vader-fail

California recently took the steps to reduce government deficits by raising taxes:  1% on sale tax , and raising income taxes.

It doesn’t seem that this worked out too well.

From the information that came out, California is pretty much KlusterF*(ked. With a kapital K.

From the May 09 Summary from the state controller’s office.

Compared to April 2008, General Fund revenue in April 2009 was down $6.3 billion (-39%). The total for the three largest taxes was below 2008 levels by $6.3 billion (-40.3%). Sales taxes were $452 million lower (-50.9%) than last April, and personal income taxes were down $5.7 billion (-43.6%).

That’s gotta hurt.  This recession is going to make things even more difficult.  California is wanting to start talking about legalizing pot.  Some ideas have been floated of putting a $50/oz tax on recreational use.  Nice.  At this point, California needs to do something big.  Look to have even higher taxes and even more people leave if they do.

 

6 Responses to “California – Taking the short bus”

  1. aksteve says:

    California may give a new meaning to “high” taxation.

  2. aksteve says:

    Actually, legalizing pot may just keep the residents hangin’ around instead of fleeing. No jobs, perfect.

  3. James/LAEF2 says:

    I think we should legalize the weed.

    However, we will have a steady exodus of business if we keep raising taxes. Tax rates have to be comparable to other states, personal or corporate. Otherwise business leave because they can’t attract employees or their costs are too high.

    Be a good idea to get a clear list of things we need to cut.

    Also be a good idea to cut public sector salaries. More deflation.

  4. Zombie says:

    With auto sales down over 40% why would anyone buy new when the tax has gone up 1% and your registration fees have now doubled. And now with GM and Chrysler closing over 2000 dealerships this year and next your addiction to sales tax and job income is your going to have to break the Unions and quit giving sweetheart pensions that i just obscene. Great California you shot your self in both feet. I will never buy a new car again and with far better quality there is going to be a lot of people holding on or finding cheaper cars to save money. And you offend me with this special election and i will vote no on 5 of the 6. You are all unfit to lead…

  5. Pete says:

    1) The only solution is to break the gerrymandering of the voting districts. Presently the politicians decide who their voters are (amazing!) by drawing the districts to make them a sure win. Just make sure the district is not competitive and you can always get re-elected. However, the voters must choose their elected representatives and not the other way around.

    The liberal Democrats have been in a majority and the districts are drawn such as to get the most socialist/liberal members win the primary and then go to win the general election without meaningful opposition. The Republican pols agreed to the gerrymandering plan so they can get elected also, albeit staying in minority.

    2) An additional protection should be to amend the Constitution so personal income taxes are eliminated (like in NINE other states, including our neighbor to the East (Nevada) and our further neighbor to the North (Washington). Its a tall order, but its the only way to stop the politicians (especially the liberal Democrats) to spend other people’s money.

    At least, there should be a cap on personal income tax, say 2%. Maybe 3% if you are a bleeding heart liberal and really insist…

  6. Carl says:

    California is going to need a new constitution. There are too many voter approved constitutional amendments that mandate funding to too many “flavor of the month” initiatives.

    I realize that Proposition 13 would also be destroyed, but if we are going to balance our budget, we need to increase revenues AND decrease spending. To not affect as many elderly/long time residents, modify the new “prop 13″ with something to the effect of the taxable value of the home shall not be increased for those owners of the property who are 55 and over, provided that they are the occupiers of the property.

    Property values are already delcining, seems like a perfect time to push them lower.