• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

California Dems Propose Surcharge On Businesses To Fund Social Programs

ChoppedLiver

ChoppedLiver

Banned
Joined
Apr 17, 2013
Messages
243
Reaction score
38
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The Feds giveth and the democrats taketh. Is there any more ways the bankrupt state can squeeze out of its residents?
How much MORE will Kalifornia want after they run out of money this cash grab brings in?

California Dems propose surcharge on businesses to fund social programs

Lawmakers from California have proposed a bill that would compel companies making more than $1 million to turn over half their tax-cut savings to the state in order to fund programs that support low-income and middle-class families.

Assembly members Kevin McCarty, D-Sacramento, and Phil Ting, D-San Francisco, have proposed an Assembly Constitutional Amendment that would enact a tax surcharge on California companies, in order to help people who have been negatively affected by the GOP’s tax overhaul, the San Francisco Chronicle reported.

Critics of the (GOP) tax overhaul have argued that a tax-heavy state like California will be hurt by declining revenues that pay for social programs, the Chronicle reported. The tax surcharge is a way of compensating for an anticipated loss in state revenue.
More...
Click to expand...
FoxNews.com - Breaking News | Latest News | Current News
 
They did that here in Seattle (so it was just the city), for more subsidized public housing.

It was just a vote in the city council but it failed.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
Words have meanings.
Click to expand...

Here's some words with meaning...

"The entire time I served in Sacramento, the Democrats were focused almost exclusively on legislation which either had to do with wealth redistribution or creating new “rights” for alleged victims such as illegal aliens, criminals, union members, homosexuals, transgenders and other “oppressed” groups. And it’s no different today. The reality is that the average middle class Californian hasn’t had representation in the halls of Sacramento for decades. Indeed, I predict the destruction of California will, unfortunately, be one of the great legacies of the progressive movement..."

https://spectator.org/adios-california/
 
ChoppedLiver said:
Here's some words with meaning...

"The entire time I served in Sacramento, the Democrats were focused almost exclusively on legislation which either had to do with wealth redistribution or creating new “rights” for alleged victims such as illegal aliens, criminals, union members, homosexuals, transgenders and other “oppressed” groups. And it’s no different today. The reality is that the average middle class Californian hasn’t had representation in the halls of Sacramento for decades. Indeed, I predict the destruction of California will, unfortunately, be one of the great legacies of the progressive movement..."

https://spectator.org/adios-california/
Click to expand...

Nice delusional irrelevancy.
 
I have to wonder where the point of diminishing returns is. At some point businesses can be taxed so much that enough of them leave that the increased tax rate on the remaining businesses can’t replace the previous tax revenue.

This seems like a purely mathematical principle rather than a partisan one. So, what is that point and how long before California reaches it, if they haven’t already?
 
ChoppedLiver said:
The Feds giveth and the democrats taketh. Is there any more ways the bankrupt state can squeeze out of its residents?
How much MORE will Kalifornia want after they run out of money this cash grab brings in?

California Dems propose surcharge on businesses to fund social programs


FoxNews.com - Breaking News | Latest News | Current News
Click to expand...

This is confusing. Do you understand even half of the words you used?

1) California is not "bankrupt".
2) California is not "squeezing" money out of its residents by offering more services.
3) California is overwhelmingly a net gain for the federal government in terms of benefits received and taxes paid due to the fact that it has one of the biggest economies in the world.
 
I support using federal funding to help any California resident with relocation fees who wants to move out of that state

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
 
Absentglare said:
1) California is not "bankrupt".
2) California is not "squeezing" money out of its residents by offering more services.
3) California is overwhelmingly a net gain for the federal government in terms of benefits received and taxes paid due to the fact that it has one of the biggest economies in the world.
Click to expand...

None of which addresses the topic of the OP.

Care to try again?
 
ChoppedLiver said:
None of which addresses the topic of the OP.

Carte to try again?
Click to expand...

California democrats proposed a change to provide more services to Californians.

Perhaps you can explain what there is to whine about there? Since i decimated all the dishonest ones you laid out in the OP.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
Odd thing to assert, when you haven't posted any.

Enjoy your magical thinking!
Click to expand...

Nothing that you would bother to actually respond to.

Let's try again to...er...what the subject of this thread is about...

California Dems propose surcharge on businesses to fund social programs

Lawmakers from California have proposed a bill that would compel companies making more than $1 million to turn over half their tax-cut savings to the state in order to fund programs that support low-income and middle-class families.

Assembly members Kevin McCarty, D-Sacramento, and Phil Ting, D-San Francisco, have proposed an Assembly Constitutional Amendment that would enact a tax surcharge on California companies, in order to help people who have been negatively affected by the GOP’s tax overhaul, the San Francisco Chronicle reported.

Critics of the (GOP) tax overhaul have argued that a tax-heavy state like California will be hurt by declining revenues that pay for social programs, the Chronicle reported. The tax surcharge is a way of compensating for an anticipated loss in state revenue.
More...
 
ChoppedLiver said:
Nothing that you would bother to actually respond to.

Let's try again to...er...what the subject of this thread is about...

California Dems propose surcharge on businesses to fund social programs

Lawmakers from California have proposed a bill that would compel companies making more than $1 million to turn over half their tax-cut savings to the state in order to fund programs that support low-income and middle-class families.

Assembly members Kevin McCarty, D-Sacramento, and Phil Ting, D-San Francisco, have proposed an Assembly Constitutional Amendment that would enact a tax surcharge on California companies, in order to help people who have been negatively affected by the GOP’s tax overhaul, the San Francisco Chronicle reported.

Critics of the (GOP) tax overhaul have argued that a tax-heavy state like California will be hurt by declining revenues that pay for social programs, the Chronicle reported. The tax surcharge is a way of compensating for an anticipated loss in state revenue.
More...
Click to expand...

LOL! I've never disputed the accuracy of the fact that some dems have proposed that, but you STILL cant dance around the fact that you flat-out lied in your OP and have been trying to run from that and obfuscate it ever since.
 
ChoppedLiver said:
Here's some words with meaning...

"The entire time I served in Sacramento, the Democrats were focused almost exclusively on legislation which either had to do with wealth redistribution or creating new “rights” for alleged victims such as illegal aliens, criminals, union members, homosexuals, transgenders and other “oppressed” groups. And it’s no different today. The reality is that the average middle class Californian hasn’t had representation in the halls of Sacramento for decades. Indeed, I predict the destruction of California will, unfortunately, be one of the great legacies of the progressive movement..."

https://spectator.org/adios-california/
Click to expand...

More and more taxpayers are leaving the state for other states vs. people from other states moving into Kalifornia. That's because the leftists in Sacramento cater to illegals, and raise taxes every year screwing over the middle class. Or impose new regulations on business.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
LOL! I've never disputed the accuracy of the fact that some dems have proposed that, but you STILL cant dance around the fact that you flat-out lied in your OP and have been trying to run from that and obfuscate it ever since.
Click to expand...

What did I lie about in the OP?

I didn't lie about anything.

You just can't justify what your leftist ilk are doing (and have done) to the once great state of Kalifornia.
 
DamnYankee said:
More and more taxpayers are leaving the state for other states vs. people from other states moving into Kalifornia. That's because the leftists in Sacramento cater to illegals, and raise taxes every year screwing over the middle class. Or impose new regulations on business.
Click to expand...

Except at the big corporation level, starting a business in kalifornia will net you about the same as if you just went out and got a job somewhere.

Why even try to start a business there?
 
ChoppedLiver said:
What did I lie about in the OP?

I didn't lie about anything.

You just can't justify what your leftist ilk are doing (and have done) to the once great state of Kalifornia.
Click to expand...

You stated CA was bankrupt, when it's not, when I reminded you of that fact and asserted words have meanings, you went of on an utterly irrelevant tangent with something that had zero to do with the OP.

This seems really hard for Marxists like you. Bummer.
 
Absentglare said:
This is confusing. Do you understand even half of the words you used?

1) California is not "bankrupt".
2) California is not "squeezing" money out of its residents by offering more services.
3) California is overwhelmingly a net gain for the federal government in terms of benefits received and taxes paid due to the fact that it has one of the biggest economies in the world.
Click to expand...

Some people are simply immune to factual data and dispassionate analysis of reality. They cannot be reached; they're too comfy in their gleeful, self-imposed ignorance.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
You stated CA was bankrupt, when it's not, when I reminded you of that fact and asserted words have meanings, you went of on an utterly irrelevant tangent with something that had zero to do with the OP.

This seems really hard for Marxists like you. Bummer.
Click to expand...

Tell you what...

...I'll concede that Kalifornia is not "factually" bankrupt if YOU concede that Kalifornia has run out of money a loooong time ago and just comes up with one tax after another after another to fund the failed programs that they already have.

The state can't print money, ya know.

Deal?
 
ChoppedLiver said:
Tell you what...

...I'll concede that Kalifornia is not "factually" bankrupt if YOU concede that Kalifornia has run out of money a loooong time ago and just comes up with one tax after another after another to fund the failed programs that they already have.

The state can't print money, ya know.

Deal?
Click to expand...

No, not really. I find you utterly dishonest and not worthy of serious consideration.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
No, not really. I find you utterly dishonest and not worthy of serious consideration.
Click to expand...

I make a generalization and state facts that you can't dispute and you write me off because you can only rebut the trivial and not the tough issues.

You, Pal, are the epitome of a typical lib/prog.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom