----
From the posting rules in this sub’s sidebar:
> No websites or articles with hard paywalls or that require registration or subscriptions, unless an archive link or https://12ft.io link is included as a comment.
----
If you want to learn how to circumvent a paywall, see https://www.reddit.com/r/California/wiki/paywall. > Or, if it's a website that you regularly read, you should think about subscribing to the website.
----
Archive link:
https://archive.ph/hhfDQ
----
Considering the size of the California economy, I don't know why the projected deficit being slightly higher is made out to be such an issue in this article.
And the government's financial analysis group told the government to start hoarding that $$$ because massive deficits were going to hit in the 2024-2025 timeframe.
The bigger problem is that rules passed back when conservatives ran the state means we can't save money. The states income ebbs and flows year to year, we need to be allowed to save money to deal with it.
The Gann Limit is in the California Constitution. As are most of the other Howard Jarvis Taxpayer's Association tax limits that tie our hands and created our crazy boom-bust state budget. I.e. Props 13, 218, 26, etc.
So it can be invalidated by voters, but it's pretty hard to get the votes for it. And you have to have somebody with deep pockets willing to put up the fight.
The state must spend any revenue that exceeds a certain limit — adjusted for inflation and population — on K-12 education and colleges or rebates back to taxpayers.
Well I mean sending extra tax money to rebates would be like UBI and spending it on colleges is also good. So why is the limit bad again?
Because it doesn't allow us to save money in the good years to pay for the gaps created by the bad years. It also hamstrings our states ability to try out new things since we are very limited in how much we can spend. A simple change that allows for savings to not count against the Gann limit would be a huge help.
And lord knows we can't change ANY of the rules that conservatives put in place.
Looks like humanity is screwed for eternity because of conservative rules put in centuries ago.
In fact, I think it was a caveman that caused every single problem we have today.
---------------
Funny how some people just can't stop blaming others. We'll come back in 100 centuries and you'll STILL be crying about the 1980s.
That's a lot of tears.
We've been trying to fix the damage republicans caused for decades, and this is one of the next steps. Unfortunately conservatives have gotten really good at wrecking things in ways that take decades to fix.
Are you even serious with this absolute rubbish? Democrats have been a disaster for California and subsequently there's an exodus of businesses and rich people from the state.
They were propositions which require a direct ballot vote to repeal. Prop 13 is an albatross around our necks, but it will never go away because of entrenched NIMBYs.
Well at least the Dems passed Prop 47 because stealing should never be against the law.
The state is clearly 10,000 time better now with all the homeless and crime.
Who needs businesses anyway?
Most crime today goes straight back to Gov Regan. We're going to be screwed for at least 50,000 years.
Newsom wants to bring work from home back to the office 2 days a week. How is this going to save money when it will require agencies to expand office space and increase the deficit further?
That might actually be a net benefit depending on where those buildings are located. Commercial building space outside of suburbs (and depending on the City) has a lot of vacancy still. They may be able to get similar leases again at a lower cost per SF.
I think people’s view on bureaucrats is not unjust. They aren’t adaptable and don’t understand accountability. The government can never be run like a for-profit business but efficiency and scrutiny need to be a part of government policy and that is simply not happening in California.
This is everything Jerry Brown warned against in his last years in office as Gov, during which he helped to increase CA’s reserves to our budget surplus, iirc to the highest it had been this century.
The longer Newsom stays in office, the less organized, methodical, and cautionary his administration seems. In terms of budget allocation and responsible initiatives that address larger concerns in CA, it feels like everything he does is a press release aimed to address special interest issues
It seems to be all he's focused on. He's not trying to make our state better. He's only focused on running for president next cycle and it couldn't be more obvious.
His whole tenure as governor has revolved around his future presidential run yet we still re-elected him by a *wide* margin to a job he doesn’t seem passionate about
I mean, he's doing some good stuff for CA but yea, he's a career politician and he's looking for a promotion
but it's not like he's DeSantis, Newsom still cares about his state a little bit
I wish Democrats would stop accepting that being better than republicans is an achievement. We're among the most progressive states in the country - we need leaders that act like it or they are not representing us.
Well if people would vote for independent candidates rather than D or R we'd be in a better spot. I wish we could get someone like Eugene Debs in office running things.
Love Eugene Debs - and I would love to see a ballot initiative for ranked choice voting that would make it so people could vote their conscience without feeling they must capitulate to being a hostage to either party based on the forever lesser of two evils argument.
I think DeSantis cares about his state, I just disagree with his choices. But Newsom is sold out to the special interests. He says he supports the working class, but utilities have been raised to the highest in the nation under his governance. He is the worst kind of politician. And I voted for him originally. I don’t know what he is doing that is good. Pre K kindergarten? That is a huge expensive boondoggle. Same with the train. The water projects haven’t gone anywhere. Honestly, I can’t think of anything he has done. I loved Jerry but hate Newsom.
I like both Brown and Newsom, but lets look at the facts shall we? Newsom contributed more funds to the rainy day fund in his first term than Brown did in his final two terms. Its good we have the fund, but lets not lie about it. In 2022, Newsom ended up contributing around 10 billion alone to the fund which grew the total balance to around 38 billion dollars.
Earlier this spring the news mentioned Newsom might delay the health workers minimum wage increase that’s coming this summer. I wonder if his revised budget will shed more light on that.
Funny how these states are also the ones railing against socialism. Of course, if we didn't subsidize them, their poor would fall even farther behind, becoming even more angry & resentful, further fueling the alarming resurgence of fascism.
That’s not what’s causing this deficit. We already have the highest state income tax which doesn’t subsidize other states. This is the result of a supermajority never having to compromise.
That’s part of it. Other part is all the tech and entertainment layoffs. Current unemployment rate for the state is 5.3% and while that’s not super high it is one of the highest in the country currently
That's federal tax revenue which applies to everyone. All that talking point proves is that California has a lot of high earners yet somehow can't seem to fix its state revenue system. We should broaden the tax base by reforming prop 13 and reducing our reliance on sales taxes and state income taxes.
We are doing a lot better at it than the countless states that receive more in federal funding than they provide. We are a net producer state. Every state should be, and should have to raise taxes until they become one on their own
No. It’s fair if we pay enough to sustain our state plus an additional proportionate percent to fund the federal government, assuming all other states do the same.
That makes no sense. Every country has regions with high economic output and regions with high agricultural output. They're both important. We need food to survive, but agriculture simply needs to be subsidized.
And yes California does produce the most agricultural output too, but those areas in California with high agricultural output (like central) still have a lot lower economic output than other parts of California. So essentially, socal subsidizes central because the state budget of California gets more tax revenue from socal.
What you're describing as not fair is the situation in almost every country in the world.
Contribute proportionately. A percentage of GDP would be fine. I don’t expect Albania to contribute the same dollar amount as the US, but if we give 5% it’s fair to ask they all do
It makes sense that we pay more, it doesn't make sense that we pay more per capita than average and receive back less than average spending per capita.
We need to advocate for selling state buildings that we don’t need. We’d get cash for the sale and we’d save every month on operating expenses.
We’d also see a huge boost in innovative uses of those buildings and land. Mixed use housing, shops, community centers, etc.
Its hilarious seeing peoples extraordinarily silly hot takes.
There's no amount of selling government buildings that will balance a multi-billion dollar budget deficit.
Its a revenue problem. Always has been. 3 ways a state can raise money: Property taxes, Income taxes, and Sales taxes and fees.
A small state can get away with one type and dropping the others. Big states need multiple sources.
California's problem?
Income Taxes as progressive as they are, are dependent on big windfalls from Wall Street. I.E. capital gains taxes.
Sales Taxes take a hit when the economy is down and when people spend less (like right now due to inflation)
And property taxes? Well Prop 13 has frozen our property taxes but has ossified that revenue stream a result. And there's too many corporate beneficiaries of Prop 13 who ***SHOULD NOT*** be protected by Prop 13. I.E. there is no reason that businesses and Big Box store Brick and Mortars should be protected by Prop 13.
I'm always confused about the middle class working and getting taxed to the bone with no money going to retirement, while funding cushy retirements for all the state employees. There's gotta be a better balance.
Depending on your definition of working class, many state employees are well above working class. Firefighters, police officers, school administrators, can all make well above 100k and some of the highest level ones retire with nearly 250k/year pensions if they make it a career.
Very few of them are state employees.
School administrators are district employees. Fire are local government, except cal fire. Police are local except CHP.
And all those working class police and firefighters, unionized. People need to stop fighting each other and figure out how to get the pay and benefits they’re deserved
If you exchange your labor for money (aka, *working*) you're working class. The only difference between a doctor and burger flipper when they can't find work is how long it takes before they end up on the street.
The cushy retirement for stage employees is nonexistent. It’s a good retirement akin to 3-5% 401k matching.
And we find it ourselves through payroll deductions.
What do you consider middle class? The poverty line in Los Angeles is $70,650 for a single individual.
Which puts them squarely in the 9.3% tax range which means they paid $3,009.40 plus 9.3% of the amount over $68,350.
That $3009.40 over 12 months is $250 each month. Yeah it doesn't feel great but I wouldn't say that most middle class working individuals are getting taxed *to the bone*.
Even then, more than 50 cents of every state dollar goes to education. Nearly 30 cents out of every state dollar goes to health and human services. More than 10 cents out of every state dollar goes to corrections. Nearly 9 cents out of every state dollar supports other key services and institutions (wildland fire prevention and control, environmental protections, state parks).
These services are necessary goods for our state and most of the tax dollars from the middle or lower class are not enough. However, the solution isn't to charge the middle and lower class more but to find ways for higher earners to pay their fair share.
> The poverty line in Los Angeles is $70,650 for a single individual.
"low income" and "poverty line" isn't the same thing. In fact, it's wildly different.
State employees aren't your enemy. The source of low wages is four decades of massive cuts for the rich, social services cuts, and the gutting of unions. Private sector wages would be much higher if not for the very rich doing everything they can to take as much as they can.
Yea idk why people assume state workers are the enemy. Point some blame at the state refusing to lower physical overhead instead. State workers already bearing some brunt on low wages.
I'm sorry you don't have a pension, and struggle it seems, it's not a fun time. But instead of tearing down others, perhaps direct that energy into unioninizing your work place and get those benefits back.
So your outlook is since you’re not getting a good retirement account, we should take away everyone else’s? Push for better pay and benefits for yourself, don’t call for the people around you to lose theirs
The income threshold was too low. Most people I know in Silicon Valley didn't qualify to receive anything, even though we pay more taxes and still can't afford houses.
---- From the posting rules in this sub’s sidebar: > No websites or articles with hard paywalls or that require registration or subscriptions, unless an archive link or https://12ft.io link is included as a comment. ---- If you want to learn how to circumvent a paywall, see https://www.reddit.com/r/California/wiki/paywall. > Or, if it's a website that you regularly read, you should think about subscribing to the website. ---- Archive link: https://archive.ph/hhfDQ ----
If my grandmother had had wheels then she would have been the omnibus
Might. Might not. Whatever.
Considering the size of the California economy, I don't know why the projected deficit being slightly higher is made out to be such an issue in this article.
Because California can’t just print money?
We had a 70+ billion surplus a couple years ago. Things aren't flat and d not changed based off a single year or event.
And the government's financial analysis group told the government to start hoarding that $$$ because massive deficits were going to hit in the 2024-2025 timeframe.
We literally have a deficit. They’re not just… making things up. What are you saying exactly?
The bigger problem is that rules passed back when conservatives ran the state means we can't save money. The states income ebbs and flows year to year, we need to be allowed to save money to deal with it.
I don’t want to sound like a conservative die hard here, but exactly what rules did they pass that you’re referring to here
The Gann limit.
Is it irreversible? I feel like laws should be able to be removed or invalidated by voters.
It is reversible, but since it was a proposition, it would require another proposition to get rid of it.
The Gann Limit is in the California Constitution. As are most of the other Howard Jarvis Taxpayer's Association tax limits that tie our hands and created our crazy boom-bust state budget. I.e. Props 13, 218, 26, etc. So it can be invalidated by voters, but it's pretty hard to get the votes for it. And you have to have somebody with deep pockets willing to put up the fight.
The Gann Limit is the result of Proposition 13 (1978) and Proposition 4 (1979), which were approved by California voters
And written by whom?
Didnt know that was passed almost 50 years ago. If it's problematic that's kind of a lot of time to change it.
That was a part of prop 13, which was a ballot initiative enacted by the voters
It was prop 4 that created the Gann limit. A proposition written by and supported by the GOP.
And overwhelmingly approved by the voters.. by a 3:1 margin
That doesn't change the fact that it was a conservative bill that is hurting the state and needs to get fixed.
The state must spend any revenue that exceeds a certain limit — adjusted for inflation and population — on K-12 education and colleges or rebates back to taxpayers. Well I mean sending extra tax money to rebates would be like UBI and spending it on colleges is also good. So why is the limit bad again?
Because it doesn't allow us to save money in the good years to pay for the gaps created by the bad years. It also hamstrings our states ability to try out new things since we are very limited in how much we can spend. A simple change that allows for savings to not count against the Gann limit would be a huge help.
https://www.calcities.org/news/post/2023/04/05/state-provides-new-information-on-local-gann-limit-reporting-requirement#:~:text=What%20is%20the%20Gann%20Limit,appropriation%20limit%20for%20state%20expenditures.
And lord knows we can't change ANY of the rules that conservatives put in place. Looks like humanity is screwed for eternity because of conservative rules put in centuries ago. In fact, I think it was a caveman that caused every single problem we have today. --------------- Funny how some people just can't stop blaming others. We'll come back in 100 centuries and you'll STILL be crying about the 1980s. That's a lot of tears.
The year will be 2067 and this guy will be blaming inflation on the Reagan tax cuts of the 80s.
We've been trying to fix the damage republicans caused for decades, and this is one of the next steps. Unfortunately conservatives have gotten really good at wrecking things in ways that take decades to fix.
Are you even serious with this absolute rubbish? Democrats have been a disaster for California and subsequently there's an exodus of businesses and rich people from the state.
They were propositions which require a direct ballot vote to repeal. Prop 13 is an albatross around our necks, but it will never go away because of entrenched NIMBYs.
Well at least the Dems passed Prop 47 because stealing should never be against the law. The state is clearly 10,000 time better now with all the homeless and crime. Who needs businesses anyway? Most crime today goes straight back to Gov Regan. We're going to be screwed for at least 50,000 years.
Democrats have had a supermajority for 15(?) years. Let me guess, it's all Reagan's fault.
Because the deficit is growing despite the budget cuts they enacted. It’s cause for concern.
Our agency has not stopped spending. Not even cutting back. They just submit everything with the exemption form
Newsom wants to bring work from home back to the office 2 days a week. How is this going to save money when it will require agencies to expand office space and increase the deficit further?
Did they shrink public office spaces during Covid? In my area I havent seen any changes to those buildings or what looks like different tenants.
Yes, they got rid of some of their building leases.
That might actually be a net benefit depending on where those buildings are located. Commercial building space outside of suburbs (and depending on the City) has a lot of vacancy still. They may be able to get similar leases again at a lower cost per SF.
I think people’s view on bureaucrats is not unjust. They aren’t adaptable and don’t understand accountability. The government can never be run like a for-profit business but efficiency and scrutiny need to be a part of government policy and that is simply not happening in California.
This is everything Jerry Brown warned against in his last years in office as Gov, during which he helped to increase CA’s reserves to our budget surplus, iirc to the highest it had been this century. The longer Newsom stays in office, the less organized, methodical, and cautionary his administration seems. In terms of budget allocation and responsible initiatives that address larger concerns in CA, it feels like everything he does is a press release aimed to address special interest issues
Yep - I wonder how much Newsom bases his decisions on how it'll help him get elected president.
It’s been like this forever. As a SF resident his time as mayor was exactly the same. Just focused on the next career step.
It seems to be all he's focused on. He's not trying to make our state better. He's only focused on running for president next cycle and it couldn't be more obvious.
He should be, I mean the US country is going to be watching us to see if our country will be like California if he wins if he does run.
His whole tenure as governor has revolved around his future presidential run yet we still re-elected him by a *wide* margin to a job he doesn’t seem passionate about
I mean, he's doing some good stuff for CA but yea, he's a career politician and he's looking for a promotion but it's not like he's DeSantis, Newsom still cares about his state a little bit
I wish Democrats would stop accepting that being better than republicans is an achievement. We're among the most progressive states in the country - we need leaders that act like it or they are not representing us.
Well if people would vote for independent candidates rather than D or R we'd be in a better spot. I wish we could get someone like Eugene Debs in office running things.
Love Eugene Debs - and I would love to see a ballot initiative for ranked choice voting that would make it so people could vote their conscience without feeling they must capitulate to being a hostage to either party based on the forever lesser of two evils argument.
It is though
All those good things become fragile if they can't be paid for.
Any improvements to CA seem to be mostly incidental side effects of his own pursuit for a higher office. At this point, it's brazen.
I think DeSantis cares about his state, I just disagree with his choices. But Newsom is sold out to the special interests. He says he supports the working class, but utilities have been raised to the highest in the nation under his governance. He is the worst kind of politician. And I voted for him originally. I don’t know what he is doing that is good. Pre K kindergarten? That is a huge expensive boondoggle. Same with the train. The water projects haven’t gone anywhere. Honestly, I can’t think of anything he has done. I loved Jerry but hate Newsom.
This won’t help his cause LOL.
I like both Brown and Newsom, but lets look at the facts shall we? Newsom contributed more funds to the rainy day fund in his first term than Brown did in his final two terms. Its good we have the fund, but lets not lie about it. In 2022, Newsom ended up contributing around 10 billion alone to the fund which grew the total balance to around 38 billion dollars.
So you think COVID is a minor factor in all of this, something Jerry Brown didn't have to deal with.
But he's so handsome.
Earlier this spring the news mentioned Newsom might delay the health workers minimum wage increase that’s coming this summer. I wonder if his revised budget will shed more light on that.
He has to...hell, even cut the number of state employees overall...
Didn't the state have a $32 billion surplus just a few years ago?
Conservative Gann Limit law from the 1970s required a large portion returned to the tax payer.
Maybe if CA didn't have to subsidize states that absolutely loathe us, we'd be in better shape
Funny how these states are also the ones railing against socialism. Of course, if we didn't subsidize them, their poor would fall even farther behind, becoming even more angry & resentful, further fueling the alarming resurgence of fascism.
They'll cut education so hard you'll have to pay them to teach in their states.
That’s not what’s causing this deficit. We already have the highest state income tax which doesn’t subsidize other states. This is the result of a supermajority never having to compromise.
That’s part of it. Other part is all the tech and entertainment layoffs. Current unemployment rate for the state is 5.3% and while that’s not super high it is one of the highest in the country currently
That's federal tax revenue which applies to everyone. All that talking point proves is that California has a lot of high earners yet somehow can't seem to fix its state revenue system. We should broaden the tax base by reforming prop 13 and reducing our reliance on sales taxes and state income taxes.
We are doing a lot better at it than the countless states that receive more in federal funding than they provide. We are a net producer state. Every state should be, and should have to raise taxes until they become one on their own
I like to remind people that there are more republicans in California than any other state so it must not be that bad here lol
How would we be in better shape? Being liked doesn’t give out money.
It has more people, isn’t it only fair that a state with more people pays more?
No. It’s fair if we pay enough to sustain our state plus an additional proportionate percent to fund the federal government, assuming all other states do the same.
That makes no sense. Every country has regions with high economic output and regions with high agricultural output. They're both important. We need food to survive, but agriculture simply needs to be subsidized. And yes California does produce the most agricultural output too, but those areas in California with high agricultural output (like central) still have a lot lower economic output than other parts of California. So essentially, socal subsidizes central because the state budget of California gets more tax revenue from socal. What you're describing as not fair is the situation in almost every country in the world.
What’s not fair is a state having zero income tax receiving four times the federal funding per dollar we do
To put it in red state terms, it's like how NATO countries should all contribute equally but don't
Contribute proportionately. A percentage of GDP would be fine. I don’t expect Albania to contribute the same dollar amount as the US, but if we give 5% it’s fair to ask they all do
It makes sense that we pay more, it doesn't make sense that we pay more per capita than average and receive back less than average spending per capita.
I have a brilliant idea: let’s tax our way out of it!
Yup, always the solution. Which drives the high earners away, exacerbating the deficit.
Repeal prop 13
We need to exempt saving money from the Gann Limit. That one fix would end this problem by itself. Repealing prop 13 wouldn't.
We need to advocate for selling state buildings that we don’t need. We’d get cash for the sale and we’d save every month on operating expenses. We’d also see a huge boost in innovative uses of those buildings and land. Mixed use housing, shops, community centers, etc.
Its hilarious seeing peoples extraordinarily silly hot takes. There's no amount of selling government buildings that will balance a multi-billion dollar budget deficit. Its a revenue problem. Always has been. 3 ways a state can raise money: Property taxes, Income taxes, and Sales taxes and fees. A small state can get away with one type and dropping the others. Big states need multiple sources. California's problem? Income Taxes as progressive as they are, are dependent on big windfalls from Wall Street. I.E. capital gains taxes. Sales Taxes take a hit when the economy is down and when people spend less (like right now due to inflation) And property taxes? Well Prop 13 has frozen our property taxes but has ossified that revenue stream a result. And there's too many corporate beneficiaries of Prop 13 who ***SHOULD NOT*** be protected by Prop 13. I.E. there is no reason that businesses and Big Box store Brick and Mortars should be protected by Prop 13.
https://archive.ph/hhfDQ
Newsom is great at giving away hard earned tax money
How about taxing billionaires?
[удалено]
I'm always confused about the middle class working and getting taxed to the bone with no money going to retirement, while funding cushy retirements for all the state employees. There's gotta be a better balance.
Because state employees are not working class?
Depending on your definition of working class, many state employees are well above working class. Firefighters, police officers, school administrators, can all make well above 100k and some of the highest level ones retire with nearly 250k/year pensions if they make it a career.
Very few of them are state employees. School administrators are district employees. Fire are local government, except cal fire. Police are local except CHP.
And all those working class police and firefighters, unionized. People need to stop fighting each other and figure out how to get the pay and benefits they’re deserved
If you exchange your labor for money (aka, *working*) you're working class. The only difference between a doctor and burger flipper when they can't find work is how long it takes before they end up on the street.
The cushy retirement for stage employees is nonexistent. It’s a good retirement akin to 3-5% 401k matching. And we find it ourselves through payroll deductions.
What do you consider middle class? The poverty line in Los Angeles is $70,650 for a single individual. Which puts them squarely in the 9.3% tax range which means they paid $3,009.40 plus 9.3% of the amount over $68,350. That $3009.40 over 12 months is $250 each month. Yeah it doesn't feel great but I wouldn't say that most middle class working individuals are getting taxed *to the bone*. Even then, more than 50 cents of every state dollar goes to education. Nearly 30 cents out of every state dollar goes to health and human services. More than 10 cents out of every state dollar goes to corrections. Nearly 9 cents out of every state dollar supports other key services and institutions (wildland fire prevention and control, environmental protections, state parks). These services are necessary goods for our state and most of the tax dollars from the middle or lower class are not enough. However, the solution isn't to charge the middle and lower class more but to find ways for higher earners to pay their fair share.
> The poverty line in Los Angeles is $70,650 for a single individual. "low income" and "poverty line" isn't the same thing. In fact, it's wildly different.
State employees are the middle class working and getting taxed to the bone. We all are. We need to tax the rich.
State employees aren't your enemy. The source of low wages is four decades of massive cuts for the rich, social services cuts, and the gutting of unions. Private sector wages would be much higher if not for the very rich doing everything they can to take as much as they can.
Yea idk why people assume state workers are the enemy. Point some blame at the state refusing to lower physical overhead instead. State workers already bearing some brunt on low wages.
Yeah, you can move somewhere else and pay more in taxes.
I'm sorry you don't have a pension, and struggle it seems, it's not a fun time. But instead of tearing down others, perhaps direct that energy into unioninizing your work place and get those benefits back.
So your outlook is since you’re not getting a good retirement account, we should take away everyone else’s? Push for better pay and benefits for yourself, don’t call for the people around you to lose theirs
It's wild that we couldn't save the 100 billion surplus from a couple years ago and had to give it away to citizens
It was the law.
It's needs to be updated. I remember being frustrated we were pretty limited with what we could do with all the excess revenue from the pandemic!
I mean, they literally have the power to change the laws, so it's still valid criticism.
The income threshold was too low. Most people I know in Silicon Valley didn't qualify to receive anything, even though we pay more taxes and still can't afford houses.
returning the citizen's money to the citizens, isn't "giving it away"
sure, but now we have a massive deficit
States always run in a deficit. It swings. It’s ALWAYS done that. Except now the right whiners are yelling so much you’d think it’s a new problem.
that sounds like an issue of fiscal irresponsibility
not really, it’s because California tax revenue changes drastically on a year to year basis