Baked
Lifer
- Dec 28, 2004
- 36,152
- 17
- 81
Too bad they don't have a choice for firing all the corrupted politicians in Sacramento, starting with that steroid shooting of a governor. I would totally vote yes on that one. "OMG, we can't balance the budget 'cause we made too many promises while pocketing untold amounts of bribe. Oh we know, we'll just cut all the public services and public education funding 'cause we didn't make any promises with those guys."
YHPM
Senior Anandtech Moderator
Common Courtesy
YHPM
Senior Anandtech Moderator
Common Courtesy
Dr. Detroit
Diamond Member
- Sep 25, 2004
- 8,157
- 624
- 126
THANK YOU VOTERS OF CALIFORNIA!
Back to the drawing baord for the legislature as they try and wipe out 15 billion of the budget. If they continue to raise taxes, fees, and surcharges the taxpayers will have no money left to spend and the ailing economy will continue to tank.
9.25% in sales tax
9.5% in income tax
1.2% in property tax
54 cents in fed/state tax per gallon of gas
1.15% vehicle license fee tax
Heres to 2010 and the hopes we vote in some fresh blood to fix this debacle!
Back to the drawing baord for the legislature as they try and wipe out 15 billion of the budget. If they continue to raise taxes, fees, and surcharges the taxpayers will have no money left to spend and the ailing economy will continue to tank.
9.25% in sales tax
9.5% in income tax
1.2% in property tax
54 cents in fed/state tax per gallon of gas
1.15% vehicle license fee tax
Heres to 2010 and the hopes we vote in some fresh blood to fix this debacle!
But.... but... don't you silly CA people know that higher taxes and bigger government creates wealth and prosperity for all? You should be ashamed at yourselves for not voting "yes" to higher taxes and fees across the board! 
retrospooty
Platinum Member
- Apr 3, 2002
- 2,031
- 74
- 86
Originally posted by: redgtxdi
Long story short.........
1A is a tax extension. It's hidden in language that makes one THINK that it's going to keep the bastards in Sacto from spending, but that's simply not true.
1B is a $9 BILLION (yes, with a B) bribe for the teachers to keep their mouths shut so Arnold can give away $9 Billion from his "Rainy Day Fund" (that was for the state, right?) :roll: to appease the teacher's union.
The rest can go to hell in a handbasket.
This state desperately needs to go bankrupt so that the courts can let ALL of these blood-thirsty unions know that we're not playing their game anymore. Game over!!
And if you care to do more than just vote, you can force action by donating to......... www.recalladams.org
I did vote. I moved my home, family, my job and all my tax money out of CA 4 years ago.
I won!!!
retrospooty
Platinum Member
- Apr 3, 2002
- 2,031
- 74
- 86
Actually having lived there for over 30 years (moved 4 years ago) I can tell you, the money IS NOT being wasted on illegals and poor. the rich corporations are getting it all.
CA is the richest state in the union with the highest wages, and highest state tax rate. By economies of scale they should have more money than any other state, but its all thrown down the pit - corporate greed and political payoffs. Gray Davis was the worst. Cheers to Arnold for trying, but its beyond his reach. It's broke beyond fixing.
- Oct 30, 2000
- 42,591
- 5
- 0
You either raise the taxes or cut the programs. Doing both will create the fastest solution with the minimal pain.
CA just voted not to pay any more taxes for anything.
OP is fantasizing about illegal immigrants and teacher unions running the state. Sheesh...
Back to reality now...
OP is fantasizing about illegal immigrants and teacher unions running the state. Sheesh...
Back to reality now...
That's what you lefties just don't seem to get. There is pressure for reforms NOW, it's called "NO MONEY". Cut spending and waisting, perhaps then the citizens would be more inclined to allow even more taxes.
You mean pressure like not authorizing more fuding of their bloated state budget? Let the reforms begin!
I'd like to see a law that if the state is running a deficit, no state employees get a raise, and no union contracts can be renewed. I bet you'd see some budget balancing then.
BoomerD
No Lifer
- Feb 26, 2006
- 62,884
- 11,282
- 136
How many millions or even billions would be saved if Kahleeforneeya stopped paying for the costs of educating children of illegal immigrants?
How about providing welfare, health care, and food stamps for illegal immigrants and their anchor babies?
Time for Prop 187 again...this time, it needs to be worded in such a way that the courts don't throw it out.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_187
How about providing welfare, health care, and food stamps for illegal immigrants and their anchor babies?
Time for Prop 187 again...this time, it needs to be worded in such a way that the courts don't throw it out.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_187
Except that there are consequences to a lot of unedcated children running around not in school, both for them and fo society; and that illegal immigrants are a net economic plus.
You are scapegoating the illegal immigrants.
What we should do is to get rid of the 2/3 budget requirement.
As far as I'm concerned, there are no consequences, provided those children are running around somewhere in Mexico instead of being here illegally. Tough to blame that on CA though, the federal government is supposed to handle it. CA deserves blame for providing lots of benefits to illegals, making it even more tempting for them to come.
They are certainly not the main reason for this mess, but I have no doubt the additional strain they put on the public systems (school, hospitals etc) has added to the problems.
Seems like the 2/3 rule is the only thing keeping the state from taxing/spending even more recklessly.
senseamp
Lifer
- Feb 5, 2006
- 35,787
- 6,195
- 126
Yes, that's what I mean. There is a lot of waste that needs to be cut, and unfortunately it is going to take a crisis to get it done.
But there need to be long term political reform, because now almost anyone can vote themselves new spending though proposition process without having to figure out a way to afford it. That is simply nuts, and should not be allowed to proceed by authorizing more borrowing to keep this insanity going. It's time to face the music.
Thanks for sharing your perspective. That's exactly how I feel (the bolded part).
I hope that one day CA will become great again, but I'm not optimistic.
As much as I don't like how many parts of TX is close-minded compared to CA, TX is much friendlier for the working class. There are states that value hard work instead of giving free sh!t to leeches and tax the sh!t out of the middle class. You and your wife's skills can be better used in middle class friendly states.
BoomerD
No Lifer
- Feb 26, 2006
- 62,884
- 11,282
- 136
On a more positive note, The California Citizens Compensation Commission today cut the salaries of elected officials by 18%.
http://cbs13.com/local/elected...als.pay.2.1014366.html
"Commission Slashes State Elected Officials Pay 18%SACRAMENTO (CBS13/AP) ?
A California commission voted Wednesday to slash the pay of the Legislature and other state elected officials by 18 percent, a day after voters offered their own rebuke by rejecting five budget-related measures drafted by lawmakers and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.
The California Citizens Compensation Commission, meeting in Burbank, voted 5-1 to impose the pay cuts and said it was seeking a legal opinion that would allow the reductions to take effect in the middle of the officials' terms. Under current law, the pay cuts would be imposed between December 2010 and the end of 2012, meaning lawmakers and officeholders would finish their terms without ever seeing a smaller paycheck.
The vote came three weeks after the seven-member commission, with three vacancies, deadlocked on a motion to cut the salaries 10 percent. Schwarzenegger filled the empty seats on the panel later that day.
With the pay cut, salaries of rank-and-file lawmakers would fall from $116,028 a year to $95,143. The legislative leaders' salaries will go from $133,639 to $109,584.
Lawmakers can still get per diem payments for daily expenses, which can add $35,000 a year to their income.
State elected officials and lawmakers are the highest-paid in the country, with two exceptions. Only the state treasurer and superintendent of public instruction have counterparts in other states who are paid more, according to the commission.
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger does not accept the state salary of $212,179, and 23 lawmakers take less than full salaries.
Schwarzenegger praised the commission's vote, which came a day after voters approved Proposition 1F. The measure prohibits state elected officials from receiving pay raises during years when the state runs a deficit.
"The people of California have spoken loud and clear," the Republican governor said in a statement. "They want the state to live within its means and do not want any more government waste or pay raises for California's elected officials."
Commission chairman Charles Murray, president of a Los Angeles-area insurance company, said voters' rejection of the budget measures on Tuesday figured in the panel's decision to impose a bigger pay cut.
"It indicated to us that this deficit issue is going to go on for more than a year, and since there's currently a lead time to implement a pay cut, we felt it would be better to give a large pay cut now and proceed on as time goes on," he said in an interview.
He said the commission has asked the Department of Personnel Administration's counsel how it could appeal an earlier opinion that the pay cuts cannot take effect in the middle of an officials' term.
"We got a ruling back from the DPA counsel we don't agree with," Murray said.
If the cuts cannot be implemented midterm, they would not take effect until December 2010 for the 100 members of the Legislature who will be elected or re-elected next year, until January 2011 for eight statewide elected officials and four members of a tax-collecting board and until December 2012 for 20 members of the state Senate.
Murray said the pay cuts would save $2.7 million a year when fully implemented. Commissioners plan to meet again June 17 to consider if elected officials' benefits are out of line.
The commission was created as part of a political reform measure approved by voters in 1990. Its members are appointed by the governor and are required to meet at least once a year to consider adjustments in state elected officials' salaries and benefits.
It has frozen all salaries five times, including last year, but until now had never voted to cut officials' pay.
In addition to lawmakers, the commission sets compensation for the governor, lieutenant governor, attorney general, secretary of state, treasurer, controller, insurance commissioner, superintendent of public instruction and state Board of Equalization.
The next thing that needs to be cut, or at least modified, is the way per diem is calculated and paid. Several lawmakers live near enough to Sacramento that they live in their own house and drive to work in the Capital...and still draw HUGE per diem checks.
They should get no more than the lowest paid Cal-Trans worker gets if he has to work out of town. (oldsmoboat can probably fill in those numbers, but it ain't much.) And NO fucking car allowances.
http://cbs13.com/local/elected...als.pay.2.1014366.html
"Commission Slashes State Elected Officials Pay 18%SACRAMENTO (CBS13/AP) ?
A California commission voted Wednesday to slash the pay of the Legislature and other state elected officials by 18 percent, a day after voters offered their own rebuke by rejecting five budget-related measures drafted by lawmakers and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.
The California Citizens Compensation Commission, meeting in Burbank, voted 5-1 to impose the pay cuts and said it was seeking a legal opinion that would allow the reductions to take effect in the middle of the officials' terms. Under current law, the pay cuts would be imposed between December 2010 and the end of 2012, meaning lawmakers and officeholders would finish their terms without ever seeing a smaller paycheck.
The vote came three weeks after the seven-member commission, with three vacancies, deadlocked on a motion to cut the salaries 10 percent. Schwarzenegger filled the empty seats on the panel later that day.
With the pay cut, salaries of rank-and-file lawmakers would fall from $116,028 a year to $95,143. The legislative leaders' salaries will go from $133,639 to $109,584.
Lawmakers can still get per diem payments for daily expenses, which can add $35,000 a year to their income.
State elected officials and lawmakers are the highest-paid in the country, with two exceptions. Only the state treasurer and superintendent of public instruction have counterparts in other states who are paid more, according to the commission.
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger does not accept the state salary of $212,179, and 23 lawmakers take less than full salaries.
Schwarzenegger praised the commission's vote, which came a day after voters approved Proposition 1F. The measure prohibits state elected officials from receiving pay raises during years when the state runs a deficit.
"The people of California have spoken loud and clear," the Republican governor said in a statement. "They want the state to live within its means and do not want any more government waste or pay raises for California's elected officials."
Commission chairman Charles Murray, president of a Los Angeles-area insurance company, said voters' rejection of the budget measures on Tuesday figured in the panel's decision to impose a bigger pay cut.
"It indicated to us that this deficit issue is going to go on for more than a year, and since there's currently a lead time to implement a pay cut, we felt it would be better to give a large pay cut now and proceed on as time goes on," he said in an interview.
He said the commission has asked the Department of Personnel Administration's counsel how it could appeal an earlier opinion that the pay cuts cannot take effect in the middle of an officials' term.
"We got a ruling back from the DPA counsel we don't agree with," Murray said.
If the cuts cannot be implemented midterm, they would not take effect until December 2010 for the 100 members of the Legislature who will be elected or re-elected next year, until January 2011 for eight statewide elected officials and four members of a tax-collecting board and until December 2012 for 20 members of the state Senate.
Murray said the pay cuts would save $2.7 million a year when fully implemented. Commissioners plan to meet again June 17 to consider if elected officials' benefits are out of line.
The commission was created as part of a political reform measure approved by voters in 1990. Its members are appointed by the governor and are required to meet at least once a year to consider adjustments in state elected officials' salaries and benefits.
It has frozen all salaries five times, including last year, but until now had never voted to cut officials' pay.
In addition to lawmakers, the commission sets compensation for the governor, lieutenant governor, attorney general, secretary of state, treasurer, controller, insurance commissioner, superintendent of public instruction and state Board of Equalization.
The next thing that needs to be cut, or at least modified, is the way per diem is calculated and paid. Several lawmakers live near enough to Sacramento that they live in their own house and drive to work in the Capital...and still draw HUGE per diem checks.
They should get no more than the lowest paid Cal-Trans worker gets if he has to work out of town. (oldsmoboat can probably fill in those numbers, but it ain't much.) And NO fucking car allowances.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 10K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 7K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter