Add on wouldn't be there had Prop 19 passed Jerry. But you're against legalizing Marijuana. And his plan to have a vote to raise taxes is laughable to say the least. With unemployment being cut here in Ca, that tax is NOT going to fly Jerry. Better legalize pot to save California.

though i did vote for it.

However, I think he deserves great credit for honesty here. This almost seems like an impossible situation.

prosecuted for negligence of their oath of office. We cannot grow with cuts. We grow with taxes. Do it fucker. Just do it. Be brave. You life is short anyway.. you don't have that much life left. Do something your dad would be proud of. Get us outta here. Turn the tide. Do your job.

is just as reckless imo as the idea it can all be done by cutting spending when the fact is what it would really take is approaching the problem from both sides which may mean some pruning probably to some programs (not necessarily social programs either) but it also probably means some taxes probably need be raised.

familiar story

Even Schwarzenegger couldn't get Republican votes for his budgets.

Not a majority aren't unreasonable, basically all are.

The Democrats control the state legislature.

don't mislead to stand up for Republicans here.

That was changed two years ago in a referendum. Only takes a majority now. Don't mislead by stating things here that are not true.

i voted for the proposition that changed that, though i wish 2/3rds requirements for taxes went away.

i vote for bond measures and parcel taxes here all the time and though the bond measures can pass with 55%, the parcel taxes have lost with even 65% because of the 2/3rds voter approval at the local level. which is completely undemocratic.

the Giants had the tenth and winning run on with two outs in the ninth but the pinch-hitter struck out.

That's what we're dealing with here.

but again, you take the side against Democrats and amplify Republican talking points regularly here.

You stated they were not allowing him to pass a budget. Not true as I pointed out. Now you have moved on to taxes. Yes they did not allow a legislature sponsored referendum. But he got it on the ballot anyway through the initiative process. So the people will decide this and that is the best solution.

narrowly referring only to the budget situation when the whole conversation in this thread was started off with --why doesn't Brown just raise taxes?

i dont' know why you think it's necessary to throw the Republicans a lifeline on this one, but perhaps it's for the same reason you cluttered up my thread on food stamps and poverty.

They don't like Brown's budget and they control that process. I am sure you know this. I am not one of those people who blame republicans for every problem in the world. That is hyper partisan and intellectually dishonest.

it's just amazing.

Dems blocked some but let most of Brown's cuts go through. Another misrepresentation by you.

The other misrepresentation by you is that it's all about cutting spending. Revenue is needed.

its just amazing.

I am not "blaming" Democrats, just stating the facts.

"Democrats, who control the Legislature, have resisted Brown's proposed cuts so far this year." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/12/jerry-brown-california-budget_n_1512251.html

I never said it "was all about spending". Show the post were I said that. A proposal to raise revenue is on the ballot and the people will decide as it should be.

before you accuse people please be sure of your facts....or are you a repub disrupter?

how on earth could a post criticizing Republicans make me a Republican defender?

do you even know me here? clearly no.

I don't pretend to know all the ins and outs of Michigan politics, though I despise PA 4 as much as any of you.

Yes, I'm Californian.

I say give it a try. tell clooney he needs to pay 100% in taxes for 5 years...

where did you get that idea anyway?

There was a time in this country, post WW2, when a top marginal federal income tax rate of 90% was normal and accepted. Even that is a far cry from "take 100% of X's fortune".

Now that the federal TMR is 36% (far less if you're an investor playing the capital gains game), that leaves a lot of room for raising the TMR on state taxes. It's about time the states do what's necessary to address their debts.

And they won't have to "take 100%" to do it, either.

I know that even mentioning that is anathema on this site, but when prison psychologists are making several hundred grand a year and can collect a pension after just working a few years, something is really, really wrong with your state. At the same time, tuition at the UC's has skyrocketed (I wonder how much the president of those makes)...

Californians are heavily taxed as it is. And the cost of living is insane. Though, I definitely agree on possibly increasing taxes for the ultra wealthy (i.e. the movie stars and silicon valley execs). And the state needs a way to bring in more revenue by property taxes, though repealing that proposition would also hurt many seniors on a fixed income.

It's a very tough situation and I get the impression Jerry Brown is doing all he can to address the situation. I don't envy him.

How do I get in on this?

how much did you pay for your house?

I do not anything close to a $800K home

i would be fine with shifting the taxes over to income taxes rather than reliance on the property tax.

what did you pay for your house BTW?

We chose it because the High Schools are rated the best in the county.

Rates are held low by the law, but high property values keep the amounts that families pay around the 10th highest among states.

Not to mention that we have some of the highest sales and income taxes in the nation. Blaming Proposition 13 for the state's budget problems is worse than simplistic. It's just plain wrong. Even before Proposition 13, the majority of state revenue came from personal income taxes.

http://www.mymoneyblog.com/state-tax-rate-maps-how-does-your-state-compare.html

BTW, my annual property taxes are just shy of $2,000 for the current year. Next year it will be over $2K.

i'll bet you have an expensive house.

It's always been close to the median value for San Diego single-family detached homes.

Did you know? Commercial property benefits from it, too. It even figured into the recent sale of the Dodgers: outgoing owner Frank McCourt will still find himself with a 51% interest in the Dodger Stadium parking lot, because that way, it won't be reassessed, at a savings (and cost to L.A.) of several $$$millions.

...in terms of reducing the deficit even if both commercial and residential rates were increased.

Note that property taxes aren't even listed as one of the major line items in the state's budget summary. Property taxes are collected by the counties, not by the state. The state gets a piece of the money. That's one component of the figure shown as "transfers" on the budget summary. You can see that transfers (which go both ways) amount to a very small piece of the state's revenue.

http://www.ebudget.ca.gov/pdf/BudgetSummary/RevenueEstimates.pdf

Which has absolutely no effect on state revenue.

Of course renters pay property tax too (albeit indirectly,) but they can't take the deduction.

But the governor has put that at the back of his priorities, and the conservatives in my state claim it's because the unions bought off Brown. Well, I wonder if they'd rather have a union-busting warrior (and crook and 1%er) like Scott Walker? John Kasich?

Can't prove it (because she lost handily) but I bet she was on board with the other idiot Governors you mentioned.

...can be found here.

http://newscenter.berkeley.edu/president-and-provost-salary-data/

Not at the top, compared to other University presidents' salaries, but pretty cushy from my perspective, especially since they are provided with a (very nice, I'm sure) house on top of the salary and deferred compensation.

if you participate in the scapegoating of public employees, you are helping bully them.

that's the tier of four-year public universities below UC, which is even more up against it because it doesn't have as many rich research grants to fall back on.

At CSU, administrators will still be able to make cushy salaries -- but a certain percentage of it must come from the CSU-(your campus here) Foundation rather than the general fund.

Release The (non-violent and elderly) prisoners.

I think CA can find 40000 non-violent prisoners to parole without too much difficulty, although there would probably be other costs incurred by doing so. Also put the illegal immigrant prisoners up for federal deportation, but with only $100million saved that part is probably optional.

Plenty of options for raising tax revenue on the table on that calc. My choices: $.30 gas tax, the "temporary tax hike" option, a $0.30 alcohol tax, vehicle license fees, a $1.00/pack cigarette tax, a rate hike for high earners (biggest no-brainer on the page imho), crude oil tax, business tax break repeal, and voila we're done. I'm not too comfortable with the regressive gas, cig, and sales taxes, but at least there might be secondary positive impacts to long term choices for health and sustainability.

So, no cuts to any state programs whatsoever. Some prisoners get early release, but that helps with prison overcrowding too. Everyone pays a bit more, especially people who drink, smoke, and drive inefficient vehicles. This is not rocket science. Now making it fly politically, that's the tricky part.

And be sure to vote the straight DU slate, so we can get to that magic two-thirds!

edit: I propose to make vehicle license fees more progressive by calculating the fee as a percentage of the blue book value of the vehicle being licensed. Thus, Larry Ellison pays a good deal more to register his Lamborghini or whatever than my coworker does for her Toyota minivan, as he should.

With the economy turning around, how can the deficit suddenly jump by $7 billion -- around 40 percent?! Either last year's figures were calculated by Enron's accounting firm, or some sleight of hand is going on this year to help the governor push his cuts-first agenda.

aforethought repeatedly violated the civil rights of his constituents in Oakland (Occupy Oakland).

Jerry Brown has zero credibility left, imho. As a manager of the affairs for the 1%, Brown is part of the problem, not part of the solution.

I'm done with him. NOT MY GOVERNOR.

shrivel up and run from office ever again. Those sack of turds must not have be sworn in because they sure are not keeping their oath of office which is to protect the public interest, levy tax to pay for services without favor, and to keep us on a competitive edge in all areas. Suckers needs to get off the playing field, be prosecuted and go to jail for fraud, or simply find a banana to slip on somewhere.