Comments on: Reset California http://www.raggedclown.com/2009/07/02/reset-california/ It's just a shadow you're seeing that he's chasing... Fri, 30 Jul 2010 12:01:38 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Matt http://www.raggedclown.com/2009/07/02/reset-california/comment-page-1/#comment-9901 Matt Mon, 06 Jul 2009 05:01:11 +0000 http://www.raggedclown.com/?p=1600#comment-9901 >If it weren’t for the initiative process stealing their attention, people would pay more attention Seems optimistic. I'm glad that everyone in Santa Clara County is uniformly wealthy enough to not miss $20 for open spaces. I didn't know that, I had thought it was regressive even there. >If it weren’t for the initiative process stealing their attention, people would pay more attention

Seems optimistic.

I’m glad that everyone in Santa Clara County is uniformly wealthy enough to not miss $20 for open spaces. I didn’t know that, I had thought it was regressive even there.

]]> By: Kevin http://www.raggedclown.com/2009/07/02/reset-california/comment-page-1/#comment-9899 Kevin Fri, 03 Jul 2009 16:14:06 +0000 http://www.raggedclown.com/?p=1600#comment-9899 The initiative process gave us Prop 13 AND the 2/3 requirement AND spending commitments. If it weren't for the initiative process stealing their attention, people would pay more attention to the election of local officials and we'd expect more of them and they wouldn't get away with raising property taxes sky high. What Jeff said on the $20. The initiative process gave us Prop 13 AND the 2/3 requirement AND spending commitments.

If it weren’t for the initiative process stealing their attention, people would pay more attention to the election of local officials and we’d expect more of them and they wouldn’t get away with raising property taxes sky high.

What Jeff said on the $20.

]]> By: Jeffrey Fredrick http://www.raggedclown.com/2009/07/02/reset-california/comment-page-1/#comment-9898 Jeffrey Fredrick Fri, 03 Jul 2009 14:39:41 +0000 http://www.raggedclown.com/?p=1600#comment-9898 Putting aside the property tax issue, the real problem with Prop 13 is the 2/3 requirements for all tax increases means that a small minority can hold the state government hostage. And your concern about regressive fees might make more sense except the $20 fee was for Santa Clara County which encompasses neither Santa Monica nor East LA. Putting aside the property tax issue, the real problem with Prop 13 is the 2/3 requirements for all tax increases means that a small minority can hold the state government hostage.

And your concern about regressive fees might make more sense except the $20 fee was for Santa Clara County which encompasses neither Santa Monica nor East LA.

]]> By: Bruce Oksol http://www.raggedclown.com/2009/07/02/reset-california/comment-page-1/#comment-9897 Bruce Oksol Fri, 03 Jul 2009 13:08:43 +0000 http://www.raggedclown.com/?p=1600#comment-9897 Had it not been for the initiative process, I can only imagine how high property taxes would be on homes by this time. Retirees would have been forced out of their homes long ago. Proposition 13 and subsequent supporting initiatives have been lifesavers for families. I do agree about term limits: sets up a perfect opportunity to not do anything constructive. Why do folks even run for elective office if there's no long-term gain, only short-term payoffs? It sounds like we might as well cut the Assembly in half, meet half the time they now meet, call it a day, and enjoy the beach. $20 per household is very regressive. There are some very poor folks who cannot afford another $20 on top of everything else and yet the folks in Santa Monica don't even notice the $20, and they are the ones benefiting from the wide open spaces right out their front door. The poor folks in east Los Angeles won't see much for their $20. I've never felt comfortable with regressive taxes. Had it not been for the initiative process, I can only imagine how high property taxes would be on homes by this time. Retirees would have been forced out of their homes long ago. Proposition 13 and subsequent supporting initiatives have been lifesavers for families.

I do agree about term limits: sets up a perfect opportunity to not do anything constructive. Why do folks even run for elective office if there’s no long-term gain, only short-term payoffs? It sounds like we might as well cut the Assembly in half, meet half the time they now meet, call it a day, and enjoy the beach.

$20 per household is very regressive. There are some very poor folks who cannot afford another $20 on top of everything else and yet the folks in Santa Monica don’t even notice the $20, and they are the ones benefiting from the wide open spaces right out their front door. The poor folks in east Los Angeles won’t see much for their $20. I’ve never felt comfortable with regressive taxes.

]]>