector workers get paid more while raking in benefits (including retirement) the private sector could only dream of. And I’m still told I’m not paying my fair share. And the funds from Prop 30 won’t make the schools better – just prop up more juicy retirement pay for teachers and administrators (of which there are far too many). Public union agitators take my tax money to picket, protest, and lobby against my interests. I am literally paying them to screw me.

[Coronita]

I give up. I vote for letting the bush era tax cuts to expire….For everyone…

Do nothing and let’s go off the fiscal cliff. Better now then later… Get it over with…

The bush era tax cuts were a gift. And rightfully so, we should revert back to pre-bush era for everyone.

It’s nice when one can spend money that’s not yours. But I think in order to stop the nonsense spending, everyone pays..Then everyone will watch their wallets better.

Go off the cliff…

[ctr70]

Another thing for those high income earners who have portable businesses looking to move out of the state of CA to avoid the state income tax, is the cumulative effect of paying a state income tax. If you pay $30k a year in state income taxes, that is $300k over 10 yrs. And you invested that $30k saved every year on a down payment on a cash flow rental or a trust deed, you would have more like $500k+ over 10 yrs. So you are losing $500k over 10 yrs for staying in CA!

[Coronita]

[quote=ctr70]Another thing for those high income earners who have portable businesses looking to move out of the state of CA to avoid the state income tax, is the cumulative effect of paying a state income tax. If you pay $30k a year in state income taxes, that is $300k over 10 yrs. And you invested that $30k saved every year on a down payment on a cash flow rental or a trust deed, you would have more like $500k+ over 10 yrs. So you are losing $500k over 10 yrs for staying in CA![/quote]

There aren’t many states that don’t have a state income tax. Also, if you plan on conducting business in CA, you’ll have to pay taxes even if you are out of state business.

[an]

@flu, let’s do it. Clinton years were the good years and Bush years were the bad ones, right. So let’s return everything back to Clinton years.

[SK in CV]

[quote=ctr70]Another thing for those high income earners who have portable businesses looking to move out of the state of CA to avoid the state income tax, is the cumulative effect of paying a state income tax. If you pay $30k a year in state income taxes, that is $300k over 10 yrs. And you invested that $30k saved every year on a down payment on a cash flow rental or a trust deed, you would have more like $500k+ over 10 yrs. So you are losing $500k over 10 yrs for staying in CA![/quote]

Just to add some perspective to this, for a married couple to pay $30K in taxes, their taxable income would have to be about $365K a year.

[Coronita]

[quote=AN]@flu, let’s do it. Clinton years were the good years and Bush years were the bad ones, right. So let’s return everything back to Clinton years.[/quote]

I really don’t have a problem with paying more taxes…if everyone has to pay more…

Because until that happens, it’s always easy for some people to suggest the government spend more money as long as it’s not theirs.

So at this point. I hope Bush era tax cuts expire for everyone…Like AYSO soccer. Everyone.. And everyone plays….

And really, if the Bush era tax cuts expire, it won’t really hurt the poor.. Not like poor people are thinking about 15% dividend tax rates or capital gains taxes.. So I don’t understand what the fuss is about if why we should extend these things for some people but not others. Hell, most americans can’t save worth shit anyway, and judging by a lot of comments recently, it seemed like a lot of them were clueless anyway that such tax breaks existed to begin with… So why bother keeping something that for people don’t even know or understand? Let it expire for everyone…

And while we’re at it.. Let’s let AMT kick in back to old times, so more middle class get ensnared by it too…

Maybe if everyone is asked to foot the bill for our orgasmic spending people would be a little bit more fiscally responsible once the dollars start coming out of everyone’s pockets.

[CA renter]

[quote=flu][quote=AN]@flu, let’s do it. Clinton years were the good years and Bush years were the bad ones, right. So let’s return everything back to Clinton years.[/quote]

I really don’t have a problem with paying more taxes…if everyone has to pay more…

Because until that happens, it’s always easy for some people to suggest the government spend more money as long as it’s not theirs.

So at this point. I hope Bush era tax cuts expire for everyone…Like AYSO soccer. Everyone.. And everyone plays….

And really, if the Bush era tax cuts expire, it won’t really hurt the poor.. Not like poor people are thinking about 15% dividend tax rates or capital gains taxes.. So I don’t understand what the fuss is about if why we should extend these things for some people but not others. Hell, most americans can’t save worth shit anyway, and judging by a lot of comments recently, it seemed like a lot of them were clueless anyway that such tax breaks existed to begin with… So why bother keeping something that for people don’t even know or understand? Let it expire for everyone…

And while we’re at it.. Let’s let AMT kick in back to old times, so more middle class get ensnared by it too…

Maybe if everyone is asked to foot the bill for our orgasmic spending people would be a little bit more fiscally responsible once the dollars start coming out of everyone’s pockets.[/quote]

Agree with this. I don’t think we need to extend the **temporary** tax cuts for anyone. All those cuts and what did we get in return? More bubbles, a much greater wealth/income gap and a global economy that is on the brink of collapse. Time to rein it all in; the party is over (and good riddance to it, too).

[The Truth]

[quote=ctr70]Another thing for those high income earners who have portable businesses looking to move out of the state of CA to avoid the state income tax, is the cumulative effect of paying a state income tax. If you pay $30k a year in state income taxes, that is $300k over 10 yrs. And you invested that $30k saved every year on a down payment on a cash flow rental or a trust deed, you would have more like $500k+ over 10 yrs. So you are losing $500k over 10 yrs for staying in CA![/quote]

If you make say $250K as a couple – the place where new state tax increases begin to kick in – you’ll probably be paying somewhere north of $20K to the state. With a modest down payment, that annual amount would cover the mortgage on a palace in the Las Vegas area. If you are ‘portable’, the move effectively pays for your housing. But it’s Las Vegas and not Southern California…

[Coronita]

[quote=The Truth][quote=ctr70]Another thing for those high income earners who have portable businesses looking to move out of the state of CA to avoid the state income tax, is the cumulative effect of paying a state income tax. If you pay $30k a year in state income taxes, that is $300k over 10 yrs. And you invested that $30k saved every year on a down payment on a cash flow rental or a trust deed, you would have more like $500k+ over 10 yrs. So you are losing $500k over 10 yrs for staying in CA![/quote]

If you make say $250K as a couple – the place where new state tax increases begin to kick in – you’ll probably be paying somewhere north of $20K to the state. With a modest down payment, that annual amount would cover the mortgage on a palace in the Las Vegas area. If you are ‘portable’, the move effectively pays for your housing. But it’s Las Vegas and not Southern California…[/quote]

Don’t waste your time arguing. If it really is gonna hit you.. Pay the money and start educating yourself on what to do. The more I read, the more I talk to people, the more I realize the more options one has if one just gets out of the W2 mold…

The people aren’t willing to put the time/energy/effort to understand things. And even if they are, you have an uphill battle because people who have knowledge most readily don’t like to share…Gotta do your own work…

Again, regarding prop 30…I think you’re numbers aren’t correct.

The surcharges kick in for $500k for a couple, $250k for individual, and if you can claim Head of Household, it’s $340k.

Fiscal cliff won’t kick in most likely to next year, and although it is possible for it to be retroactively applied, I doubt they will do it..Work from that assumption, you have 1 months left.

[Author]

Posts