Propositions 30 and 38 are both humongous and liberal tax increases on Californians -- yet only one can win.
So what is a bleeding heart liberal to do?
The "feel good" way out for liberals and socialists is to vote "yes" on both.
But, according to the California General Election guide, the one with the most votes wins providing they both get over 50 percent. That means liberals and socialists will actually have to use some brain cells on Nov. 6 and pick a side if they actually want one to win.
As a conservative, I view this like the Iran-Iraq war...or maybe a Raiders-Cowboys game. I want both sides to go down to defeat in the bloodiest political war imaginable.
Prop. 30 is Gov. Jerry "Moonbeam" Brown's tax increase. If passed, we will be highest-taxed state in even more categories than we are now.
Prop 38, funding by uber-lib Molly Munger, bypasses Sacramento and sends money to school districts. For people drinking the education lobby Kool-Aide, this is the measure which will really give more money to schools.
Never mind that both measures would skyrocket the express train of taxpayers and businesses out of California, or prevent the real reform schools actually need; liberals are determined to feel good about themselves by soaking the dwindling number of millionaires who pay most of our taxes already.
Moonbeam pulled some tricks this year so his tax increase would be the first prop voters see when voting. Munger paid for ads that attacked Prop 30 as a Sacramento inside job.
Liberals, if they are true to education, should vote "no" on 30 and "yes" on 38.
Me?
I'm voting "no" on both so Sacramento will actually have to make some hard decisions about cutting spending instead of soaking taxpayers for even more money.
And Amanda: Please...somehow...connect the dots between my tea party's agenda and exploiting children. I could use the laugh.
Reduce after inflation government spending to 2000 levels, and you will have plenty of money. “Adjusted for inflation, California’s government spending increased 42 percent per capita from 2000 to 2010.” http://www.foxandhoundsdaily.com/2012/10/reason-rupe-poll-california-voters-moving-towards-wisconsin-like-government-reforms/ Cancel the high speed rail boondoggle, and you have ~$3 billion of the $6 billion the Brown tax increase claims it will raise. [Of course, the actual amount the tax increase will raise will be less because taxpayers will move themselves or their money out of CA and/or otherwise change their behavior to reduce their tax burden.] (http://californiabudgetbites.org/2011/01/ says not increasing taxes will require cutting $930 per student [out of $11,405 per student. http://www.lao.ca.gov/reports/2011/calfacts/calfacts_010511.aspx (p.13)]. That is 8.15%. Not the end of the world. Families and businesses base their spending on the money available and prioritize accordingly. How many families and businesses have and to reduce their spending by 8% or more? Brown and the Dems passed a budget that cuts education spending if the voters to not pass the tax increase. They can make other choices.
Please see http://www.foxandhoundsdaily.com/2012/09/breaking-bad-california-vs-the-other-states/ "California has the 2nd worst state income tax in the nation. 9.3% tax bracket starts at $48,029 for people filing as individuals. 10.3% tax starts at $1,000,000. Governor Brown has put on the ballot a prop to change the “millionaires’ tax” to 13.3%, starting at $500,000 – including capital gains. If approved, CA will be by far #1 in income tax rates. We will be 21% higher than the 2nd highest state (Hawaii), 34% higher than the 3rd highest state (Oregon), and a heck of a lot higher than all the rest – including six states with zero state income tax." "CA has the highest state sales tax rate in the nation. 7.25% (does not include local sales taxes)." CA corporate income tax rate (8.84%) is the highest west of the Mississippi (our economic competitors) except for Alaska. “CA has the highest gas tax (tied with NY) in the nation at 67.7 cents/gallon (June, 2012). National average is 48.9 cents.” “CA has the nation’s 5th highest diesel tax – 71.9 cents/gallon. National average 53.8 cents.” Even with Prop 13, “California in 2009 ranked 15th highest in per capita property taxes (including commercial) – the only major tax where we are not in the worst ten states. But CA property taxes per owner-occupied home were the 10th highest in the nation in 2009.”
http://www.foxandhoundsdaily.com/2012/10/reason-rupe-poll-california-voters-moving-towards-wisconsin-like-government-reforms/ Cancel the high speed rail boondoggle, and you have ~$3 billion of the $6 billion the Brown tax increase claims it will raise. [Of course, the actual amount the tax increase will raise will be less because taxpayers will move themselves or their money out of CA and/or otherwise change their behavior to reduce their tax burden.] (http://californiabudgetbites.org/2011/01/ says not increasing taxes will require cutting $930 per student [out of $11,405 per student. http://www.lao.ca.gov/reports/2011/calfacts/calfacts_010511.aspx (p.13)]. That is 8.15%. Not the end of the world. Families and businesses base their spending on the money available and prioritize accordingly. How many families and businesses have and to reduce their spending by 8% or more? Brown and the Dems passed a budget that cuts education spending if the voters to not pass the tax increase. They can make other choices.
Government is never expected to be efficient or effective.
http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d09/tables/dt09_182.asp The total per student education spending in government run schools in constant 2007-2008 dollars was: 1949-1950 $2377 1959-1960 $3394 1969-1970 $5593 1979-1980 $6792 1989-1990 $9248 1999-2000 $10,741 2006-2007 $12,463 Inflation adjusted education spending has ~quadrupled since 1960 and more than doubled since 1970. And what happened to the quality of government run education over that time? California currently spent > $11,405 per student in 2011. http://www.lao.ca.gov/reports/2011/calfacts/calfacts_010511.aspx (p. 13) If you gave them K-12 Scholarships for $11,000 each, you would schools lined up at their doors to provide education. There is nothing like competition to improve quality and reduce cost.
Please see: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/septemberoctober_2011/features/administrators_ate_my_tuition031641.php Some highlights: “Since 1980, inflation- adjusted tuition at public universities has tripled; at private universities it has more than doubled.” Are the universities spending the additional money in ways that make college education better, never mind 3X better? “Between 1975 and 2005, total spending by American higher educational institutions, stated in constant dollars, tripled, to more than $325 billion per year.” “Over the same period, the faculty-to-student ratio has remained fairly constant, at approximately fifteen or sixteen students per instructor. One thing that has changed, dramatically, is the administrator-per-student ratio. In 1975, colleges employed one administrator for every eighty-four students and one professional staffer—admissions officers, information technology specialists, and the like—for every fifty students. By 2005, the administrator-to-student ratio had dropped to one administrator for every sixty-eight students while the ratio of professional staffers had dropped to one for every twenty-one students.” The number of administrators at the UC and CSU systems has grown by 212% since 1993. http://www.foxandhoundsdaily.com/2012/05/can-california-be-fixed/ In the private sector, we have to prioritize how to spend our money.
Please see Fran Tarkenton, What if the NFL Played by Teachers' Rules? http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204226204576601232986845102.html If every football player was paid based on seniority and could not be cut from the team absent very serious misconduct, what would happen to the quality of the game? More generally, government employees keep their jobs and get raises regardless of how hard they work and what they individually or their agencies, departments, schools or districts accomplish. It is practically impossible to fire a government employee for doing a lousy job, never mind merely mediocre. In the private sector, we have to produce goods or services that other people will voluntarily purchase. At least with education, there is a perverse incentive. When the government schools do a lousy job, the Dems, education system and GEUs can say our kids need a good education so the government needs to spend more money on the (lousy) government schools. Without accusing them of trying to provide lousy education, people and systems respond to financial incentives.
http://www.lao.ca.gov/reports/2011/calfacts/calfacts_010511.aspx page 36”
http://www.foxandhoundsdaily.com/2012/10/alarming-compensation-trends-for-state-workers/
Leaving tax increases aside, for those worried about more money for schools, why don’t you work on improving CA’s terrible business climate to attract more business and jobs and hence tax revenue? One telling statistic, "From 2007 through 2010, 10,763 industrial facilities were built or expanded across the country — but only 176 of those were in CA. So with roughly 12% of the nation’s population, CA got 1.6% of the built or expanded industrial facilities." http://www.foxandhoundsdaily.com/2012/09/breaking-bad-california-vs-the-other-states/ CA has to compete with other states and counties for investment and jobs. CA should be the #1 place to start or expand a business. If CA had a business climate to match its natural (weather) climate, [if Romney and the Reps win the national election, that would be a big help b/c 1.3% national growth limits what any state can do] you would see an explosion of growth, jobs and tax revenue to CA government. Chasing tax revenue with higher tax rates is a futile, losing exercise.