A “Real World” referendum on high tax vs low tax states? CA and TX
By LisaB on November 2, 2009 at 4:00 PM in Current Affairs
The LATimes has a fascinating article comparing California to Texas. William Voegeli basically argues that the Texas model of low taxes / low-benefit works better than California’s high-benefit / high-tax model.
In America’s federal system, some states, such as California, offer residents a “package deal” that bundles numerous and ambitious public benefits with the high taxes needed to pay for them. Other states, such as Texas, offer packages combining modest benefits and low taxes. These alternatives, of course, define the basic argument between liberals and conservatives over what it means to get the size and scope of government right.
It’s not surprising, then, that there’s an intense debate over which model is more admirable and sustainable. What is surprising is the growing evidence that the low-benefit/low-tax package not only succeeds on its own terms but also according to the criteria used to defend its opposite. In other words, the superior public goods that supposedly justify the high taxes just aren’t being delivered.
———
One way to assess how Americans feel about the different tax and benefit packages the states offer is by examining internal U.S. migration patterns. Between April 1, 2000, and June 30, 2007, an average of 3,247 more people moved out of California than into it every week, according to the Census Bureau. Over the same period, Texas had a net weekly population increase of 1,544 as a result of people moving in from other states. During these years, more generally, 16 of the 17 states with the lowest tax levels had positive “net internal migration,” in the Census Bureau’s language, while 14 of the 17 states with the highest taxes had negative net internal migration.
These folks pulling up stakes and driving U-Haul trucks across state lines understand a reality the defenders of the high-benefit/high-tax model must confront: All things being equal, everyone would rather pay low taxes than high ones. The high-benefit/high-tax model can work only if things are demonstrably not equal — if the public goods purchased by the high taxes far surpass the quality, quantity and impact of those available to people who live in states with low taxes.
Today’s public benefits fail that test, as urban scholar Joel Kotkin of NewGeography.com and Chapman University told the Los Angeles Times in March: “Twenty years ago, you could go to Texas, where they had very low taxes, and you would see the difference between there and California. Today, you go to Texas, the roads are no worse, the public schools are not great but are better than or equal to ours, and their universities are good. The bargain between California’s government and the middle class is constantly being renegotiated to the disadvantage of the middle class.”
These judgments are not based on drive-by sociology. According to a report issued earlier this year by the consulting firm McKinsey & Co., Texas students “are, on average, one to two years of learning ahead of California students of the same age,” even though per-pupil expenditures on public school students are 12% higher in California. The details of the Census Bureau data show that Texas not only spends its citizens’ dollars more effectively than California but emphasizes priorities that are more broadly beneficial. Per capita spending on transportation was 5.9% lower in California, and highway expenditures in particular were 9.5% lower, a discovery both plausible and infuriating to any Los Angeles commuter losing the will to live while sitting in yet another freeway traffic jam.
If this is correct, if we can see that many people actually prefer “a la cart” services rather than “all-in-one” from government, I’d think this has implications for Obamacare, Obamacorps, and anything else the federal government is thinking of nationalizing.
But that’s just a few people moving from CA to TX and doesn’t mean anything right? I’m not so sure. Tea partiers seem to me to make the same argument and those people can be found in all states.
Personally, I live in one of the highest taxed communities in my state. By all accounts, this is a great place to live, but many are fed up with zooming property taxes that saw property re-valuations go up 40% AFTER the economic plunge last year. Local incumbents are suffering during this election season. The general consensus among the dissatisfied is that local government spends too much and is unaccountable. Is this a nice place BECAUSE of local government or despite it? That’s a good question.
I think the LATimes makes an important point. And I think one paragraph, in particular, hits the anxiety of Americans concerned about what the Obama administration is moving toward.
. . . California’s interlocking directorate of government employee unions, issue activists, careerists and campaign contributors has become increasingly aggressive and adept at using rhetoric extolling public benefits for all to deliver targeted advantages to itself. As a result, the political reality of the high-benefit/high-tax model is that its public goods are, increasingly, neither public nor good. Instead, the beneficiaries are the providers of the public services, and certain favored or connected constituencies, rather than the general population.
This sounds a lot like Chicago as well. Did the poor in Chicago ever get the renovations they needed from those who got money to fix up the dilapidated apartment buildings? No. Given the many financial scandals of Wall Street, K Street, Obama administration officials and Congress, it would be madness to think higher taxes would ever get past the all the “bites” and actually reach its intended purpose.
And I think many people see Obamacare as trickle-down health care. Send all your money to the top and hope the care actually trickles down to you how, when and where you need it.
Thoughts?
Do go read the whole article. It’s well worth the time!
(Release: November 13)
on sale for only $16.95.
has a spatula.)
8% Off at $11.95, with a rare five-star ranking by 294 customers: 
And check out these: 
("This crazy redhead is on to something. Her pink Rambler story alone is worth the price of the book," writes 
- “Richard Sale’s reportage on Washington, the CIA, the American armed forces, and foreign intrigue has created a perfect background for this account of the steady growth of President Clinton as a master of the game of nations.”--W. Patrick Lang, former head of Middle East Operations, DIA
"Anne C. Heller's stunning biography of Ayn Rand" uses a "plethora of newly unearthed research and fresh insight."
New programs and bureaus set up under this insane spending plan.
1. Retiree Reserve Trust Fund (Section 111(d), p. 61)
2. Grant program for wellness programs to small employers (Section 112, p. 62)
3. Grant program for State health access programs (Section 114, p. 72)
4. Program of administrative simplification (Section 115, p. 76)
5. Health Benefits Advisory Committee (Section 223, p. 111)
6. Health Choices Administration (Section 241, p. 131)
7. Qualified Health Benefits Plan Ombudsman (Section 244, p. 138)
8. Health Insurance Exchange (Section 201, p. 155)
9. Program for technical assistance to employees of small businesses buying Exchange coverage (Section 305(h), p. 191)
10. Mechanism for insurance risk pooling to be established by Health Choices Commissioner (Section 306(b), p. 194)
11. Health Insurance Exchange Trust Fund (Section 307, p. 195)
12. State-based Health Insurance Exchanges (Section 308, p. 197)
13. Grant program for health insurance cooperatives (Section 310, p. 206)
14. “Public Health Insurance Option” (Section 321, p. 211)
15. Ombudsman for “Public Health Insurance Option” (Section 321(d), p. 213)
16. Account for receipts and disbursements for “Public Health Insurance Option” (Section 322(b), p. 215)
17. Telehealth Advisory Committee (Section 1191 (b), p. 589)
18. Demonstration program providing reimbursement for “culturally and linguistically appropriate services” (Section 1222, p. 617)
19. Demonstration program for shared decision making using patient decision aids (Section 1236, p. 648)
20. Accountable Care Organization pilot program under Medicare (Section 1301, p. 653)
21. Independent patient-centered medical home pilot program under Medicare (Section 1302, p. 672)
22. Community-based medical home pilot program under Medicare (Section 1302(d), p. 681)
23. Independence at home demonstration program (Section 1312, p. 718)
24. Center for Comparative Effectiveness Research (Section 1401(a), p. 734)
25. Comparative Effectiveness Research Commission (Section 1401(a), p. 738)
26. Patient ombudsman for comparative effectiveness research (Section 1401(a), p. 753)
27. Quality assurance and performance improvement program for skilled nursing facilities (Section 1412(b)(1), p. 784)
28. Quality assurance and performance improvement program for nursing facilities (Section 1412 (b)(2), p. 786)
29. Special focus facility program for skilled nursing facilities (Section 1413(a)(3), p. 796)
30. Special focus facility program for nursing facilities (Section 1413(b)(3), p. 804)
31. National independent monitor pilot program for skilled nursing facilities and nursing facilities (Section 1422, p. 859)
32. Demonstration program for approved teaching health centers with respect to Medicare GME (Section 1502(d), p. 933)
33. Pilot program to develop anti-fraud compliance systems for Medicare providers (Section 1635, p. 978)
34. Special Inspector General for the Health Insurance Exchange (Section 1647, p. 1000)
35. Medical home pilot program under Medicaid (Section 1722, p. 1058)
36. Accountable Care Organization pilot program under Medicaid (Section 1730A, p. 1073)
37. Nursing facility supplemental payment program (Section 1745, p. 1106)
38. Demonstration program for Medicaid coverage to stabilize emergency medical conditions in institutions for mental diseases (Section 1787, p. 1149)
39. Comparative Effectiveness Research Trust Fund (Section 1802, p. 1162)
40. “Identifiable office or program” within CMS to “provide for improved coordination between Medicare and Medicaid in the case of dual eligibles” (Section 1905, p. 1191)
41. Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (Section 1907, p. 1198)
42. Public Health Investment Fund (Section 2002, p. 1214)
43. Scholarships for service in health professional needs areas (Section 2211, p. 1224)
44. Program for training medical residents in community-based settings (Section 2214, p. 1236)
45. Grant program for training in dentistry programs (Section 2215, p. 1240)
46. Public Health Workforce Corps (Section 2231, p. 1253)
47. Public health workforce scholarship program (Section 2231, p. 1254)
48. Public health workforce loan forgiveness program (Section 2231, p. 1258)
49. Grant program for innovations in interdisciplinary care (Section 2252, p. 1272)
50. Advisory Committee on Health Workforce Evaluation and Assessment (Section 2261, p. 1275)
51. Prevention and Wellness Trust (Section 2301, p. 1286)
52. Clinical Prevention Stakeholders Board (Section 2301, p. 1295)
53. Community Prevention Stakeholders Board (Section 2301, p. 1301)
54. Grant program for community prevention and wellness research (Section 2301, p. 1305)
55. Grant program for research and demonstration projects related to wellness incentives (Section 2301, p. 1305)
56. Grant program for community prevention and wellness services (Section 2301, p. 1308)
57. Grant program for public health infrastructure (Section 2301, p. 1313)
58. Center for Quality Improvement (Section 2401, p. 1322)
59. Assistant Secretary for Health Information (Section 2402, p. 1330)
60. Grant program to support the operation of school-based health clinics (Section 2511, p. 1352)
61. Grant program for nurse-managed health centers (Section 2512, p. 1361)
62. Grants for labor-management programs for nursing training (Section 2521, p. 1372)
63. Grant program for interdisciplinary mental and behavioral health training (Section 2522, p. 1382)
64. “No Child Left Unimmunized Against Influenza” demonstration grant program (Section 2524, p. 1391)
65. Healthy Teen Initiative grant program regarding teen pregnancy (Section 2526, p. 1398)
66. Grant program for interdisciplinary training, education, and services for individuals with autism (Section 2527(a), p. 1402)
67. University centers for excellence in developmental disabilities education (Section 2527(b), p. 1410)
68. Grant program to implement medication therapy management services (Section 2528, p. 1412)
69. Grant program to promote positive health behaviors in underserved communities (Section 2530, p. 1422)
70. Grant program for State alternative medical liability laws (Section 2531, p. 1431)
71. Grant program to develop infant mortality programs (Section 2532, p. 1433)
72. Grant program to prepare secondary school students for careers in health professions (Section 2533, p. 1437)
73. Grant program for community-based collaborative care (Section 2534, p. 1440)
74. Grant program for community-based overweight and obesity prevention (Section 2535, p. 1457)
75. Grant program for reducing the student-to-school nurse ratio in primary and secondary schools (Section 2536, p. 1462)
76. Demonstration project of grants to medical-legal partnerships (Section 2537, p. 1464)
77. Center for Emergency Care under the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (Section 2552, p. 1478)
78. Council for Emergency Care (Section 2552, p 1479)
79. Grant program to support demonstration programs that design and implement regionalized emergency care systems (Section 2553, p. 1480)
80. Grant program to assist veterans who wish to become emergency medical technicians upon discharge (Section 2554, p. 1487)
81. Interagency Pain Research Coordinating Committee (Section 2562, p. 1494)
82. National Medical Device Registry (Section 2571, p. 1501)
83. CLASS Independence Fund (Section 2581, p. 1597)
84. CLASS Independence Fund Board of Trustees (Section 2581, p. 1598)
85. CLASS Independence Advisory Council (Section 2581, p. 1602)
86. Health and Human Services Coordinating Committee on Women’s Health (Section 2588, p. 1610)
87. National Women’s Health Information Center (Section 2588, p. 1611)
88. Centers for Disease Control Office of Women’s Health (Section 2588, p. 1614)
89. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Office of Women’s Health and Gender-Based Research (Section 2588, p. 1617)
90. Health Resources and Services Administration Office of Women’s Health (Section 2588, p. 1618)
91. Food and Drug Administration Office of Women’s Health (Section 2588, p. 1621)
92. Personal Care Attendant Workforce Advisory Panel (Section 2589(a)(2), p. 1624)
93. Grant program for national health workforce online training (Section 2591, p. 1629)
94. Grant program to disseminate best practices on implementing health workforce investment programs (Section 2591, p. 1632)
95. Demonstration program for chronic shortages of health professionals (Section 3101, p. 1717)
96. Demonstration program for substance abuse counselor educational curricula (Section 3101, p. 1719)49. Grant program for innovations in interdisciplinary care (Section 2252, p. 1272)
97. Program of Indian community education on mental illness (Section 3101, p. 1722)
98. Intergovernmental Task Force on Indian environmental and nuclear hazards (Section 3101, p. 1754)
99. Office of Indian Men’s Health (Section 3101, p. 1765)
100. Indian Health facilities appropriation advisory board (Section 3101, p. 1774)
101. Indian Health facilities needs assessment workgroup (Section 3101, p. 1775)
102. Indian Health Service tribal facilities joint venture demonstration projects (Section 3101, p. 1809)
103. Urban youth treatment center demonstration project (Section 3101, p. 1873)
104. Grants to Urban Indian Organizations for diabetes prevention (Section 3101, p. 1874)
105. Grants to Urban Indian Organizations for health IT adoption (Section 3101, p. 1877)
106. Mental health technician training program (Section 3101, p. 1898)
107. Indian youth telemental health demonstration project (Section 3101, p. 1909)
108. Program for treatment of child sexual abuse victims and perpetrators (Section 3101, p. 1925)
109. Program for treatment of domestic violence and sexual abuse (Section 3101, p. 1927)
110. Native American Health and Wellness Foundation (Section 3103, p. 1966)
111. Committee for the Establishment of the Native American Health and Wellness Foundation (Section 3103, p. 1968
They are friggin insane.
That’s 111 things we could do without. Toss that POS bill into the nearest recycle bin.
Holy smokes - that IS insane!! MY head is just reeling from that list!
Great post, LisaB - thank you!
HARP - Which of the five bills is this list from? Is it the House version? The Senate’s? The Bachus bill? Or is it a list from all the bills.
Agree it is insane no matter which bill or bills.
I moved from Chicago to Dallas in February. My property taxes are 40% less for twice the space. I bring home more money because of no income taxes and can’t complaining about the weather. I lived in Los Angeles in the 90’s and you would have to pay me a lot of money to go back. And and far as Chicago is concern, they could not pay me enough to move back there.
Right off the bat I’d say this is a biased article if only because they are comparing the Texas system: low public works and low taxes; to the California system: after California has crashed and burned due to the wholesale bankrupting of CA by companies like Enron (a Texas-based company) and depredations of Governors like Saint Ronald who did their level best to gut what was once considered the finest public educational system in the world.
As I recall, when California was in it’s heyday the comparison to Texas was laughable.
Sounds like a bit of opportunistic neocon propagandizing to me.
Saint Ronald is ancient history. You mean to say all the kings men and all the king’s lobbyists couldn’t put CA back together again since ????
Whoa there, Craig.
The real picture is that, where Texas continues to improve, some states do not. The lesson that Texans learned a long time ago was that the less govt. gets involved in its citizens lives, the better for them.
Here’s a very simple analogy that we Texans know. Say you have a cattle ranch and your cattle like to graze but there’s been a drought. Then some fast-talking salesman comes along and tries to tell you that if you and your neighbors each pay $5000 per month, you can all share in a brand new and improved cattle feed. So you agree to try it, but soon find that your cattle don’t like the feed and just want to be left alone to graze the land your family has owned for 150 years.
Do you want to keep paying for feed you can’t use, or would you rather take that money and buy an irrigation system to keep your land sustainable? If your neighbor’s cattle like the new feed, they’re free to buy it each month, but nobody’s forced to pay for something they may not even want or need.
Texans want to be able to determine how their money is spent without their govt. telling them what they ought to spend it on.
(I may live in NH, but my heart is still in Texas.)
Disagree. And I think Enron was an equal opportunity destroyer of wealth. Suggesting Texas, as the “home” of Enron, somehow was involved, is a cheap shot. Might as well suggest CA was responsible for Polanski, since he lived there.
An economy that is very strong would have weathered the financial storms a little better than CA. Suggesting CA’s problems are all the result of other states or a long-retired and now dead governor, is simply lazy. CA’s situation is complex, complicated and incredibly difficult. “It’s Reagan’s fault” simply won’t do. “It’s the result of prop 13″ simply won’t do. There are many players in the CA mess right now.
And worrying about who is to blame is a waste of time.
The point here is when a state providing high services either sees the quality of those services dip or that those services metastasize into areas the general population does not agree with, people will no longer pay. They’ll leave.
They’ll go where the payments are less and pay for those services they use or take a chance they won’t need such services. They simply do a cost / benefit analysis on a personal level and make a choice.
And apparently, CA is losing people. The underlying point, for me, is if the federal government can’t provide high quality healthcare for all then their plan to tax everyone will fall apart.
So far, lots of people seriously doubt the government’s ability to provide high quality. That’s the crux of the problem.
The end result is the middle class is tired of supporting the masses. The masses need to get jobs and the illegals need to go back. Plain and simple. We must protect our borders or we will all become CA. Once a beautiful state that the rest of the country looked up to and now are fleeing.
Yesterday on the news they said in this country of 310 million only 107 million have jobs.
California was targeted buy Enron, there are recordings to prove it. Enron cost the State billions of dollars. No other State, including Texas, was affected so disastrously by Enron. This resulted in our budgets going into the red, and our governor being recalled.
This article doesn’t address a more likely cause of people leaving California-the rapidly rising cost of housing. Even today, housing is still very expensive here and income has not risen much. Business, big and not-so-big, is reluctant to move here in part because of taxes, but also, in a big way, because of the cost of housing. They don’t want to have to pay their workers enough so that they can house their famlies here. Now of course we have huge uemployment too.
For those who can easily change location, there are many benefits.
Those who come into our area can buy much larger homes for far less than other regions, and pay less in taxes.
It is a double-edged sword though. With an influx in population, more schools and services may be required.That is certainly the case in my daughters’s area of N.C.
We mostly get retirees, who have children living here now.
PSST: Sassy! Please don’t give them any ideas. I moved back to Eastern TN to get away from crowds, noise, and nasty attitudes I found in the other 5 states I’ve lived in. I still remember what happened to my home state of Oklahoma in the early 80s when all the northerners moved in. I left soon after.
Amen Ferd!
Not to mention less crime, pollution, and the mad rush to nowhere!
For sure. It takes me 30 minutes less time to travel 15 miles to work than it used to take me to go 4 miles in WA. I am so happy to be back where the pace of life is slower as it gives me time to actually enjoy being in the here and now.
There is no denying medium-to-high-benefit states like CA, NY, NJ, HI, etc need a mechanism for bringing greater efficiency to public employees and conditions of entrenched government corruption.
As difficult and terribly challanging as that is, though, it may actually be easier than making states like TX and FL actually HAVE a public good for anyone outside the middle class. I’d be interested in the poverty rates for both these states.
When I moved to CA in 61, returning in 68, this was a great state. Schools were excellent; community colleges were free, easily accessible and quality classes; UC system was great. The weather was just about perfect year round. Traffic was not a significant problem. No problem with illegals. Housing was no more than what I had paid just outside of DC. Great public services, libraries, parks.
Most of that has changed. You would still have to pay me a lot to move to TX. But Az and NV are aren’t so bad. CAs prop 13 that put an end to residential tax increases that were driving people out of their homes is really valuable. The sales tax is starting to bite. And the services suck for the middle class along with the schools. Everything west of the mountain ranges is overbuilt, overgrown and demoralizing. I always saw myself as a liberal but some of the liberal ideas in CA are just nuts.
I guess you could quote the old cliche: the proof is in the pudding. California is imploding and Texas is weathering the storm.
I’m a native of NJ. I can tell you from experience the taxes are horrific and car insurance alone can put you in the poor house.
I now live south of the Mason-Dixon line, not by choice but by job necessity.
But the taxes? They’re a fraction of what we were paying in Jersey. Do I have all the “public” amenities? No. I pay privately for fire assistance, ambulance service and trash pickup. But it’s not a gouging rate.
I pay no state income tax but would be willing to pay a bit more in whatever tax to improve the level of education in the state [which is simply not [[dedicated southerners, please, forgive me]] up to par]. Fortunately, my kids were educated up North.
Do I miss or resent paying for services that I took for granted up North?
Frankly, no. I suspect, if you asked most Americans, they could easily do with less social services. Take care of the people in need, the ones who for whatever reason, fall through the cracks. I do think Americans are compassionate, maybe to a fault.
But for the rest of us? We can do with less. And we can certainly do without the endless regulations and ever escalating taxes.
Where would I rather live? I’m a Northerner by my DNA. But right now I live South. And I ain’t unhappy!!
PS: I should have said: I miss my friends and family like hell. But economically: I ain’t unhappy :0).
Peggy Sue,
I have relatives in N.J. and the price of their first small starter home there was astounding.
In addition, they sent their twins to private school for quality and safety.
I’m interested in the election results there tomorrow.
The tea-party crowd needs to make a strong showing.
It should be very interesting, Sassy. There is no bluer state than New Jersey. The fact that Corzine is running neck-to-neck with Christie is an indictment of how unpopular Corzine truly is. Christie Whitman took out Jim Florio in the 90s [but in all honesty Florio was compromised by rumor, scandal but also major tax considerations, always a factor in NJ politics]. Really, the taxes in Jersey have always been ridiculous.
If Christie wins against the 2:1 or 3:1 spending advantage from the Corzine camp and after all the heavy Dem hitters that have come out to stomp for Corzine?
It is a major coup, a shot across the bow:
Resist and desist, Mr. President. This is “not” what the American people voted for.
And if that happens, it remains to be seen whether the honchos in DC are willing to listen on this round.
If not? It will all come around again, in 2010.
PS: It used to be, Sassy, that you could buy a house in South Jersey for less than a house in the Philadelphia area. That’s why my husband and I ended up in Jersey though we both worked in Philly. We rented a house in Delaware County after our first son was born but when we priced the housing to buy, it was beyond our means.
The further you move north, the higher the prices go. And in North Jersey? You’re looking at NY comparable prices.
Not easy if you have a family to feed.
School districts vary in the state, as do local taxes. In fact, I think one of the problems New Jersey has is this fiefdom mentality. Every berg, town and township wants autonmy over its own destiny. Yes, there’s something noble in that but also something dumb–too much overlapping services and double billing. And so the taxes keep going up, up, up.
There’s just so much people can afford until they split down the middle.
New Jersey reached that point about a decade ago.
Well this is an interesting note on TX:
Take Texas, where nearly one in three working adults lacks health insurance, the highest percentage in the nation. Many Texas employers do not offer coverage. And while Texas Medicaid covers about 2 million children, it picks up only 125,000 of their parents, because of an eligibility cap set in 1985 and never adjusted for inflation, according to Anne Dunkelberg of the Texas-based Center for Public Policy Priorities.
Expanding Medicaid eligibility to all adults who earn just a bit more than the federal poverty level, as Congress is proposing, could easily add 1 million people to Texas Medicaid, Dunkelberg said. But the program has huge administrative problems and takes more than three months to sign up some applicants, she said; without federal standards, “these Medicaid expansions could turn out to be an empty promise.”
I think TX did a good job of inventing Neiman Marcus.
What? Surely you aren’t serious, jangles. Needless Markups represents wretched excess, with emphasis on the wretched.
It was my understanding that TX is experiencing significant state budget problems. Is that wrong?
Not really and gang, I live in TX and 70% of all the new jobs created are created in Texas. People who live here love it. I am from Wisconsin and love that state, but Texas is where you can afford to raise a family.
Half US kids have lived off food stamps
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,26298985-401,00.html
Chinese proverb: Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.
Liberal policies have fail written all over it. Widen the safety net? Right. What you need is to get rid of the damn safety net.
Please, let’s get serious.
There’s a need for a safety net for children, the disabled and the elderly. It’s not the safety net per se, it’s the way the safety net’s been weighted down and ripped by programs that make no sense, overburdening the taxpayer and ultimately not helping those in true need, those falling between the cracks.
I would hate to think that the present insanity would turn us into a country of uncaring Scrooges. I want to help those on the bottom rungs. I just don’t want us to all to fall down in the abyss in the process.
Because then, there’s no one to help. Only universal misery.
Dear Peggy,
I agree in spirit, but not in the way it’s currently implemented.
Safety nets/Charity SHOULD NOT be govt run and as such should not be funded via taxes but by donations (preferably fully tax deductible). This allows the taxpayer to choose WHO they want to support.
I’m all for you supporting as many people as you want and through whatever means available to you, that’s certainly your right! Just as it should be my right to choose NOT to, and I refuse to support ANYONE indefinitely. Taxing me against my will is essentially tyranny!
Concerned said:
“I’m all for you supporting as many people as you want and through whatever means available to you, that’s certainly your right! Just as it should be my right to choose NOT to, and I refuse to support ANYONE indefinitely. Taxing me against my will is essentially tyranny!”
I have no argument with you, Concerned. As long as we agree that safety nets themselves have an intrinsic value. For instance, I do not object to umemployment insurance, which basically is funded through taxes. Although I think extending those benefits ad infinitum is a gross trick that the Government would like to play without admitting to the horrendous umemployment numbers right now. I don’t object to health insurance extended to impoverished children because our children, all our children, are the future, all our futures, the only future we really have.
But there is much waste and many programs that simply should not be funded. I’m a Dem by inclination and DNA, but I’ve never believed that you solve problems by simply throwing tax dollars at them. In fact, I think you merely pretend you’re addressing problems that way.
I give to private charities. I always have. We probably have more in common than you may believe.
There is a middle ground where rational people can meet.
Too bad that the current political climate would have us believe otherwise.
You’re certainly right that there’s a middle ground where rational people can meet.
My beef with the safety net lies more in the approach than with the idea.
The greatest manifestation of the human spirit is when one stranger helps another. I wholeheartedly believe and will support that. I firmly believe that we can and should do more to bring people out of poverty. BUT giving them a free meal is NOT the way to do it.
What we’re doing is merely suppressing their human ingenuity and denying them the right of satisfaction from a day’s hard work and enjoying the fruits of their labor. What we’re doing is essentially BRIBING them, very much like what ancient Rome did to her poor. Giving them just enough to be content but not enough to help them rise.
The double edged sword with the unemployment numbers and taxes is, the more the extend it, the more they have to charge businesses. In Maryland the rate for 2010 went up dramatically, to the point where some businesses won’t hire more people b/c they can’t afford the additional payroll taxes. And are considering laying off people - just adding to the burden.
As for charity, I would actually give more if I didn’t have to pay taxes. I don’t agree with the never ending welfare checks - people have been living for thousands of years without a safety net. However, one thing I don’t mind paying taxes for is free/reduced breakfast and lunches for children. At least this way, I know the children are getting the food.
With this focus on children being uninsured, there’s already school nurses, why not have a doctor/nurse practitioner rotate between schools so the children have access to health care? Seems it would be quite a bit cheaper.
Good comment carros.
More and more companies are running leaner now, which means fewer jobs.
None of us want to see children in need. It is frustrating for me, though, to visit my downtown library and see able- bodied people lounging all day, eating at the Salvation Army and living in public housing.
When we encountered rough times at a younger age, I waited tables at the local country club. My daughter has as well, and she has a college degree.
We certainly need to help those who have no options, but I’m not fond of being a doormat!
Living in TX i can tell you that if the economy is bad I sure don’t see it here. Hiring signs are all over and love the fact we have no income tax. New homes in Houston are at an unbelieveable price for the square footage and are electric bills even with air conditioning cost are a pretty good bargain. Lower taxes do bring in jobs and if you don’t beloieve it get a Houston or other Texas paper and see all the ads for jobs.
California’s state legislature has been controlled by free-spending Democrats who believe in their hearts that there are always tax revenues to be had on the backs of the middle class and the wealthy. Here in northern California, we’ve been keeping the state afloat with our high tech industries, while in southern California the job market outlook is worse. Even with the current economy, the Dems in our state legislature continue to devise creative ways of raising our sales, property, and income taxes in order to fund an array of social services.
Here in the SF Bay Area, if you are making just over 100k annually, you are middle class AND would still be unable to purchase a home. That’s why a lot of young, upwardly-mobile families are leaving in droves to states like Oregon and Arizona. This makes our state income tax punitive towards middle-class, successful, and productive individuals like myself and my friends.
Sure, social services are great for the burgeoning population of illegal immigrants, but many people such as myself are sick of contributing to entitlement programs that going to eventually bankrupt the state. I don’t mind paying state and federal income taxes, but I do mind if my taxes keep increasing while the myriad and quality of social services continue to be suspect at best. Our public school systems used to be much envied by the rest of the country. This is not the case anymore. All of my friends send their children to private schools because of quality and safety concerns. One of them equate sending children to public schools here in San Francisco as child abuse if one has the means to go the private route and chooses not to do so.
Real estate is ridiculously expensive. In Cupertino, heart of Silicon Valley and where I grew up, a typical 4 BR house will cost you between $700K to over 1 million. These aren’t even new houses, these are older houses in established neighborhoods. Who can afford that? I can’t even afford to pay $600K for a tiny, 1 BR condo located in a crime-ridden area in San Francisco. Meanwhile, I have both California and Obama telling me that I’m rich and need to be taxed more. Now can’t you see how frustrated a lot of us are over here?
My husband just got an email from his employer, Los Angeles Unified School District informing him that the State of California is raising income tax 10%. This is not in the future. It starts immediately. 10 freaking percent!!!
Good grief! 10%?!! That’s highway robbery!
socialanne, First Obama gives me a reduction in payroll tax, then I get a 10 day furlough, then this 10% tax. It SUCKS.
My empathy to you and yours, I am right there with you.
It’s worth noting that this article from the LA Times is one in a series which looks at the many things in California that may need to be changed or adjusted. It is not sugggesting that just changing the tax structure would correct all that is wrong in California woud be fixed.
http://preview.tinyurl.com/yglyela
The 10% raise in tax, which will be refunded to the taxpayer in April next year, so it’s like an interest-free loan, works out at about $4 per week for a person making $51,000 with no deductions. I’m not saying it’s a good thing, but it’s not a huge, permanent increase.
The prison system here in CA is 10% of the budget and on track to overtake the $$ spent on the University system in the next 5 years.
The 3 strikes law is partly to blame. I certainly think it should be applied to violent crimes but many people have been locked up for life for stealing a video tape or other minor infractions. The law has prisons at 200% capacity. The prison guard union gives generously to candidates and in return gets huge benefits and large salaries.
Schwarzenegger swaggered into the open gov. seat after Davis was recalled and immediately rescinded a car license fee that only kicked in when the budget reached a certain low. The state budget went into free fall and has never recovered. The Dems only want more taxes and the Rs won’t pass any so they are at a stalemate.
I’ve lived in CA most of my life and graduated from Cal Berkeley but we are deciding where we’ll go to retire when our daughter is done with high school.
We used to be able to rationalize the high cost of living here (taxes, real estate, etc) when the quality of life was high but not anymore.
Texas is a good place to be if you are white and wealthy.
Has the highest number of people with no healthcare. Some of the worst pollution in the country and the highest obesity rates.
Texas ranks among the 50 States today:
* Percentage of Uninsured Children 1st
* Income Inequality Between the Rich and the Poor 2nd
* Percentage of Population without Health Insurance 1st
* Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT) Scores 47th
* Percentage of Population over 25 with a High School Diploma 50th
* Percentage of Non-Elderly Women with Health Insurance 50th
* Rate of Women Aged 40+ Who Receive Mammograms 44th
* Rate of Women Aged 18+ Who Receive Pap Smears 47th
* Cervical Cancer Rate 5th
* Women’s Voter Registration 43rd
* Women’s Voter Turnout 49th
* Percentage of Eligible Voters that Vote 44th
Add to this list that Texas has the highest rates for home insurance, 25% higher than 2nd place Louisiana. Deregulation of electricity has resulted in skyrocketing electricity costs instead of more competition that would reduce our rates, as promised. College education costs have soared by an average of 39% in just one short year once again as a result of deregulation.
Supporting a Texas Tax Model is a little misleading. It still has a lot of oil and gas production and the state taxes every barrel of oil that comes out of the Texas ground at 4.6% of its value. Natural gas is taxed at 7.5%.
Additionally, Texas is a net “dependent” of the federal government, meaning that it receives more funds from the Fed than it pays in the form of income taxes.
This allows Texas to have no personal income tax; however, the sales tax is 8.25% and annual property taxes run 1.4% of home value.
To raise additional money, Texas recently re-vamped its business franchise tax which taxes all corporations, LLCs, and limited partnerships at 1/2 to 1% of gross income with some deductions allowed depending upon the industry.
Still, the budget is tight and other revenue sources are being considered.