| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#1
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
What has brought California to such a perilous state? How did its
government become so wildly dysfunctional? One obvious cause is the deep recession that has caused tax revenues to plunge for all states. But California's woes have a set of deeper reasons: direct democracy run amok, timid governors, partisan gridlock and a flawed constitution all contribute to budget chaos and people in pain. And at the root of California's misery lies Proposition 13, the antitax measure that ignited the Reagan Revolution and the conservative era. In Washington, the Reagan-Bush era is over. But in California, the conservative legacy lives on. http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/2009062...08599190493800 "Direct democracy run amok". 2pid, is too much direct democracy a bad thing in a representative republic? And how does it feel to know your movement is "over"? LoL. |
|
#2
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jun 28, 3:05*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote: What has brought California to such a perilous state? How did its government become so wildly dysfunctional? One obvious cause is the deep recession that has caused tax revenues to plunge for all states. But California's woes have a set of deeper reasons: direct democracy run amok, timid governors, partisan gridlock and a flawed constitution all contribute to budget chaos and people in pain. And at the root of California's misery lies Proposition 13, the antitax measure that ignited the Reagan Revolution and the conservative era. In Washington, the Reagan-Bush era is over. But in California, the conservative legacy lives on. http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/2009062...08599190493800 "Direct democracy run amok". 2pid, is too much direct democracy a bad thing in a representative republic? And how does it feel to know your movement is "over"? LoL. Yes indeed, California is the last bastion of Conservatism!!!! |
|
#3
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jun 28, 8:35*pm, Clyde Slick wrote:
On Jun 28, 3:05*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: What has brought California to such a perilous state? How did its government become so wildly dysfunctional? One obvious cause is the deep recession that has caused tax revenues to plunge for all states. But California's woes have a set of deeper reasons: direct democracy run amok, timid governors, partisan gridlock and a flawed constitution all contribute to budget chaos and people in pain. And at the root of California's misery lies Proposition 13, the antitax measure that ignited the Reagan Revolution and the conservative era. In Washington, the Reagan-Bush era is over. But in California, the conservative legacy lives on. http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/2009062...08599190493800 "Direct democracy run amok". 2pid, is too much direct democracy a bad thing in a representative republic? And how does it feel to know your movement is "over"? LoL. Yes indeed, California is the last bastion of Conservatism!!!! And all thanks to "the will of the people"!!!!!!!! (Oh, and an ill-advised proposition.) |
|
#4
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jun 29, 12:09*am, ScottW2 wrote:
On Jun 28, 6:35*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 28, 3:05*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: What has brought California to such a perilous state? How did its government become so wildly dysfunctional? One obvious cause is the deep recession that has caused tax revenues to plunge for all states. But California's woes have a set of deeper reasons: direct democracy run amok, timid governors, partisan gridlock and a flawed constitution all contribute to budget chaos and people in pain. And at the root of California's misery lies Proposition 13, the antitax measure that ignited the Reagan Revolution and the conservative era. In Washington, the Reagan-Bush era is over. But in California, the conservative legacy lives on. http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/2009062...08599190493800 "Direct democracy run amok". 2pid, is too much direct democracy a bad thing in a representative republic? And how does it feel to know your movement is "over"? LoL. Yes indeed, California is the last bastion of Conservatism!!!! LoL. *If only it were true. *Meanwhile here's a few facts for the tax and spend lunatics. http://weblog.signonsandiego.com/web...es/034048.html Under Prop 13 property tax revenues have not only far outpaced inflation and population growth combined but also grew faster than other sources of revenue. One would hope you could find a valid cite for your positions but apparently not. LoL. Poor shhh. One would hope what might be his last days could be better spent than trolling on RAO but apparently not. I'm not planning on dying, 2pid. And who's trolling? I'm really REALLY ****ed at the liberal MSM! Congrats on the trophy though! |
|
#5
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jun 29, 12:09*am, ScottW2 wrote:
On Jun 28, 6:35*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 28, 3:05*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: What has brought California to such a perilous state? How did its government become so wildly dysfunctional? One obvious cause is the deep recession that has caused tax revenues to plunge for all states. But California's woes have a set of deeper reasons: direct democracy run amok, timid governors, partisan gridlock and a flawed constitution all contribute to budget chaos and people in pain. And at the root of California's misery lies Proposition 13, the antitax measure that ignited the Reagan Revolution and the conservative era. In Washington, the Reagan-Bush era is over. But in California, the conservative legacy lives on. http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/2009062...08599190493800 "Direct democracy run amok". 2pid, is too much direct democracy a bad thing in a representative republic? And how does it feel to know your movement is "over"? LoL. Yes indeed, California is the last bastion of Conservatism!!!! LoL. *If only it were true. *Meanwhile here's a few facts for the tax and spend lunatics. PS: Like Warren Buffett? In the 2003 California recall election in which Arnold Schwarzenegger was elected governor, his advisor Warren Buffett suggested that Proposition 13 be repealed or changed as a method of balancing the state's budget. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Califor...ition_13_(1978) LoL. Yeah, 2pid, I trust your views on large financial issues over those of Warren Buffett. LoL. |
|
#6
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
In article
, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 12:09*am, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 28, 6:35*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 28, 3:05*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: What has brought California to such a perilous state? How did its government become so wildly dysfunctional? One obvious cause is the deep recession that has caused tax revenues to plunge for all states. But California's woes have a set of deeper reasons: direct democracy run amok, timid governors, partisan gridlock and a flawed constitution all contribute to budget chaos and people in pain. And at the root of California's misery lies Proposition 13, the antitax measure that ignited the Reagan Revolution and the conservative era. In Washington, the Reagan-Bush era is over. But in California, the conservative legacy lives on. http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/2009062...08599190493800 "Direct democracy run amok". 2pid, is too much direct democracy a bad thing in a representative republic? And how does it feel to know your movement is "over"? LoL. Yes indeed, California is the last bastion of Conservatism!!!! LoL. *If only it were true. *Meanwhile here's a few facts for the tax and spend lunatics. http://weblog.signonsandiego.com/web...es/034048.html Under Prop 13 property tax revenues have not only far outpaced inflation and population growth combined but also grew faster than other sources of revenue. One would hope you could find a valid cite for your positions but apparently not. LoL. Didn't he trot this one out a while back? Maybe he should explain why the comparison to inflation, population growth and "other sources of revenue" is valid to the discussion. The Jarvis website says taxpayers have saved "over $528 billion." Stephen Poor shhh. One would hope what might be his last days could be better spent than trolling on RAO but apparently not. I'm not planning on dying, 2pid. And who's trolling? I'm really REALLY ****ed at the liberal MSM! Congrats on the trophy though! |
|
#7
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jun 29, 7:07*am, MiNe 109 wrote:
*"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 12:09*am, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 28, 6:35*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 28, 3:05*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: What has brought California to such a perilous state? How did its government become so wildly dysfunctional? One obvious cause is the deep recession that has caused tax revenues to plunge for all states. But California's woes have a set of deeper reasons: direct democracy run amok, timid governors, partisan gridlock and a flawed constitution all contribute to budget chaos and people in pain. And at the root of California's misery lies Proposition 13, the antitax measure that ignited the Reagan Revolution and the conservative era. In Washington, the Reagan-Bush era is over. But in California, the conservative legacy lives on. http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/2009062...08599190493800 "Direct democracy run amok". 2pid, is too much direct democracy a bad thing in a representative republic? And how does it feel to know your movement is "over"? LoL. Yes indeed, California is the last bastion of Conservatism!!!! LoL. *If only it were true. *Meanwhile here's a few facts for the tax and spend lunatics. http://weblog.signonsandiego.com/web...es/034048.html Under Prop 13 property tax revenues have not only far outpaced inflation and population growth combined but also grew faster than other sources of revenue. One would hope you could find a valid cite for your positions but apparently not. LoL. Didn't he trot this one out a while back? Maybe he should explain why the comparison to inflation, population growth and "other sources of revenue" is valid to the discussion. The Jarvis website says taxpayers have saved "over $528 billion." Maybe most of that savings is for corporations who have shell companies set up. Did you know that you could buy a shopping center in California and not have the taxes increase? If the mall is deeded to a corporation like "Mega Mall Assets LLC" all you do is buy the corporation. Since it's not a real estate transaction the property tax is not recalculated. Owners of commercial real estate have also benefited: if a corporation owning commercial property (such as a shopping mall) is sold or merged, but the property stays technically deeded to the corporation, ownership of the property can effectively change hands without triggering Proposition 13's provision that fixes the amount of tax based on the property's resale value.[3] Since many properties owned by large companies are nominally owned by shell companies whose sole assets are the properties in question, this has led to situations that have struck many commentators, such as Steve Lopez and Michael Hiltzik of the Los Angeles Times, as absurd and unfair, with companies taking a lesser percentage of the overall tax burden than private homeowners. [3] Smaller property owners do not have the "shell company" advantage that large property owners do.[3] As an example, the Times has reported that the property tax bill of the historic Capitol Records building in Hollywood is approximately five cents per square foot, while a small house assessed at $300,000 may pay up to 60 times that on a per-square-foot basis. Critics of Proposition 13 have argued that this situation unfairly benefits commercial property owners and should be changed,[3] but recent attempted ballot initiatives have not succeeded in altering assessment formulas. Tim Taylor at the University of Minnesota has analyzed Prop 13 as part of a problem of "Generational Justice" and a pattern of specifically providing tax breaks and benefits to one generational cohort-and tax increases and reduction in services to another generational cohort. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Califor...ition_13_(1978) I'll bet 2pid loves scenarios like that. Otherwise it's possible that the mall might move to Ireland. Wiki has a pretty good overview of the results of prop 13. It seems a little more balanced and intelligent that 2pid's cite. |
|
#8
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
In article
, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 7:07*am, MiNe 109 wrote: *"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 12:09*am, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 28, 6:35*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 28, 3:05*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: What has brought California to such a perilous state? How did its government become so wildly dysfunctional? One obvious cause is the deep recession that has caused tax revenues to plunge for all states. But California's woes have a set of deeper reasons: direct democracy run amok, timid governors, partisan gridlock and a flawed constitution all contribute to budget chaos and people in pain. And at the root of California's misery lies Proposition 13, the antitax measure that ignited the Reagan Revolution and the conservative era. In Washington, the Reagan-Bush era is over. But in California, the conservative legacy lives on. http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/2009062...08599190493800 "Direct democracy run amok". 2pid, is too much direct democracy a bad thing in a representative republic? And how does it feel to know your movement is "over"? LoL. Yes indeed, California is the last bastion of Conservatism!!!! LoL. *If only it were true. *Meanwhile here's a few facts for the tax and spend lunatics. http://weblog.signonsandiego.com/web...es/034048.html Under Prop 13 property tax revenues have not only far outpaced inflation and population growth combined but also grew faster than other sources of revenue. One would hope you could find a valid cite for your positions but apparently not. LoL. Didn't he trot this one out a while back? Maybe he should explain why the comparison to inflation, population growth and "other sources of revenue" is valid to the discussion. The Jarvis website says taxpayers have saved "over $528 billion." Maybe most of that savings is for corporations who have shell companies set up. Did you know that you could buy a shopping center in California and not have the taxes increase? If the mall is deeded to a corporation like "Mega Mall Assets LLC" all you do is buy the corporation. Since it's not a real estate transaction the property tax is not recalculated. snip http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Califor...ition_13_(1978) I'll bet 2pid loves scenarios like that. Otherwise it's possible that the mall might move to Ireland. And he's happy with his local government services! Wiki has a pretty good overview of the results of prop 13. It seems a little more balanced and intelligent that 2pid's cite. The 2/3rds requirement for tax increases is pernicious. At some point, even an economy as huge as California's can't afford to not tax. Stephen |
|
#9
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jun 29, 10:20*am, MiNe 109 wrote:
In article , *"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 7:07*am, MiNe 109 * wrote: *"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 12:09*am, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 28, 6:35*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 28, 3:05*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: What has brought California to such a perilous state? How did its government become so wildly dysfunctional? One obvious cause is the deep recession that has caused tax revenues to plunge for all states. But California's woes have a set of deeper reasons: direct democracy run amok, timid governors, partisan gridlock and a flawed constitution all contribute to budget chaos and people in pain. And at the root of California's misery lies Proposition 13, the antitax measure that ignited the Reagan Revolution and the conservative era. In Washington, the Reagan-Bush era is over. But in California, the conservative legacy lives on. http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/2009062...08599190493800 "Direct democracy run amok". 2pid, is too much direct democracy a bad thing in a representative republic? And how does it feel to know your movement is "over"? LoL. Yes indeed, California is the last bastion of Conservatism!!!! LoL. *If only it were true. *Meanwhile here's a few facts for the tax and spend lunatics. http://weblog.signonsandiego.com/web...es/034048.html Under Prop 13 property tax revenues have not only far outpaced inflation and population growth combined but also grew faster than other sources of revenue. One would hope you could find a valid cite for your positions but apparently not. LoL. Didn't he trot this one out a while back? Maybe he should explain why the comparison to inflation, population growth and "other sources of revenue" is valid to the discussion. The Jarvis website says taxpayers have saved "over $528 billion." Maybe most of that savings is for corporations who have shell companies set up. Did you know that you could buy a shopping center in California and not have the taxes increase? If the mall is deeded to a corporation like "Mega Mall Assets LLC" all you do is buy the corporation. Since it's not a real estate transaction the property tax is not recalculated. snip http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Califor...ition_13_(1978) I'll bet 2pid loves scenarios like that. Otherwise it's possible that the mall might move to Ireland. And he's happy with his local government services! I would hope he keeps a very accurate accounting of those he uses. Wiki has a pretty good overview of the results of prop 13. It seems a little more balanced and intelligent that 2pid's cite. The 2/3rds requirement for tax increases is pernicious. At some point, even an economy as huge as California's can't afford to not tax. It looks like there are too many loopholes in Prop 13 and no way to address them. If you look at dum-dum's arguments he appears to be saying that Prop 13 didn't go far enough. OTOH Warren Buffett seems to think it went too far. OTOOH Jarvis claims over one-half trillion 'saved'. Who to believe? I choose Buffett. I even choose Jarvis over Bonehead. ;-) |
|
#10
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jun 29, 5:09*pm, ScottW2 wrote:
On Jun 29, 8:20*am, MiNe 109 * wrote: In article , *"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 7:07*am, MiNe 109 * wrote: *"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 12:09*am, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 28, 6:35*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 28, 3:05*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: What has brought California to such a perilous state? How did its government become so wildly dysfunctional? One obvious cause is the deep recession that has caused tax revenues to plunge for all states. But California's woes have a set of deeper reasons: direct democracy run amok, timid governors, partisan gridlock and a flawed constitution all contribute to budget chaos and people in pain. And at the root of California's misery lies Proposition 13, the antitax measure that ignited the Reagan Revolution and the conservative era. In Washington, the Reagan-Bush era is over. But in California, the conservative legacy lives on. http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/2009062...08599190493800 "Direct democracy run amok". 2pid, is too much direct democracy a bad thing in a representative republic? And how does it feel to know your movement is "over"? LoL. Yes indeed, California is the last bastion of Conservatism!!!! LoL. *If only it were true. *Meanwhile here's a few facts for the tax and spend lunatics. http://weblog.signonsandiego.com/web...es/034048.html Under Prop 13 property tax revenues have not only far outpaced inflation and population growth combined but also grew faster than other sources of revenue. One would hope you could find a valid cite for your positions but apparently not. LoL. Didn't he trot this one out a while back? Maybe he should explain why the comparison to inflation, population growth and "other sources of revenue" is valid to the discussion. The Jarvis website says taxpayers have saved "over $528 billion." Maybe most of that savings is for corporations who have shell companies set up. Did you know that you could buy a shopping center in California and not have the taxes increase? If the mall is deeded to a corporation like "Mega Mall Assets LLC" all you do is buy the corporation. Since it's not a real estate transaction the property tax is not recalculated. snip http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Califor...ition_13_(1978) I'll bet 2pid loves scenarios like that. Otherwise it's possible that the mall might move to Ireland. And he's happy with his local government services! Wiki has a pretty good overview of the results of prop 13. It seems a little more balanced and intelligent that 2pid's cite. The 2/3rds requirement for tax increases is pernicious. At some point, even an economy as huge as California's can't afford to not tax. *LoL. "Can't afford to not tax." Ca. ranked 6th in the nation in tax burden per capita in 2008. http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/443.html That was before passing these tax increases. - Sales taxes raised by one percentage point - Additional 5% surcharge on state income taxes. - Increase in the vehicle-license fee from 0.65% to 1.15%. Um, dum-dum? These are all brought to you courtesy of Prop 13. There will be more forthcoming I'm sure. *But hey, don't let a few facts ruin your delusion. The only "delusion" is that Prop 13 was a good thing. And you seem to be the only one holding it. LoL. |
|
#11
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jun 29, 10:57*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote: On Jun 29, 7:07*am, MiNe 109 * wrote: *"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 12:09*am, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 28, 6:35*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 28, 3:05*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: What has brought California to such a perilous state? How did its government become so wildly dysfunctional? One obvious cause is the deep recession that has caused tax revenues to plunge for all states. But California's woes have a set of deeper reasons: direct democracy run amok, timid governors, partisan gridlock and a flawed constitution all contribute to budget chaos and people in pain. And at the root of California's misery lies Proposition 13, the antitax measure that ignited the Reagan Revolution and the conservative era. In Washington, the Reagan-Bush era is over. But in California, the conservative legacy lives on. http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/2009062...08599190493800 "Direct democracy run amok". 2pid, is too much direct democracy a bad thing in a representative republic? And how does it feel to know your movement is "over"? LoL. Yes indeed, California is the last bastion of Conservatism!!!! LoL. *If only it were true. *Meanwhile here's a few facts for the tax and spend lunatics. http://weblog.signonsandiego.com/web...es/034048.html Under Prop 13 property tax revenues have not only far outpaced inflation and population growth combined but also grew faster than other sources of revenue. One would hope you could find a valid cite for your positions but apparently not. LoL. Didn't he trot this one out a while back? Maybe he should explain why the comparison to inflation, population growth and "other sources of revenue" is valid to the discussion. The Jarvis website says taxpayers have saved "over $528 billion." Maybe most of that savings is for corporations who have shell companies set up. Did you know that you could buy a shopping center in California and not have the taxes increase? If the mall is deeded to a corporation like "Mega Mall Assets LLC" all you do is buy the corporation. Since it's not a real estate transaction the property tax is not recalculated. It depends on what taxes you are talking about. Yes, the buyer would not pay one time transfer taxes and recording fees if the transaction was for the corporate ownership vs the real property.. As far as the property taxes, I am not sure of a few things. Not residing in California, I don't know if Prop 13 covers all properties, or only residentialo properties. At any rate, commercial real property owners would also be looking at income taxes, as those properties are revenue producers, and it might be beneficial on the Fed tax level to sell the property vs sell the corportation, depending upon where they are in the depreciation scale. So, really, its a matter of individual circumstance, and can't be painted all one color. But you are right in some cases, just not in all cases. It gets pretty complicated. Owners of commercial real estate have also benefited: if a corporation owning commercial property (such as a shopping mall) is sold or merged, but the property stays technically deeded to the corporation, ownership of the property can effectively change hands without triggering Proposition 13's provision that fixes the amount of tax based on the property's resale value.[3] Since many properties owned by large companies are nominally owned by shell companies whose sole assets are the properties in question, this has led to situations that have struck many commentators, such as Steve Lopez and Michael Hiltzik of the Los Angeles Times, as absurd and unfair, with companies taking a lesser percentage of the overall tax burden than private homeowners. [3] Smaller property owners do not have the "shell company" advantage that large property owners do.[3] As an example, the Times has reported that the property tax bill of the historic Capitol Records building in Hollywood is approximately five cents per square foot, while a small house assessed at $300,000 may pay up to 60 times that on a per-square-foot basis. I suspect that there may be a reason for that. Do historic properties get a tax break in Calif? I don't know, but before putting faith in'that comparison, I would want to know. Critics of Proposition 13 have argued that this situation unfairly benefits commercial property owners and should be changed,[3] but recent attempted ballot initiatives have not succeeded in altering assessment formulas. Tim Taylor at the University of Minnesota has analyzed Prop 13 as part of a problem of "Generational Justice" and a pattern of specifically providing tax breaks and benefits to one generational cohort-and tax increases and reduction in services to another generational cohort. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Califor...ition_13_(1978) I'll bet 2pid loves scenarios like that. Otherwise it's possible that the mall might move to Ireland. I don't know, what are the, vacancy rates? normal, higher than normal? |
|
#12
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jun 29, 6:09*pm, ScottW2 wrote:
On Jun 29, 8:20*am, MiNe 109 * wrote: In article , *"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 7:07*am, MiNe 109 * wrote: *"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 12:09*am, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 28, 6:35*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 28, 3:05*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: What has brought California to such a perilous state? How did its government become so wildly dysfunctional? One obvious cause is the deep recession that has caused tax revenues to plunge for all states. But California's woes have a set of deeper reasons: direct democracy run amok, timid governors, partisan gridlock and a flawed constitution all contribute to budget chaos and people in pain. And at the root of California's misery lies Proposition 13, the antitax measure that ignited the Reagan Revolution and the conservative era. In Washington, the Reagan-Bush era is over. But in California, the conservative legacy lives on. http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/2009062...08599190493800 "Direct democracy run amok". 2pid, is too much direct democracy a bad thing in a representative republic? And how does it feel to know your movement is "over"? LoL. Yes indeed, California is the last bastion of Conservatism!!!! LoL. *If only it were true. *Meanwhile here's a few facts for the tax and spend lunatics. http://weblog.signonsandiego.com/web...es/034048.html Under Prop 13 property tax revenues have not only far outpaced inflation and population growth combined but also grew faster than other sources of revenue. One would hope you could find a valid cite for your positions but apparently not. LoL. Didn't he trot this one out a while back? Maybe he should explain why the comparison to inflation, population growth and "other sources of revenue" is valid to the discussion. The Jarvis website says taxpayers have saved "over $528 billion." Maybe most of that savings is for corporations who have shell companies set up. Did you know that you could buy a shopping center in California and not have the taxes increase? If the mall is deeded to a corporation like "Mega Mall Assets LLC" all you do is buy the corporation. Since it's not a real estate transaction the property tax is not recalculated. snip http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Califor...ition_13_(1978) I'll bet 2pid loves scenarios like that. Otherwise it's possible that the mall might move to Ireland. And he's happy with his local government services! Wiki has a pretty good overview of the results of prop 13. It seems a little more balanced and intelligent that 2pid's cite. The 2/3rds requirement for tax increases is pernicious. At some point, even an economy as huge as California's can't afford to not tax. *LoL. "Can't afford to not tax." Ca. ranked 6th in the nation in tax burden per capita in 2008. http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/443.html That was before passing these tax increases. - Sales taxes raised by one percentage point - Additional 5% surcharge on state income taxes. - Increase in the vehicle-license fee from 0.65% to 1.15%. *But hey, don't let a few facts ruin your delusion. ScottW- there are lots of ways to measure that overall burden. waht taxes are included, and what wer not included in that calculation? |
|
#13
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jun 29, 5:47*pm, Clyde Slick wrote:
On Jun 29, 10:57*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 7:07*am, MiNe 109 * wrote: *"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 12:09*am, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 28, 6:35*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 28, 3:05*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: What has brought California to such a perilous state? How did its government become so wildly dysfunctional? One obvious cause is the deep recession that has caused tax revenues to plunge for all states. But California's woes have a set of deeper reasons: direct democracy run amok, timid governors, partisan gridlock and a flawed constitution all contribute to budget chaos and people in pain. And at the root of California's misery lies Proposition 13, the antitax measure that ignited the Reagan Revolution and the conservative era. In Washington, the Reagan-Bush era is over. But in California, the conservative legacy lives on. http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/2009062...08599190493800 "Direct democracy run amok". 2pid, is too much direct democracy a bad thing in a representative republic? And how does it feel to know your movement is "over"? LoL. Yes indeed, California is the last bastion of Conservatism!!!! LoL. *If only it were true. *Meanwhile here's a few facts for the tax and spend lunatics. http://weblog.signonsandiego.com/web...es/034048.html Under Prop 13 property tax revenues have not only far outpaced inflation and population growth combined but also grew faster than other sources of revenue. One would hope you could find a valid cite for your positions but apparently not. LoL. Didn't he trot this one out a while back? Maybe he should explain why the comparison to inflation, population growth and "other sources of revenue" is valid to the discussion. The Jarvis website says taxpayers have saved "over $528 billion." Maybe most of that savings is for corporations who have shell companies set up. Did you know that you could buy a shopping center in California and not have the taxes increase? If the mall is deeded to a corporation like "Mega Mall Assets LLC" all you do is buy the corporation. Since it's not a real estate transaction the property tax is not recalculated. It depends on what taxes you are talking about. Yes, the buyer would not pay one time transfer taxes and recording fees if the transaction was for the corporate ownership vs the real property.. As far as the property taxes, I am not sure of a few things. Not residing in California, I don't know if Prop 13 covers all properties, or only residentialo properties. wiki is saying "all". At any rate, commercial real property owners would also be looking at income taxes, as those properties are revenue producers, and it might be beneficial on the Fed tax level to sell the property vs sell the corportation, depending upon where they are in the depreciation scale. Homeowners face income tax too, just not income derived from their property. So, really, its a matter of individual circumstance, and can't be painted all one color. But you are right in some cases, just not in all cases. It gets pretty complicated. It's probably too complicated for a "one size fits all" 'solution' like Prop 13. As an example, the Times has reported that the property tax bill of the historic Capitol Records building in Hollywood is approximately five cents per square foot, while a small house assessed at $300,000 may pay up to 60 times that on a per-square-foot basis. I suspect that there may be a reason for that. Do historic properties get a tax break in Calif? I don't think it's a registered historic landmark. It's just an office building. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitol...cords_Building Substitute "easily recognizable" or "well-known". I don't know, but before putting faith in'that comparison, I would want to know. Critics of Proposition 13 have argued that this situation unfairly benefits commercial property owners and should be changed,[3] but recent attempted ballot initiatives have not succeeded in altering assessment formulas. Tim Taylor at the University of Minnesota has analyzed Prop 13 as part of a problem of "Generational Justice" and a pattern of specifically providing tax breaks and benefits to one generational cohort-and tax increases and reduction in services to another generational cohort. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Califor...ition_13_(1978) I'll bet 2pid loves scenarios like that. Otherwise it's possible that the mall might move to Ireland. I don't know, what are the, vacancy rates? normal, higher than normal? Irrelevant. That will change over time. I'm sure vacancy is lower than "normal" now and in 2007 was probably higher than "normal". |
|
#14
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jun 29, 7:13*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote: At any rate, commercial real property owners would also be looking at income taxes, as those properties are revenue producers, and it might be beneficial on the Fed tax level to sell the property vs sell the corportation, depending upon where they are in the depreciation scale. Homeowners face income tax too, just not income derived from their property. Let me be more specific, owners of commercial properties pay income taxses on the income produced by the commercial property. When the depreciation schedule ends, it afects taxes, and it means \"decison time". what I am saying, is tht prop 13 is but one factor leading to a deceison as to whther to buy or sell or hold property. So, really, its a matter of individual circumstance, and can't be painted all one color. But you are right in some cases, just not in all cases. It gets pretty complicated. It's probably too complicated for a "one size fits all" 'solution' like Prop 13. As an example, the Times has reported that the property tax bill of the historic Capitol Records building in Hollywood is approximately five cents per square foot, while a small house assessed at $300,000 may pay up to 60 times that on a per-square-foot basis. I suspect that there may be a reason for that. Do historic properties get a tax break in Calif? I don't think it's a registered historic landmark. It's just an office building. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitol...l_Records_Buil... Substitute "easily recognizable" or "well-known". I don't know, but before putting faith in'that comparison, I would want to know. Critics of Proposition 13 have argued that this situation unfairly benefits commercial property owners and should be changed,[3] but recent attempted ballot initiatives have not succeeded in altering assessment formulas. Tim Taylor at the University of Minnesota has analyzed Prop 13 as part of a problem of "Generational Justice" and a pattern of specifically providing tax breaks and benefits to one generational cohort-and tax increases and reduction in services to another generational cohort. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Califor...ition_13_(1978) I'll bet 2pid loves scenarios like that. Otherwise it's possible that the mall might move to Ireland. I don't know, what are the, vacancy rates? normal, higher than normal? Irrelevant. That will change over time. I'm sure vacancy is lower than "normal" now and in 2007 was probably higher than "normal".- Hide quoted text - Obviously, malls don't move, but tenants do. New malls get built, unproductive ones get redeveloped or rehabilitated. |
|
#15
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jun 29, 7:26*pm, ScottW2 wrote:
On Jun 29, 3:49*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 29, 6:09*pm, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 29, 8:20*am, MiNe 109 * wrote: In article , *"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 7:07*am, MiNe 109 * wrote: *"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 12:09*am, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 28, 6:35*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 28, 3:05*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: What has brought California to such a perilous state? How did its government become so wildly dysfunctional? One obvious cause is the deep recession that has caused tax revenues to plunge for all states. But California's woes have a set of deeper reasons: direct democracy run amok, timid governors, partisan gridlock and a flawed constitution all contribute to budget chaos and people in pain. And at the root of California's misery lies Proposition 13, the antitax measure that ignited the Reagan Revolution and the conservative era. In Washington, the Reagan-Bush era is over. But in California, the conservative legacy lives on. http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/2009062...08599190493800 "Direct democracy run amok". 2pid, is too much direct democracy a bad thing in a representative republic? And how does it feel to know your movement is "over"? LoL. Yes indeed, California is the last bastion of Conservatism!!!! LoL. *If only it were true. *Meanwhile here's a few facts for the tax and spend lunatics. http://weblog.signonsandiego.com/web...s/034048..html Under Prop 13 property tax revenues have not only far outpaced inflation and population growth combined but also grew faster than other sources of revenue. One would hope you could find a valid cite for your positions but apparently not. LoL. Didn't he trot this one out a while back? Maybe he should explain why the comparison to inflation, population growth and "other sources of revenue" is valid to the discussion. The Jarvis website says taxpayers have saved "over $528 billion." Maybe most of that savings is for corporations who have shell companies set up. Did you know that you could buy a shopping center in California and not have the taxes increase? If the mall is deeded to a corporation like "Mega Mall Assets LLC" all you do is buy the corporation. Since it's not a real estate transaction the property tax is not recalculated. snip http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Califor...ition_13_(1978) I'll bet 2pid loves scenarios like that. Otherwise it's possible that the mall might move to Ireland. And he's happy with his local government services! Wiki has a pretty good overview of the results of prop 13. It seems a little more balanced and intelligent that 2pid's cite. The 2/3rds requirement for tax increases is pernicious. At some point, even an economy as huge as California's can't afford to not tax. *LoL. "Can't afford to not tax." Ca. ranked 6th in the nation in tax burden per capita in 2008. http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/443.html That was before passing these tax increases. - Sales taxes raised by one percentage point - Additional 5% surcharge on state income taxes. - Increase in the vehicle-license fee from 0.65% to 1.15%. *But hey, don't let a few facts ruin your delusion. ScottW- there are lots of ways to measure that overall burden. waht taxes are included, and what wer not included in that calculation? http://www.taxfoundation.org/publica...how/22320.html "For each state, we calculate the total amount paid by the residents in taxes, and we divide those taxes by the total income in each state to compute a "tax burden" measure." Is that too complicated for you? ScottW- No, the opposite, it is too simple for me. What taxes??? to know if the survey makes a valid point,' we need to know wbhat taxes are included or not included. |
|
#16
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jun 30, 9:36*am, Clyde Slick wrote:
On Jun 29, 7:26*pm, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 29, 3:49*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 29, 6:09*pm, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 29, 8:20*am, MiNe 109 * wrote: In article , *"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 7:07*am, MiNe 109 * wrote: *"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 12:09*am, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 28, 6:35*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 28, 3:05*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: What has brought California to such a perilous state? How did its government become so wildly dysfunctional? One obvious cause is the deep recession that has caused tax revenues to plunge for all states. But California's woes have a set of deeper reasons: direct democracy run amok, timid governors, partisan gridlock and a flawed constitution all contribute to budget chaos and people in pain. And at the root of California's misery lies Proposition 13, the antitax measure that ignited the Reagan Revolution and the conservative era. In Washington, the Reagan-Bush era is over. But in California, the conservative legacy lives on. http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/2009062...08599190493800 "Direct democracy run amok". 2pid, is too much direct democracy a bad thing in a representative republic? And how does it feel to know your movement is "over"? LoL. Yes indeed, California is the last bastion of Conservatism!!!! LoL. *If only it were true. *Meanwhile here's a few facts for the tax and spend lunatics. http://weblog.signonsandiego.com/web...es/034048.html Under Prop 13 property tax revenues have not only far outpaced inflation and population growth combined but also grew faster than other sources of revenue. One would hope you could find a valid cite for your positions but apparently not. LoL. Didn't he trot this one out a while back? Maybe he should explain why the comparison to inflation, population growth and "other sources of revenue" is valid to the discussion. The Jarvis website says taxpayers have saved "over $528 billion." Maybe most of that savings is for corporations who have shell companies set up. Did you know that you could buy a shopping center in California and not have the taxes increase? If the mall is deeded to a corporation like "Mega Mall Assets LLC" all you do is buy the corporation. Since it's not a real estate transaction the property tax is not recalculated. snip http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Califor...ition_13_(1978) I'll bet 2pid loves scenarios like that. Otherwise it's possible that the mall might move to Ireland. And he's happy with his local government services! Wiki has a pretty good overview of the results of prop 13. It seems a little more balanced and intelligent that 2pid's cite. The 2/3rds requirement for tax increases is pernicious. At some point, even an economy as huge as California's can't afford to not tax. *LoL. "Can't afford to not tax." Ca. ranked 6th in the nation in tax burden per capita in 2008. http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/443.html That was before passing these tax increases. - Sales taxes raised by one percentage point - Additional 5% surcharge on state income taxes. - Increase in the vehicle-license fee from 0.65% to 1.15%. *But hey, don't let a few facts ruin your delusion. ScottW- there are lots of ways to measure that overall burden. waht taxes are included, and what wer not included in that calculation? http://www.taxfoundation.org/publica...how/22320.html "For each state, we calculate the total amount paid by the residents in taxes, and we divide those taxes by the total income in each state to compute a "tax burden" measure." Is that too complicated for you? ScottW- No, the opposite, it is too simple for me. What taxes??? to know if the survey makes a valid point,' we need to know wbhat taxes are included or not included. It looks like what they do is take all taxes and divide by all income to come up with a percent. It is like 2pid's "spending divided by number of taxpayers" formula for federal taxes. Remember when he advocated that one? LOL! But you're exactly correct: the formula is too simple to be of any real use. |
|
#17
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jun 30, 5:05*pm, ScottW2 wrote:
On Jun 30, 1:08*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 30, 9:36*am, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 29, 7:26*pm, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 29, 3:49*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 29, 6:09*pm, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 29, 8:20*am, MiNe 109 * wrote: In article , *"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 7:07*am, MiNe 109 * wrote: *"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 12:09*am, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 28, 6:35*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 28, 3:05*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: What has brought California to such a perilous state? How did its government become so wildly dysfunctional? One obvious cause is the deep recession that has caused tax revenues to plunge for all states. But California's woes have a set of deeper reasons: direct democracy run amok, timid governors, partisan gridlock and a flawed constitution all contribute to budget chaos and people in pain.. And at the root of California's misery lies Proposition 13, the antitax measure that ignited the Reagan Revolution and the conservative era. In Washington, the Reagan-Bush era is over. But in California, the conservative legacy lives on. http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/2009062...08599190493800 "Direct democracy run amok". 2pid, is too much direct democracy a bad thing in a representative republic? And how does it feel to know your movement is "over"? LoL. Yes indeed, California is the last bastion of Conservatism!!!! LoL. *If only it were true. *Meanwhile here's a few facts for the tax and spend lunatics. http://weblog.signonsandiego.com/web...es/034048.html Under Prop 13 property tax revenues have not only far outpaced inflation and population growth combined but also grew faster than other sources of revenue. One would hope you could find a valid cite for your positions but apparently not. LoL. Didn't he trot this one out a while back? Maybe he should explain why the comparison to inflation, population growth and "other sources of revenue" is valid to the discussion. The Jarvis website says taxpayers have saved "over $528 billion." Maybe most of that savings is for corporations who have shell companies set up. Did you know that you could buy a shopping center in California and not have the taxes increase? If the mall is deeded to a corporation like "Mega Mall Assets LLC" all you do is buy the corporation. Since it's not a real estate transaction the property tax is not recalculated. snip http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Califor...ition_13_(1978) I'll bet 2pid loves scenarios like that. Otherwise it's possible that the mall might move to Ireland. And he's happy with his local government services! Wiki has a pretty good overview of the results of prop 13. It seems a little more balanced and intelligent that 2pid's cite. The 2/3rds requirement for tax increases is pernicious. At some point, even an economy as huge as California's can't afford to not tax. *LoL. "Can't afford to not tax." Ca. ranked 6th in the nation in tax burden per capita in 2008. http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/443.html That was before passing these tax increases. - Sales taxes raised by one percentage point - Additional 5% surcharge on state income taxes. - Increase in the vehicle-license fee from 0.65% to 1.15%. *But hey, don't let a few facts ruin your delusion. ScottW- there are lots of ways to measure that overall burden. waht taxes are included, and what wer not included in that calculation? http://www.taxfoundation.org/publica...how/22320.html "For each state, we calculate the total amount paid by the residents in taxes, and we divide those taxes by the total income in each state to compute a "tax burden" measure." Is that too complicated for you? ScottW- No, the opposite, it is too simple for me. What taxes??? to know if the survey makes a valid point,' we need to know wbhat taxes are included or not included. It looks like what they do is take all taxes and divide by all income to come up with a percent. It is like 2pid's "spending divided by number of taxpayers" formula for federal taxes. Remember when he advocated that one? LOL! *You probably don't pay your fair share. Of course I don't. After all, I disagree with you! (What a dum-dum.) But you're exactly correct: the formula is too simple to be of any real use. *If you wanted to compare states tax burdens, what would you do different? Well, let's see. A comparison by income bracket would be helpful for one. A breakout of regressive versus progressive taxes would also help. These accounting shifts also shift the "tax burdens" of some states onto states that have no control over the tax rates: •When Connecticut residents work in New York City and pay income tax there to both the state and the city, the Census Bureau will duly tally those amounts as New York tax collections, but we will count them as part of the tax burden of Connecticut's residents. •When Illinois and Massachusetts residents own second homes in nearby Wisconsin or Maine, local governments in Wisconsin and Maine will tally those property tax collections, but we will shift those payments back to the states of the taxpayers. •When people all over the country vacation in Disney World or Las Vegas, tax collectors will tally the receipts from lodging, rental car, restaurant and general sales taxes in Florida and Nevada, but we will use economic tools to tally those payments in the states where the vacationers live. Every state's economic activity is different, as is every state's tax code. As a result, they vary in their ability to "export their tax burden"-that is, to collect revenue from non-residents. Economists have been studying this phenomenon since at least the 1960s when Charles McLure (1967) estimated that states were extracting between 15 and 35 percent of their tax revenue from non-residents. http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/22320.html IOW, if I live in Nevada and work in California, your dreaded California tax rates shift to the "burden" of residents of Nevada. If I own a second home in another state that shifts back to my state. So if my second home is on Long Island with 1000 feet of oceanfront my state gets "blamed" for a high tax burden. Rental cars, hotels, etc. typically have high taxes because politicians know they are getting money from nonresident tourists. But in this study the home state is the one blamed with the high tax burden. That's for starters. It's a very simple snapshot (simple enough for you which is probably why you like it) but I sure as hell wouldn't base any tax policy on it. |
|
#18
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jun 30, 6:27*pm, ScottW2 wrote:
On Jun 30, 3:43*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 30, 5:05*pm, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 30, 1:08*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 30, 9:36*am, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 29, 7:26*pm, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 29, 3:49*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 29, 6:09*pm, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 29, 8:20*am, MiNe 109 * wrote: In article , *"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 7:07*am, MiNe 109 * wrote: *"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 12:09*am, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 28, 6:35*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 28, 3:05*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: What has brought California to such a perilous state? How did its government become so wildly dysfunctional? One obvious cause is the deep recession that has caused tax revenues to plunge for all states. But California's woes have a set of deeper reasons: direct democracy run amok, timid governors, partisan gridlock and a flawed constitution all contribute to budget chaos and people in pain. And at the root of California's misery lies Proposition 13, the antitax measure that ignited the Reagan Revolution and the conservative era. In Washington, the Reagan-Bush era is over. But in California, the conservative legacy lives on. http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/2009062...08599190493800 "Direct democracy run amok". 2pid, is too much direct democracy a bad thing in a representative republic? And how does it feel to know your movement is "over"? LoL. Yes indeed, California is the last bastion of Conservatism!!!! LoL. *If only it were true. *Meanwhile here's a few facts for the tax and spend lunatics. http://weblog.signonsandiego.com/web...es/034048.html Under Prop 13 property tax revenues have not only far outpaced inflation and population growth combined but also grew faster than other sources of revenue. One would hope you could find a valid cite for your positions but apparently not. LoL. Didn't he trot this one out a while back? Maybe he should explain why the comparison to inflation, population growth and "other sources of revenue" is valid to the discussion. The Jarvis website says taxpayers have saved "over $528 billion." Maybe most of that savings is for corporations who have shell companies set up. Did you know that you could buy a shopping center in California and not have the taxes increase? If the mall is deeded to a corporation like "Mega Mall Assets LLC" all you do is buy the corporation. Since it's not a real estate transaction the property tax is not recalculated. snip http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Califor...ition_13_(1978) I'll bet 2pid loves scenarios like that. Otherwise it's possible that the mall might move to Ireland. And he's happy with his local government services! Wiki has a pretty good overview of the results of prop 13. It seems a little more balanced and intelligent that 2pid's cite. The 2/3rds requirement for tax increases is pernicious. At some point, even an economy as huge as California's can't afford to not tax. *LoL. "Can't afford to not tax." Ca. ranked 6th in the nation in tax burden per capita in 2008. http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/443.html That was before passing these tax increases. - Sales taxes raised by one percentage point - Additional 5% surcharge on state income taxes. - Increase in the vehicle-license fee from 0.65% to 1.15%. *But hey, don't let a few facts ruin your delusion. ScottW- there are lots of ways to measure that overall burden. waht taxes are included, and what wer not included in that calculation? http://www.taxfoundation.org/publica...how/22320.html "For each state, we calculate the total amount paid by the residents in taxes, and we divide those taxes by the total income in each state to compute a "tax burden" measure." Is that too complicated for you? ScottW- No, the opposite, it is too simple for me. What taxes??? to know if the survey makes a valid point,' we need to know wbhat taxes are included or not included. It looks like what they do is take all taxes and divide by all income to come up with a percent. It is like 2pid's "spending divided by number of taxpayers" formula for federal taxes. Remember when he advocated that one? LOL! *You probably don't pay your fair share. Of course I don't. After all, I disagree with you! (What a dum-dum.) But you're exactly correct: the formula is too simple to be of any real use. *If you wanted to compare states tax burdens, what would you do different? Well, let's see. A comparison by income bracket would be helpful for one. A breakout of regressive versus progressive taxes would also help. *(snip the useless detail for which no purpose was defined). Which answered the question you asked, imbecile. LOL! "If you wanted to compare states tax burdens, what would you do different?" What an imbecile. LOL! snip irrelevant statement which does not address the weaknesses in 2pid's link |
|
#19
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
Shhhh! said to Woofies: *If you wanted to compare states tax burdens, what would you do different? Well, let's see. A comparison by income bracket would be helpful for one. A breakout of regressive versus progressive taxes would also help. sigh You know perfectly well that research (and actual reading of relevant material) consumes time -- time that could be spent yapping and otherwise fomenting arguments. Expecting Witless to spontaneously disobey his ingrained yap-havior patterns is asking quite a lot. |
|
#20
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jun 30, 6:38*pm, George M. Middius
wrote: Shhhh! said to Woofies: If you wanted to compare states tax burdens, what would you do different? Well, let's see. A comparison by income bracket would be helpful for one. A breakout of regressive versus progressive taxes would also help. sigh You know perfectly well that research (and actual reading of relevant material) consumes time -- time that could be spent yapping and otherwise fomenting arguments. Expecting Witless to spontaneously disobey his ingrained yap-havior patterns is asking quite a lot. Yes, I agree. Did you notice that 2pid asked me what issues I had with his link and then he snipped my answer and called "irrelevant"? LOL! What a moron. |
|
#21
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
Shhhh! said: Well, let's see. A comparison by income bracket would be helpful for one. A breakout of regressive versus progressive taxes would also help. sigh You know perfectly well that research (and actual reading of relevant material) consumes time -- time that could be spent yapping and otherwise fomenting arguments. Expecting Witless to spontaneously disobey his ingrained yap-havior patterns is asking quite a lot. Yes, I agree. Did you notice that 2pid asked me what issues I had with his link and then he snipped my answer and called "irrelevant"? I'm sure Witless was afraid you were trying to overload his 'mind' with a passel of facts. He was right to run away and hide in the face of such a barrage. The last time he tried to chew through a fact-barrage, he had to be confined to his kennel for several days and force-fed doggie tranks. |
|
#22
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jun 30, 6:55*pm, George M. Middius
wrote: Shhhh! said: Well, let's see. A comparison by income bracket would be helpful for one. A breakout of regressive versus progressive taxes would also help. sigh You know perfectly well that research (and actual reading of relevant material) consumes time -- time that could be spent yapping and otherwise fomenting arguments. Expecting Witless to spontaneously disobey his ingrained yap-havior patterns is asking quite a lot. Yes, I agree. Did you notice that 2pid asked me what issues I had with his link and then he snipped my answer and called "irrelevant"? I'm sure Witless was afraid you were trying to overload his 'mind' with a passel of facts. He was right to run away and hide in the face of such a barrage. The last time he tried to chew through a fact-barrage, he had to be confined to his kennel for several days and force-fed doggie tranks. Poor pooch. My heart actually does go out to people who are so overwhelmed by life. I still feel more sorry for the stray mongrels that 2pid has admittedly performed fellatio on though. |
|
#23
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jun 30, 2:52*pm, ScottW2 wrote:
On Jun 30, 7:36*am, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 29, 7:26*pm, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 29, 3:49*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 29, 6:09*pm, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 29, 8:20*am, MiNe 109 * wrote: In article , *"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 7:07*am, MiNe 109 * wrote: *"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 12:09*am, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 28, 6:35*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 28, 3:05*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: What has brought California to such a perilous state? How did its government become so wildly dysfunctional? One obvious cause is the deep recession that has caused tax revenues to plunge for all states. But California's woes have a set of deeper reasons: direct democracy run amok, timid governors, partisan gridlock and a flawed constitution all contribute to budget chaos and people in pain. And at the root of California's misery lies Proposition 13, the antitax measure that ignited the Reagan Revolution and the conservative era. In Washington, the Reagan-Bush era is over. But in California, the conservative legacy lives on. http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/2009062...08599190493800 "Direct democracy run amok". 2pid, is too much direct democracy a bad thing in a representative republic? And how does it feel to know your movement is "over"? LoL. Yes indeed, California is the last bastion of Conservatism!!!! LoL. *If only it were true. *Meanwhile here's a few facts for the tax and spend lunatics. http://weblog.signonsandiego.com/web...es/034048.html Under Prop 13 property tax revenues have not only far outpaced inflation and population growth combined but also grew faster than other sources of revenue. One would hope you could find a valid cite for your positions but apparently not. LoL. Didn't he trot this one out a while back? Maybe he should explain why the comparison to inflation, population growth and "other sources of revenue" is valid to the discussion. The Jarvis website says taxpayers have saved "over $528 billion." Maybe most of that savings is for corporations who have shell companies set up. Did you know that you could buy a shopping center in California and not have the taxes increase? If the mall is deeded to a corporation like "Mega Mall Assets LLC" all you do is buy the corporation. Since it's not a real estate transaction the property tax is not recalculated. snip http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Califor...ition_13_(1978) I'll bet 2pid loves scenarios like that. Otherwise it's possible that the mall might move to Ireland. And he's happy with his local government services! Wiki has a pretty good overview of the results of prop 13. It seems a little more balanced and intelligent that 2pid's cite. The 2/3rds requirement for tax increases is pernicious. At some point, even an economy as huge as California's can't afford to not tax.. *LoL. "Can't afford to not tax." Ca. ranked 6th in the nation in tax burden per capita in 2008. http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/443.html That was before passing these tax increases. - Sales taxes raised by one percentage point - Additional 5% surcharge on state income taxes. - Increase in the vehicle-license fee from 0.65% to 1.15%. *But hey, don't let a few facts ruin your delusion. ScottW- there are lots of ways to measure that overall burden. waht taxes are included, and what wer not included in that calculation? http://www.taxfoundation.org/publica...how/22320.html "For each state, we calculate the total amount paid by the residents in taxes, and we divide those taxes by the total income in each state to compute a "tax burden" measure." Is that too complicated for you? ScottW- No, the opposite, it is too simple for me. What taxes??? * All of them. ScottW- How do you know that? do you even know what all of them are? |
|
#24
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jun 30, 4:08*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote: On Jun 30, 9:36*am, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 29, 7:26*pm, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 29, 3:49*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 29, 6:09*pm, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 29, 8:20*am, MiNe 109 * wrote: In article , *"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 7:07*am, MiNe 109 * wrote: *"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 12:09*am, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 28, 6:35*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 28, 3:05*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: What has brought California to such a perilous state? How did its government become so wildly dysfunctional? One obvious cause is the deep recession that has caused tax revenues to plunge for all states. But California's woes have a set of deeper reasons: direct democracy run amok, timid governors, partisan gridlock and a flawed constitution all contribute to budget chaos and people in pain. And at the root of California's misery lies Proposition 13, the antitax measure that ignited the Reagan Revolution and the conservative era. In Washington, the Reagan-Bush era is over. But in California, the conservative legacy lives on. http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/2009062...08599190493800 "Direct democracy run amok". 2pid, is too much direct democracy a bad thing in a representative republic? And how does it feel to know your movement is "over"? LoL. Yes indeed, California is the last bastion of Conservatism!!!! LoL. *If only it were true. *Meanwhile here's a few facts for the tax and spend lunatics. http://weblog.signonsandiego.com/web...es/034048.html Under Prop 13 property tax revenues have not only far outpaced inflation and population growth combined but also grew faster than other sources of revenue. One would hope you could find a valid cite for your positions but apparently not. LoL. Didn't he trot this one out a while back? Maybe he should explain why the comparison to inflation, population growth and "other sources of revenue" is valid to the discussion. The Jarvis website says taxpayers have saved "over $528 billion." Maybe most of that savings is for corporations who have shell companies set up. Did you know that you could buy a shopping center in California and not have the taxes increase? If the mall is deeded to a corporation like "Mega Mall Assets LLC" all you do is buy the corporation. Since it's not a real estate transaction the property tax is not recalculated. snip http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Califor...ition_13_(1978) I'll bet 2pid loves scenarios like that. Otherwise it's possible that the mall might move to Ireland. And he's happy with his local government services! Wiki has a pretty good overview of the results of prop 13. It seems a little more balanced and intelligent that 2pid's cite. The 2/3rds requirement for tax increases is pernicious. At some point, even an economy as huge as California's can't afford to not tax.. *LoL. "Can't afford to not tax." Ca. ranked 6th in the nation in tax burden per capita in 2008. http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/443.html That was before passing these tax increases. - Sales taxes raised by one percentage point - Additional 5% surcharge on state income taxes. - Increase in the vehicle-license fee from 0.65% to 1.15%. *But hey, don't let a few facts ruin your delusion. ScottW- there are lots of ways to measure that overall burden. waht taxes are included, and what wer not included in that calculation? http://www.taxfoundation.org/publica...how/22320.html "For each state, we calculate the total amount paid by the residents in taxes, and we divide those taxes by the total income in each state to compute a "tax burden" measure." Is that too complicated for you? ScottW- No, the opposite, it is too simple for me. What taxes??? to know if the survey makes a valid point,' we need to know wbhat taxes are included or not included. It looks like what they do is take all taxes and divide by all income to come up with a percent. It is like 2pid's "spending divided by number of taxpayers" formula for federal taxes. Remember when he advocated that one? LOL! But you're exactly correct: the formula is too simple to be of any real use.- I am not sure they even used "all" of the taxes. |
|
#25
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jun 30, 8:31*pm, Clyde Slick wrote:
On Jun 30, 4:08*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 30, 9:36*am, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 29, 7:26*pm, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 29, 3:49*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 29, 6:09*pm, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 29, 8:20*am, MiNe 109 * wrote: In article , *"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 7:07*am, MiNe 109 * wrote: *"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 12:09*am, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 28, 6:35*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 28, 3:05*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: What has brought California to such a perilous state? How did its government become so wildly dysfunctional? One obvious cause is the deep recession that has caused tax revenues to plunge for all states. But California's woes have a set of deeper reasons: direct democracy run amok, timid governors, partisan gridlock and a flawed constitution all contribute to budget chaos and people in pain.. And at the root of California's misery lies Proposition 13, the antitax measure that ignited the Reagan Revolution and the conservative era. In Washington, the Reagan-Bush era is over. But in California, the conservative legacy lives on. http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/2009062...08599190493800 "Direct democracy run amok". 2pid, is too much direct democracy a bad thing in a representative republic? And how does it feel to know your movement is "over"? LoL. Yes indeed, California is the last bastion of Conservatism!!!! LoL. *If only it were true. *Meanwhile here's a few facts for the tax and spend lunatics. http://weblog.signonsandiego.com/web...es/034048.html Under Prop 13 property tax revenues have not only far outpaced inflation and population growth combined but also grew faster than other sources of revenue. One would hope you could find a valid cite for your positions but apparently not. LoL. Didn't he trot this one out a while back? Maybe he should explain why the comparison to inflation, population growth and "other sources of revenue" is valid to the discussion. The Jarvis website says taxpayers have saved "over $528 billion." Maybe most of that savings is for corporations who have shell companies set up. Did you know that you could buy a shopping center in California and not have the taxes increase? If the mall is deeded to a corporation like "Mega Mall Assets LLC" all you do is buy the corporation. Since it's not a real estate transaction the property tax is not recalculated. snip http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Califor...ition_13_(1978) I'll bet 2pid loves scenarios like that. Otherwise it's possible that the mall might move to Ireland. And he's happy with his local government services! Wiki has a pretty good overview of the results of prop 13. It seems a little more balanced and intelligent that 2pid's cite. The 2/3rds requirement for tax increases is pernicious. At some point, even an economy as huge as California's can't afford to not tax. *LoL. "Can't afford to not tax." Ca. ranked 6th in the nation in tax burden per capita in 2008. http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/443.html That was before passing these tax increases. - Sales taxes raised by one percentage point - Additional 5% surcharge on state income taxes. - Increase in the vehicle-license fee from 0.65% to 1.15%. *But hey, don't let a few facts ruin your delusion. ScottW- there are lots of ways to measure that overall burden. waht taxes are included, and what wer not included in that calculation? http://www.taxfoundation.org/publica...how/22320.html "For each state, we calculate the total amount paid by the residents in taxes, and we divide those taxes by the total income in each state to compute a "tax burden" measure." Is that too complicated for you? ScottW- No, the opposite, it is too simple for me. What taxes??? to know if the survey makes a valid point,' we need to know wbhat taxes are included or not included. It looks like what they do is take all taxes and divide by all income to come up with a percent. It is like 2pid's "spending divided by number of taxpayers" formula for federal taxes. Remember when he advocated that one? LOL! But you're exactly correct: the formula is too simple to be of any real use.- I am not sure they even used "all" of the taxes. Even if they did they're using taxes from one state and applying them to entirely different states. That doesn't seem valid when computing a state's tax burden. |
|
#26
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jul 1, 1:59*pm, ScottW2 wrote:
On Jun 30, 6:30*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 30, 2:52*pm, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 30, 7:36*am, Clyde Slick wrote: No, the opposite, it is too simple for me. What taxes??? * All of them. How do you know that? *Because I understand what "the total amount paid by residents in taxes" means. LoL. Clearly and obviously you don't. |
|
#27
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
2pid waxes philosophic
On Jul 1, 2:02*pm, ScottW2 wrote:
*Can you be sure of anything? *Just wondering. Yes, 2pid, in fact you can be sure of many things. For example, you can be sure that you're an imbecile. You can also be sure that whatever views you have are about 180 degrees off (unless you're arguing the 180 of your standard position that particular day). You can be sure that most people laugh at you behind your back. Many laugh at you to your face. You can be sure that you come off as an angry white guy. You can be sure that you've proven you cannot communicate effectively nor think through problems. You can be sure that virtually all of your 'solutions' to problems have secondary effects that are worse than the initial problem. See, 2pid? There's so much you can be sure of! LoL. |
|
#28
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jun 30, 9:34*am, Clyde Slick wrote:
On Jun 29, 7:13*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: Homeowners face income tax too, just not income derived from their property. Let me be more specific, owners of commercial properties pay income taxses on the income produced by the commercial property. When the depreciation schedule ends, it afects taxes, and it means \"decison time". what I am saying, is tht prop 13 is but one factor leading to a deceison as to whther to buy or sell or hold property. True, but it appears that under Prop 13 the *corporation holding the property* can be sold (along with the asset of the property) and the property tax rate remains unchanged because it wasn't a *real estate* transaction. The *mall* wasn't sold, just the corporation holding it. |
|
#29
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jun 30, 10:19*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote: On Jun 30, 8:31*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 30, 4:08*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 30, 9:36*am, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 29, 7:26*pm, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 29, 3:49*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 29, 6:09*pm, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 29, 8:20*am, MiNe 109 * wrote: In article , *"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 7:07*am, MiNe 109 * wrote: *"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 12:09*am, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 28, 6:35*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 28, 3:05*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: What has brought California to such a perilous state? How did its government become so wildly dysfunctional? One obvious cause is the deep recession that has caused tax revenues to plunge for all states. But California's woes have a set of deeper reasons: direct democracy run amok, timid governors, partisan gridlock and a flawed constitution all contribute to budget chaos and people in pain. And at the root of California's misery lies Proposition 13, the antitax measure that ignited the Reagan Revolution and the conservative era. In Washington, the Reagan-Bush era is over. But in California, the conservative legacy lives on. http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/2009062...08599190493800 "Direct democracy run amok". 2pid, is too much direct democracy a bad thing in a representative republic? And how does it feel to know your movement is "over"? LoL. Yes indeed, California is the last bastion of Conservatism!!!! LoL. *If only it were true. *Meanwhile here's a few facts for the tax and spend lunatics. http://weblog.signonsandiego.com/web...es/034048.html Under Prop 13 property tax revenues have not only far outpaced inflation and population growth combined but also grew faster than other sources of revenue. One would hope you could find a valid cite for your positions but apparently not. LoL. Didn't he trot this one out a while back? Maybe he should explain why the comparison to inflation, population growth and "other sources of revenue" is valid to the discussion. The Jarvis website says taxpayers have saved "over $528 billion." Maybe most of that savings is for corporations who have shell companies set up. Did you know that you could buy a shopping center in California and not have the taxes increase? If the mall is deeded to a corporation like "Mega Mall Assets LLC" all you do is buy the corporation. Since it's not a real estate transaction the property tax is not recalculated. snip http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Califor...ition_13_(1978) I'll bet 2pid loves scenarios like that. Otherwise it's possible that the mall might move to Ireland. And he's happy with his local government services! Wiki has a pretty good overview of the results of prop 13.. It seems a little more balanced and intelligent that 2pid's cite. The 2/3rds requirement for tax increases is pernicious. At some point, even an economy as huge as California's can't afford to not tax. *LoL. "Can't afford to not tax." Ca. ranked 6th in the nation in tax burden per capita in 2008.. http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/443.html That was before passing these tax increases. - Sales taxes raised by one percentage point - Additional 5% surcharge on state income taxes. - Increase in the vehicle-license fee from 0.65% to 1.15%. *But hey, don't let a few facts ruin your delusion. ScottW- there are lots of ways to measure that overall burden. waht taxes are included, and what wer not included in that calculation? http://www.taxfoundation.org/publica...how/22320.html "For each state, we calculate the total amount paid by the residents in taxes, and we divide those taxes by the total income in each state to compute a "tax burden" measure." Is that too complicated for you? ScottW- No, the opposite, it is too simple for me. What taxes??? to know if the survey makes a valid point,' we need to know wbhat taxes are included or not included. It looks like what they do is take all taxes and divide by all income to come up with a percent. It is like 2pid's "spending divided by number of taxpayers" formula for federal taxes. Remember when he advocated that one? LOL! But you're exactly correct: the formula is too simple to be of any real use.- I am not sure they even used "all" of the taxes. Even if they did they're using taxes from one state and applying them to entirely different states. That doesn't seem valid when computing a state's tax burden.- What do you mean? How are they doing that? Are they taking taxes say, Marylanders pay, and then say that New Yorkers are paying them? |
|
#30
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jul 1, 2:59*pm, ScottW2 wrote:
On Jun 30, 6:30*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 30, 2:52*pm, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 30, 7:36*am, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 29, 7:26*pm, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 29, 3:49*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 29, 6:09*pm, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 29, 8:20*am, MiNe 109 * wrote: In article , *"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 7:07*am, MiNe 109 * wrote: *"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 12:09*am, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 28, 6:35*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 28, 3:05*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: What has brought California to such a perilous state? How did its government become so wildly dysfunctional? One obvious cause is the deep recession that has caused tax revenues to plunge for all states. But California's woes have a set of deeper reasons: direct democracy run amok, timid governors, partisan gridlock and a flawed constitution all contribute to budget chaos and people in pain. And at the root of California's misery lies Proposition 13, the antitax measure that ignited the Reagan Revolution and the conservative era. In Washington, the Reagan-Bush era is over. But in California, the conservative legacy lives on. http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/2009062...08599190493800 "Direct democracy run amok". 2pid, is too much direct democracy a bad thing in a representative republic? And how does it feel to know your movement is "over"? LoL. Yes indeed, California is the last bastion of Conservatism!!!! LoL. *If only it were true. *Meanwhile here's a few facts for the tax and spend lunatics. http://weblog.signonsandiego.com/web...es/034048.html Under Prop 13 property tax revenues have not only far outpaced inflation and population growth combined but also grew faster than other sources of revenue. One would hope you could find a valid cite for your positions but apparently not. LoL. Didn't he trot this one out a while back? Maybe he should explain why the comparison to inflation, population growth and "other sources of revenue" is valid to the discussion. The Jarvis website says taxpayers have saved "over $528 billion." Maybe most of that savings is for corporations who have shell companies set up. Did you know that you could buy a shopping center in California and not have the taxes increase? If the mall is deeded to a corporation like "Mega Mall Assets LLC" all you do is buy the corporation. Since it's not a real estate transaction the property tax is not recalculated. snip http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Califor...ition_13_(1978) I'll bet 2pid loves scenarios like that. Otherwise it's possible that the mall might move to Ireland. And he's happy with his local government services! Wiki has a pretty good overview of the results of prop 13.. It seems a little more balanced and intelligent that 2pid's cite. The 2/3rds requirement for tax increases is pernicious. At some point, even an economy as huge as California's can't afford to not tax. *LoL. "Can't afford to not tax." Ca. ranked 6th in the nation in tax burden per capita in 2008.. http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/443.html That was before passing these tax increases. - Sales taxes raised by one percentage point - Additional 5% surcharge on state income taxes. - Increase in the vehicle-license fee from 0.65% to 1.15%. *But hey, don't let a few facts ruin your delusion. ScottW- there are lots of ways to measure that overall burden. waht taxes are included, and what wer not included in that calculation? http://www.taxfoundation.org/publica...how/22320.html "For each state, we calculate the total amount paid by the residents in taxes, and we divide those taxes by the total income in each state to compute a "tax burden" measure." Is that too complicated for you? ScottW- No, the opposite, it is too simple for me. What taxes??? * All of them. ScottW- How do you know that? *Because I understand what "the total amount paid by residents in taxes" means. ScottW- Really? how about state and local taxes on hotel rooms and rental cars? Are tey counted? Are they part of the burden of that State's residents, if so, how much of it? Are they the burden of the residents of other states, who come and visit? If so, what percentage? Waht about the New York City resident who flies to Buffalo and rents a car. Is that part o his state tax burden/ Waht is the traveller to Buffalo were a resident of Ohio? Then is that New York tax burden a burden on New Yorkers, or on Ohians? this is but one example of the difficulties in caqlculating overall tax burdens. What about fees? In one state, a [articlar required [ayment might be callled a fee, in anpther state, a payment fopr the same thing might be callled a tax. I am sorry to m aqke your head spins, but it is not so simple. |
|
#31
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jul 1, 3:02*pm, ScottW2 wrote:
On Jun 30, 6:31*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 30, 4:08*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 30, 9:36*am, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 29, 7:26*pm, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 29, 3:49*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 29, 6:09*pm, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 29, 8:20*am, MiNe 109 * wrote: In article , *"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 7:07*am, MiNe 109 * wrote: *"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 12:09*am, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 28, 6:35*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 28, 3:05*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: What has brought California to such a perilous state? How did its government become so wildly dysfunctional? One obvious cause is the deep recession that has caused tax revenues to plunge for all states. But California's woes have a set of deeper reasons: direct democracy run amok, timid governors, partisan gridlock and a flawed constitution all contribute to budget chaos and people in pain. And at the root of California's misery lies Proposition 13, the antitax measure that ignited the Reagan Revolution and the conservative era. In Washington, the Reagan-Bush era is over. But in California, the conservative legacy lives on. http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/2009062...08599190493800 "Direct democracy run amok". 2pid, is too much direct democracy a bad thing in a representative republic? And how does it feel to know your movement is "over"? LoL. Yes indeed, California is the last bastion of Conservatism!!!! LoL. *If only it were true. *Meanwhile here's a few facts for the tax and spend lunatics. http://weblog.signonsandiego.com/web...es/034048.html Under Prop 13 property tax revenues have not only far outpaced inflation and population growth combined but also grew faster than other sources of revenue. One would hope you could find a valid cite for your positions but apparently not. LoL. Didn't he trot this one out a while back? Maybe he should explain why the comparison to inflation, population growth and "other sources of revenue" is valid to the discussion. The Jarvis website says taxpayers have saved "over $528 billion." Maybe most of that savings is for corporations who have shell companies set up. Did you know that you could buy a shopping center in California and not have the taxes increase? If the mall is deeded to a corporation like "Mega Mall Assets LLC" all you do is buy the corporation. Since it's not a real estate transaction the property tax is not recalculated. snip http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Califor...ition_13_(1978) I'll bet 2pid loves scenarios like that. Otherwise it's possible that the mall might move to Ireland. And he's happy with his local government services! Wiki has a pretty good overview of the results of prop 13.. It seems a little more balanced and intelligent that 2pid's cite. The 2/3rds requirement for tax increases is pernicious. At some point, even an economy as huge as California's can't afford to not tax. *LoL. "Can't afford to not tax." Ca. ranked 6th in the nation in tax burden per capita in 2008.. http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/443.html That was before passing these tax increases. - Sales taxes raised by one percentage point - Additional 5% surcharge on state income taxes. - Increase in the vehicle-license fee from 0.65% to 1.15%. *But hey, don't let a few facts ruin your delusion. ScottW- there are lots of ways to measure that overall burden. waht taxes are included, and what wer not included in that calculation? http://www.taxfoundation.org/publica...how/22320.html "For each state, we calculate the total amount paid by the residents in taxes, and we divide those taxes by the total income in each state to compute a "tax burden" measure." Is that too complicated for you? ScottW- No, the opposite, it is too simple for me. What taxes??? to know if the survey makes a valid point,' we need to know wbhat taxes are included or not included. It looks like what they do is take all taxes and divide by all income to come up with a percent. It is like 2pid's "spending divided by number of taxpayers" formula for federal taxes. Remember when he advocated that one? LOL! But you're exactly correct: the formula is too simple to be of any real use.- I am not sure they even used "all" of the taxes. *Can you be sure of anything? *Just wondering. ScottW- I am sure that you are worng on this particular point. |
|
#32
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jul 1, 5:08*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote: On Jun 30, 9:34*am, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 29, 7:13*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: Homeowners face income tax too, just not income derived from their property. Let me be more specific, owners of commercial properties pay income taxses on the income produced by the commercial property. When the depreciation schedule ends, it afects taxes, and it means \"decison time". what I am saying, is tht prop 13 is but one factor leading to a deceison as to whther to buy or sell or hold property. True, but it appears that under Prop 13 the *corporation holding the property* can be sold (along with the asset of the property) and the property tax rate remains unchanged because it wasn't a *real estate* transaction. The *mall* wasn't sold, just the corporation holding it. That is true. And the corporations depreciation schedule is not reset. Ther is an unintended consequence to Prop13 you may not have considered. It contributes to blight. Selling a property is not the only trigger for a reassessment of value. Major renovations and additions are another trigger for reassessment, and those items may be dropped for fear of raising taxes. |
|
#33
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jul 1, 9:19*pm, Clyde Slick wrote:
On Jun 30, 10:19*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 30, 8:31*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 30, 4:08*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 30, 9:36*am, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 29, 7:26*pm, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 29, 3:49*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 29, 6:09*pm, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 29, 8:20*am, MiNe 109 * wrote: In article , *"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 7:07*am, MiNe 109 * wrote: *"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 29, 12:09*am, ScottW2 wrote: On Jun 28, 6:35*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 28, 3:05*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: What has brought California to such a perilous state? How did its government become so wildly dysfunctional? One obvious cause is the deep recession that has caused tax revenues to plunge for all states. But California's woes have a set of deeper reasons: direct democracy run amok, timid governors, partisan gridlock and a flawed constitution all contribute to budget chaos and people in pain. And at the root of California's misery lies Proposition 13, the antitax measure that ignited the Reagan Revolution and the conservative era. In Washington, the Reagan-Bush era is over. But in California, the conservative legacy lives on. http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/2009062...08599190493800 "Direct democracy run amok". 2pid, is too much direct democracy a bad thing in a representative republic? And how does it feel to know your movement is "over"? LoL. Yes indeed, California is the last bastion of Conservatism!!!! LoL. *If only it were true. *Meanwhile here's a few facts for the tax and spend lunatics. http://weblog.signonsandiego.com/web...es/034048.html Under Prop 13 property tax revenues have not only far outpaced inflation and population growth combined but also grew faster than other sources of revenue. One would hope you could find a valid cite for your positions but apparently not. LoL. Didn't he trot this one out a while back? Maybe he should explain why the comparison to inflation, population growth and "other sources of revenue" is valid to the discussion. The Jarvis website says taxpayers have saved "over $528 billion." Maybe most of that savings is for corporations who have shell companies set up. Did you know that you could buy a shopping center in California and not have the taxes increase? If the mall is deeded to a corporation like "Mega Mall Assets LLC" all you do is buy the corporation. Since it's not a real estate transaction the property tax is not recalculated. snip http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Califor...ition_13_(1978) I'll bet 2pid loves scenarios like that. Otherwise it's possible that the mall might move to Ireland. And he's happy with his local government services! Wiki has a pretty good overview of the results of prop 13. It seems a little more balanced and intelligent that 2pid's cite. The 2/3rds requirement for tax increases is pernicious. At some point, even an economy as huge as California's can't afford to not tax. *LoL. "Can't afford to not tax." Ca. ranked 6th in the nation in tax burden per capita in 2008. http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/443.html That was before passing these tax increases. - Sales taxes raised by one percentage point - Additional 5% surcharge on state income taxes. - Increase in the vehicle-license fee from 0.65% to 1.15%. *But hey, don't let a few facts ruin your delusion. ScottW- there are lots of ways to measure that overall burden. waht taxes are included, and what wer not included in that calculation? http://www.taxfoundation.org/publica...how/22320.html "For each state, we calculate the total amount paid by the residents in taxes, and we divide those taxes by the total income in each state to compute a "tax burden" measure." Is that too complicated for you? ScottW- No, the opposite, it is too simple for me. What taxes??? to know if the survey makes a valid point,' we need to know wbhat taxes are included or not included. It looks like what they do is take all taxes and divide by all income to come up with a percent. It is like 2pid's "spending divided by number of taxpayers" formula for federal taxes. Remember when he advocated that one? LOL! But you're exactly correct: the formula is too simple to be of any real use.- I am not sure they even used "all" of the taxes. Even if they did they're using taxes from one state and applying them to entirely different states. That doesn't seem valid when computing a state's tax burden.- What do you mean? How are they doing that? Are they taking taxes say, Marylanders pay, and then say that New Yorkers are paying them? Yes. If you work in New York and live in Connecticut the New York state and local and income taxes you pay count toward Connecticut. If you own a second home in another state, the property taxes you pay in that state count toward your home state's burden. Likewise if you travel from your home in Maryland to visit 2pid and rent a car in California, the rental car tax you pay in California is counted against your tax burden in Maryland. Read 2pid's link. It's described in the methodology. Stupid but simple. Just like 2pid would want it! LoL. |
|
#34
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jul 1, 9:40*pm, Clyde Slick wrote:
On Jul 1, 5:08*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 30, 9:34*am, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 29, 7:13*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: Homeowners face income tax too, just not income derived from their property. Let me be more specific, owners of commercial properties pay income taxses on the income produced by the commercial property. When the depreciation schedule ends, it afects taxes, and it means \"decison time". what I am saying, is tht prop 13 is but one factor leading to a deceison as to whther to buy or sell or hold property. True, but it appears that under Prop 13 the *corporation holding the property* can be sold (along with the asset of the property) and the property tax rate remains unchanged because it wasn't a *real estate* transaction. The *mall* wasn't sold, just the corporation holding it. That is true. And the corporations depreciation schedule is not reset. Ther is an unintended consequence to Prop13 you may not have considered. It contributes to blight. Selling a property is not the only trigger for a reassessment of value. Major renovations and additions are another trigger for reassessment, and those items may be dropped for fear of raising taxes. Interesting. No wonder 2pid likes it. LoL. |
|
#35
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jul 2, 12:22*pm, ScottW2 wrote:
On Jul 1, 8:22*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" Stupid but simple. Just like 2pid would want it! LoL. *It answers a question you can't answer. What is the residents of a states avg tax burden? (A fraction of that burden will come from other states). You might as well take all income in the US and divide by all taxes in the US. That will give you your "avg" tax burden. LOL! I think I 'saved' .00000000165 of a second with that abbreviation. |
|
#36
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jul 2, 4:12*pm, ScottW2 wrote:
On Jul 2, 12:46*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jul 2, 12:22*pm, ScottW2 wrote: On Jul 1, 8:22*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" Stupid but simple. Just like 2pid would want it! LoL. *It answers a question you can't answer. What is the residents of a states avg tax burden? (A fraction of that burden will come from other states). You might as well take all income in the US and divide by all taxes in the US. That will give you your "avg" tax burden. *Not by state of residence nor even close to accurately born by individual, you don't even have the right units. Whatever, 2pid. This isn't by state either as taxes from other states are lumped against the state of residence. Those are taxes of choice (second homes, travel, etc.). *Math must not have been required in officer training. Um, 2pid? I'm sure that someone as 'smart' as you are would know how much math goes into accurately shooting a 96.6 lb 155mm howitzer projectile 30 km. What a dumb thing to say. In addition to the basic artillery math, FA officers are trained in ballistics, meteorology, astronomy, survey, CAS, Naval gunfire, targeting, battle damage assessment and a host of other things. I'm sure that someone as 'smart' as you are would recognize that when shooting a projectile that is in flight for over a minute you even have to account for the rotation of the Earth, going through several layers of atmosphere, powder temp (the warmer it is, the faster it burns) (or did you think powder "explodes? LoL) and on and on. *It was dumped for diversity sensitivity. Or some of us can be really good at more than one thing simultaneously. We're called "smart". LoL. That makes you jealous, doesn't it. LoL. |
|
#37
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jul 2, 1:30*pm, ScottW2 wrote:
On Jul 1, 7:40*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jul 1, 5:08*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 30, 9:34*am, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 29, 7:13*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: Homeowners face income tax too, just not income derived from their property. Let me be more specific, owners of commercial properties pay income taxses on the income produced by the commercial property. When the depreciation schedule ends, it afects taxes, and it means \"decison time". what I am saying, is tht prop 13 is but one factor leading to a deceison as to whther to buy or sell or hold property. True, but it appears that under Prop 13 the *corporation holding the property* can be sold (along with the asset of the property) and the property tax rate remains unchanged because it wasn't a *real estate* transaction. The *mall* wasn't sold, just the corporation holding it. That is true. And the corporations depreciation schedule is not reset. Ther is an unintended consequence to Prop13 you may not have considered. It contributes to blight. Selling a property is not the only trigger for a reassessment of value. Major renovations and additions are another trigger for reassessment, and those items may be dropped for fear of raising taxes. *Prop 13 didn't change that. *Property was reassessed with rennovation and improvement before Prop 13 and probably at at higher rate than the ~1% rate Prop 13 set. *So it reduced the tax impediment to property improvement, not increase it. Also, the reassessment is only on additions or major change of use. You can remodel your kitchen with no impact. Add a room and they will increase your appraisal based upon the sq. ft added. They wont reassess the entire property. And before Prop 13 property taxes were in runaway mode wether you improved it or not. ScottW LOL!! It sure did change it, because with Prop 13,'owners do wahtever they can to avoid a trigger. We are talkking about people who DON"T reno0vate, nit the ones that do. |
|
#38
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jul 3, 11:33*am, ScottW2 wrote:
On Jul 2, 5:26*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jul 2, 1:30*pm, ScottW2 wrote: On Jul 1, 7:40*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jul 1, 5:08*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 30, 9:34*am, Clyde Slick wrote: On Jun 29, 7:13*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: Homeowners face income tax too, just not income derived from their property. Let me be more specific, owners of commercial properties pay income taxses on the income produced by the commercial property. When the depreciation schedule ends, it afects taxes, and it means \"decison time". what I am saying, is tht prop 13 is but one factor leading to a deceison as to whther to buy or sell or hold property. True, but it appears that under Prop 13 the *corporation holding the property* can be sold (along with the asset of the property) and the property tax rate remains unchanged because it wasn't a *real estate* transaction. The *mall* wasn't sold, just the corporation holding it. That is true. And the corporations depreciation schedule is not reset. Ther is an unintended consequence to Prop13 you may not have considered. It contributes to blight. Selling a property is not the only trigger for a reassessment of value. Major renovations and additions are another trigger for reassessment, and those items may be dropped for fear of raising taxes. *Prop 13 didn't change that. *Property was reassessed with rennovation and improvement before Prop 13 and probably at at higher rate than the ~1% rate Prop 13 set. *So it reduced the tax impediment to property improvement, not increase it. Also, the reassessment is only on additions or major change of use. You can remodel your kitchen with no impact. Add a room and they will increase your appraisal based upon the sq. ft added. They wont reassess the entire property. And before Prop 13 property taxes were in runaway mode wether you improved it or not. ScottW LOL!! It sure did change it, because with Prop 13,'owners do wahtever they can to avoid a trigger. Youv'e been claiming it will trigger a reassessment of the entire property value which is not true. At least with prop 13 people have some money left to rennovate. Before it, the government was destined to become the owner and they're just soooo good at maintaining and rennovating. ScottW According to several articles I previously read, it is true. Before Prop 13, ths govt was not destined to be the owner. |
|
#39
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jul 3, 3:32*pm, ScottW2 wrote:
How many more businesses would be bankrupt and defaulting on their property taxes in this recession and past recessions with higher property taxes? ScottW How many fewer governments would be bankrupt and defaulting? |
|
#40
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Damned liberal media telling lies...again
On Jul 3, 6:30*pm, ScottW2 wrote:
On Jul 3, 1:03*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: How many fewer governments would be bankrupt and defaulting? California dems appear very capable of spending more money than revenues provide no matter their volume. Sort of like the national republicans, yes, 2pid? Or do you still buy that 'party of fiscal responsibility' thing? LoL. |
| Reply |
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Brian, I keep telling you | Audio Opinions | |||
| Why is it all so damned HARD?! | Pro Audio | |||
| LIES, DAMNED LIES AND COMPLAINTS continued ... | Vacuum Tubes | |||
| LIES, DAMNED LIES, AND STATISTICS! | Vacuum Tubes | |||
| LIES, DAMNED LIES AND COMPLAINTS | Vacuum Tubes | |||
Linear Mode
