Tax opponents to gather in Oroville and Chico

Can we just give Texas to the people who do not want to pay taxes, while the rest of us enjoy roads, public education, law enforcement, safety services, etc.?

A lot of this is just a desperate attempt by Republicans to fabricate a grassroots movement to give conservatives a warm fuzzy.

There is nothing wrong with big tax revenues when they come as a result of massive wealth. McClintock, Logue and La Malfa are not interested in increasing anyone's personal wealth. They want us to work for Wal Mart wages.

Where were this protesters when Bush Co. was leading the assault on our constitution? I call BS and agree with Charles.

Can we just give the former Soviet Union to Charles Kasey Kitterman? Texas seems to be managing its budget quite nicely amid all the economic chaos. Budget surpluses the past few years have been massive. You enjoy those California roads and public education systems Charles. Texas is quite frankly kicking your behind in both, while all the while having no personal state income tax. Gosh, how do they do that? I wonder....

Right on Charles. We need to make some serious changes around here. I'm tired of the polar elites on both sides of the aisle. They prevent common sense solutions from being implemented. We need to cut costs AND enhance revenue to make this work. AND we must correct Prop 13. It is not old and outmoded. It needs to be changed.

California makes 50% more than Texas according to GDP data from 2008 (per capita it is 10% more). But here's the most interesting detail: Californian employees make 72% more than Texan employees (that's rank and file), yet their taxes on imports and production is only 33% more than it is in Texas (personal income for 2008 between the 2 states has California up by 67%). Sure, Texans pay less in taxes but they also make far less. And most importantly, the money that they do make does not go to employees but rather a few top owners (mostly due to oil and energy production).

Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis

Education rankings are also interesting. Texas has a 2006 High School Graduation Rate that is significantly below the national average (Texas is 67.0% graduating with the national average being 70.2%). California by contrast is 71.2% in the same year (above the national average).

What's more is property taxes are much higher in Texas (the principal source of funding for the state). So while homes cost less, the taxes paid are much higher since there is no Proposition 13 tax cap.

California leads the nation in resident education levels, employed income, and innovation. Though there are reasons to argue against California being the best place to live, Texas is not a reasonable comparison and it is one of the reasons why Texas (the larger state) is not also the most populated state nor are the major innovations in technology bursting from Texas. True, some of that is increasing in Texas but nowhere near being competitive with California.

Education Source: ALEC Report Card on Education

Proposition 13 legitimately protected homeowners from literally being taxed out of their homes. But that protection was also extended to corporations and other non-sensitive groups.

It would seem to me that corporate exemption from Prop 13 is a better starting point as well as the removal of the mortgage interest deduction which has the effect of driving up the price of real estate and is effectively a tax subsidy of the "American Dream."

Charles Kasey Kitterman wrote:

Can we just give Texas to the people who do not want to pay taxes, while the rest of us enjoy roads, public education, law enforcement, safety services, etc.?
A lot of this is just a desperate attempt by Republicans to fabricate a grassroots movement to give conservatives a warm fuzzy.
There is nothing wrong with big tax revenues when they come as a result of massive wealth. McClintock, Logue and La Malfa are not interested in increasing anyone's personal wealth. They want us to work for Wal Mart wages.

The attitude of someone on the dole.

These Grover Norquist anti-tax fans are freeloaders, just like illegals and hillbillies. They want somebody else to pay for schools, roads etc. Their guru, Norquist, is a psycho right wing nutcase, just like Lush and Fawn.

Buster202 wrote:

<quoted text>
The attitude of someone on the dole.

That would be a pretty incredible dole since CKK owns an unsubsidized home in Chico and has since 1993 (unsubsidized meaning it wasn't paid for through low income subsidies). That's just 8 years after graduating high school (not too shabby particularly if you include 4 years of college and getting married in that timeline). No criminal record and no other data to suggest he is in any way on "the dole."

In fact, it also means he isn't currently collecting SSI, medicare, or other subsidy.

Sounds like some jealousy to me. Besides, he posts with his real name which makes his machismo that much more apparent particularly when given his comments on controversial issues.

He also beat Dan Ripke of the Chico Economic Development Corporation in the Almond Bowl 10k in 2002 which probably means he would beat Sarah Palin in an endurance race.

Crazy wrote:

<quoted text>
That would be a pretty incredible dole since CKK owns an unsubsidized home in Chico and has since 1993 (unsubsidized meaning it wasn't paid for through low income subsidies). That's just 8 years after graduating high school (not too shabby particularly if you include 4 years of college and getting married in that timeline). No criminal record and no other data to suggest he is in any way on "the dole."
In fact, it also means he isn't currently collecting SSI, medicare, or other subsidy.
Sounds like some jealousy to me. Besides, he posts with his real name which makes his machismo that much more apparent particularly when given his comments on controversial issues.

I include government employment in the "on the dole" category.

Whats crazy is the idea that we are undertaxed, not taxed enough, or that we don't want to "pay taxes".

Its stupid.

Buster202 wrote:

<quoted text>
I include government employment in the "on the dole" category.
Whats crazy is the idea that we are undertaxed, not taxed enough, or that we don't want to "pay taxes".
Its stupid.

Gee, I guess 30% of Butte County is on the dole. What a terrible thing to say about those that defend our country as well as have defended our country. You best move to the former Soviet Union if you don't like our military, our public servants, or our county.

Buster202 wrote:

<quoted text>
I include government employment in the "on the dole" category.
Whats crazy is the idea that we are undertaxed, not taxed enough, or that we don't want to "pay taxes".
Its stupid.

I might add that reducing taxes to historical lows (where they are now) and then being upset that we pay too much is, by definition, complaining that you don't want to pay taxes; particularly when you are NOW organizing protests on the historically low taxes.

Don't go to Bidwell Park for your protest! That park is maintained through taxes. Don't drive there either because Manzanita was recently renovated (and still being renovated) with more efficient uses of taxes.

It would be best if you rode your bike there on the bike paths which are supported (in part) by a local non-profit in conjunction with those taxes you don't want to pay.

Crazy wrote:

What's more is property taxes are much higher in Texas (the principal source of funding for the state). So while homes cost less, the taxes paid are much higher since there is no Proposition 13 tax cap.

http://www.tax.co.harris.tx.us/jurtaxrates.as...

Has Prop. 13 Really Robbed California of Property-Tax Revenue?
Matt Welch | June 3, 2009, 5:20pm

San Diego Union-Tribune editorial writer Chris Reed, in response to the received wisdom that Prop. 13 has wrecked California's finances, runs some quick numbers to see what the state's property tax haul has been the past quarter century:
Remember, Prop. 13 is not a hard cap of property taxes. Levies are adjusted to current market value when property changes hands. And that happens all the time.

According to the latest info from the Board of Equalization [...] total property taxes collected in 2006-07 were $43.16 billion.

The oldest property tax stats I could find were for 1980-81, from caltax.org . That year, property tax revenue was $6.36 billion.

So since shortly after Prop. 13's adoption, property tax revenue increased by 579 percent. That is not a typo. It went up 579 percent.

During the same span, population went from 24 million to 38 milion -- an increase of 58 percent.

As for inflation, as of January 1981, the rough midpoint of the 1980-81 fiscal year, the Consumer Price Index -- which gauges inflation -- was 88. As of January 2007, it was 202.4. That is a 133 percent increase.

So property tax revenue has increased by more than triple the combined rate of inflation and population growth -- 579 percent versus 191 percent.[...]

[I]n 1980-1981, the total of all general and special fund revenue for the state of California was $22.1 billion. For 2006-07, it was $120.7 billion.[...] That is an increase of 555 percent.

You follow? PROPERTY TAX REVENUE WENT UP FASTER THAN OTHER SOURCES OF REVENUE!

http://www.reason.com/blog/show/133927.html

Crazy wrote:

<quoted text>
Gee, I guess 30% of Butte County is on the dole.

Thats precisely the problem.

Buster202 wrote:

<quoted text>
http://www.tax.co.harris.tx.us/jurtaxrates.as...
Has Prop. 13 Really Robbed California of Property-Tax Revenue?
Matt Welch | June 3, 2009, 5:20pm
San Diego Union-Tribune editorial writer Chris Reed, in response to the received wisdom that Prop. 13 has wrecked California's finances, runs some quick numbers to see what the state's property tax haul has been the past quarter century:
Remember, Prop. 13 is not a hard cap of property taxes. Levies are adjusted to current market value when property changes hands. And that happens all the time.
According to the latest info from the Board of Equalization [...] total property taxes collected in 2006-07 were $43.16 billion.
The oldest property tax stats I could find were for 1980-81, from caltax.org . That year, property tax revenue was $6.36 billion.
So since shortly after Prop. 13's adoption, property tax revenue increased by 579 percent. That is not a typo. It went up 579 percent.
During the same span, population went from 24 million to 38 milion -- an increase of 58 percent.
As for inflation, as of January 1981, the rough midpoint of the 1980-81 fiscal year, the Consumer Price Index -- which gauges inflation -- was 88. As of January 2007, it was 202.4. That is a 133 percent increase.
So property tax revenue has increased by more than triple the combined rate of inflation and population growth -- 579 percent versus 191 percent.[...]
[I]n 1980-1981, the total of all general and special fund revenue for the state of California was $22.1 billion. For 2006-07, it was $120.7 billion.[...] That is an increase of 555 percent.
You follow? PROPERTY TAX REVENUE WENT UP FASTER THAN OTHER SOURCES OF REVENUE!
http://www.reason.com/blog/show/133927.html

Well awe-shucks. I didn't state that Prop 13 destroyed California finances, now did I? I said, there's no property tax cap in Texas.

And by the way, what do you suppose happened to real estate values during that same period you cite (1981 to 2009).

Awe-shucks. Looks like you're an idiot too. And look at that! Texas COST of a house hasn't gone up that much. Hmmm, sounds like the solution to housing expenses is to eliminate Prop 13. I'm not seriously suggesting that, but if I used your brain, that would be the conclusion YOU would come to.

Randall Stone wrote:

<quoted text>
Well awe-shucks. I didn't state that Prop 13 destroyed California finances, now did I? I said, there's no property tax cap in Texas.
And by the way, what do you suppose happened to real estate values during that same period you cite (1981 to 2009).
Awe-shucks. Looks like you're an idiot too. And look at that! Texas COST of a house hasn't gone up that much. Hmmm, sounds like the solution to housing expenses is to eliminate Prop 13. I'm not seriously suggesting that, but if I used your brain, that would be the conclusion YOU would come to.

Its an article for people who think our property taxes are not high enough.

I can post it for you. But I can't understand it for you.

Froget these facist MOFOS. Tell them what a real American does. We don't wine and moan. Most of these people when asked don't realy even know what they stand for. They say smaller government and a strong large millitary. Last time I checked MILLITARY IS GOVERNMENT. THESE PEOPLE ARE SOILING THIS COUNTRY!!! LET THEM KNOW
Party_Tea.Chico@Rocketmail.com
5305700645 (Cynthia)

Cynthia Van Auken. This stinks just like Sarah Palin trying to get in the media for any reason.

I think "smaller government and a strong military" was the Republican battlecry.

Answerer wrote:

Can we just give the former Soviet Union to Charles Kasey Kitterman? Texas seems to be managing its budget quite nicely amid all the economic chaos. Budget surpluses the past few years have been massive. You enjoy those California roads and public education systems Charles. Texas is quite frankly kicking your behind in both, while all the while having no personal state income tax. Gosh, how do they do that? I wonder....

Well, you can lick all the boots you want. I do not see how anything I posted would lead you to think I am a communist. I know Limbaugh tells you to think we all be better off if big companies are allowed to go offshore, but I think we should have those jobs and foreign imports need to be limited. This country was at its best when we had a strong middle class.

Buster202 wrote:

<quoted text>
The attitude of someone on the dole.

I am hardly on the dole.

What is your problem with people making lots of money?