16 votes

California Proposition 37 failed to pass.

http://vote.sos.ca.gov/returns/ballot-measures/

YES: 3,402,151; 46.1%

NO: 3,974,122; 53.9%

I guess people in California think ignorance is bliss for GMO "food"...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

It's foolish to join tax revenue to GDP

The people paying the higher tax rates don't care about the GDP (much of the GDP comes it self from govt spending that comes from the taxes taken from the citizens
The important number is the pct of tax people pay
The higher it is the less money people have for savings and consumption
And that hurts the economy

Please subscribe to smaulgld.com

Alright, then. The following

Alright, then. The following is comparing unemployment vs. tax revenue/income earned. So, for example, Alabama has an UE of 8.3%; its citizens paid 27 billion in taxes and earned 161 billion in income in 2010.

State Unemployment % Tax Revenue to GDP
Alabama 8.3 16.7%
Alaska 7.5 35.5%
Arizona 8.2 15.3%
Arkansas 7.1 15.6%
California 10.2 17.8%
Colorado 8 16.3%
Connecticut 8.9 13.6%
Delaware 6.8 19.6%
Florida 8.7 16.3%
Georgia 9 15.0%
Hawaii 5.7 19.2%
Idaho 7.1 15.2%
Illinois 8.8 14.4%
Indiana 8.2 17.1%
Iowa 5.2 17.4%
Kansas 5.9 17.3%
Kentucky 8.4 16.0%
Louisiana 7 16.2%
Maine 7.6 16.4%
Maryland 6.9 13.6%
Massachusetts 6.5 15.1%
Michigan 9.3 17.3%
Minnesota 5.8 16.7%
Mississippi 9.2 17.6%
Missouri 6.9 14.1%
Montana 6.1 16.2%
Nebraska 3.9 20.6%
Nevada 11.8 16.0%
New Hampshire 5.7 13.8%
New Jersey 9.8 15.7%
New Mexico 6.4 17.0%
New York 8.9 20.5%
North Carolina 9.6 16.5%
North Dakota 3 18.1%
Ohio 7 16.4%
Oklahoma 5.2 15.5%
Oregon 8.7 21.4%
Pennsylvania 8.2 15.5%
Rhode Island 10.5 15.9%
South Carolina 9.1 19.2%
South Dakota 4.4 13.4%
Tennessee 8.3 16.6%
Texas 6.8 14.6%
Utah 5.4 18.1%
Vermont 5.4 17.7%
Virginia 5.9 14.2%
Washington 8.5 16.9%
West Virginia 7.6 17.4%
Wisconsin 7.3 16.9%
Wyoming 5.4 23.8%

The correlation is now very slightly negative (-.06). Again, I would say that there is practically no correlation between tax revenue and unemployment.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

The only way to do it is

Unemployment rate vs income tax rate

Please subscribe to smaulgld.com

Waitng for a response. The

Waitng for a response. The facts do not seem to back your argument at all.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

That doesn't make any sense.

What are you asking for? You want UE vs. TOP income tax rate?

That doesn't make any sense. Because the income tax rate is not flat. For every person in the population it is going to be different. For example, in the US we have a 35 percent highest rate, but few people actually pay that (and of course income below a certain amount is taxed less). Not only because it is a tiered system, but because of exemptions and what not.
Another example is Singapore. Corporate of tax ratre of 17% vs USA of 39%....but Singapore collects almost twice of all corporate income in taxes because their 17% is actually very close to 17% while in the US, it is more like 9-10% (and 2-3% of GDP).

What matters is the EFFECTIVE tax rate, which is what I am doing. What I am doing is taking personal income the residents of a state generate for themselves each year, taking self-generated revenues, and calculating a percentage. That is the overall taxation on the population. And in 2010 at least, there is no correlation with tax rates and unemployment.

I realize that the post above is mislabled; is is UE vs. Effective tax rates, not tax % of GDP.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

California's unemployment rate is higher than the nationa

Average
And the bls counts underemployed and part time workers as "employed" and it doesn count those that have given up work living in their parents' basements.
California public colleges are not turning out graduates with engineering skills they a re turning out mind mush

It does not justify a 13 pct tax rate no matter how you slice it

Please subscribe to smaulgld.com

California has the largest string of crappy community colleges

In the nation that offer free tuition to illegal aliens
The San Francisco college is a mega waste of money that has failing economic standards and the campus is dangerous partially because of the student body
California doesn't need to fund this type of waste so there is no need to even discuss taxation as these schools should just be shuttered

Please subscribe to smaulgld.com

This is besides the point.

This is besides the point. Look at the tremendous successes of the UC and CSU system. Do Californians want to keep it going or shut it down. They will face the consequences either way.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

No, it is the point

Wasteful is wasteful spending even if there is some value
The consequences of over taxing and bankrupting the state are far greater than shutting down 100 crappy expensive community colleges

Please subscribe to smaulgld.com

Perhaps, but my initial

Perhaps, but my initial argument was that California was not close to overtaxing. There are many states in this union that tax far higher (more than 1% of their GDP higher).

I would also suggest that in respect to spending, other than in pension promises, there are far, far better places to cut spending that in education. Spending in education generally returns to the taxpayer many fold over in economic growth...I would much rather cut train services, housing services, environmental services, or whatever.

People will always say that there are rooms for private schools...and there are. BUt private schools alone will not suffice. The nation you cited, India, has learned this lesson the hard way. They were able to crawl out of the gutter when they spent on public education. It is hard to get a businessman to spend his limited capital on an investment that will take decades to return dividends, and, most likely, once setup will lure other competitors that will take away his profit.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

I'm done responding -you believe in govt spending

As a driver of economic growth when the facts indicate otherwise
Also detemining tax levels as a pct of GDP is moronic
A 13 pct state income tax IS high and is the highest in the nation. Your liberal statist explanations don't make a 13pct tax rate "low" or about right

It's interesting to have your big government perspective and of course we are happy to have your vote for Ron Paul but you are clearly not liberty minded, small government prone
You are part of the left wing Ron Paul coalition

Please subscribe to smaulgld.com

Of course government spending

Of course government spending can create economic growth...it is just how much growth is it creating vs. having that money in the private sector/paying down debt.

In fact, there have been study have study that shows that government spending can and does boost economic growth.

I always feel that the argument for lower taxation and lower government spending, at some point, has to become a moral argument and not a pragmatic one. Because factually, it is incorrect to say that government is so awful or inefficient. IT is downright wrong to say that government spending cannot be a driver of economic growth. Despite what Tom Woods or Ron Paul say should happen, I look at the facts, and read what does happen.

BTW, my view as tax levels as apercentage of GDP is incredibly accurate. A 10% state income tax (it isn't 13% yet) means nothing since not all income is taxed at that level. If you want to look at the tax burden in the economy, you look as % of GDP for a good measure. An even better look is to look at it vs. personal savings.

That is the reason that the US has a top marginal rate of 35%....but overall personal income tax revenue is only at 8% of GDP.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

Laughable-you believe in the concept of public works

That somehow taking money through taxation of the productive private sector and giving it to the bloated inefficient political favor land of the public sector can do a good job creating jobs

Yes they have roads and bridges in cuba too

Please subscribe to smaulgld.com

Or take up arms.

I think it's cute how you use Dr.Paul's moniker to spread fascists bullshit.

If you don't consent to taxes, it is theft. No need to move anywhere.. We'll just take the country back and you can send taxes to us if you really feel you need to.

I pray that one day the government comes to your door because of some simple slight and takes what is yours.. that's the only way stupid people like you will ever learn.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

I think it is stupid how you

I think it is stupid how you want to have a society governed by a fantasy.

Firstly, you do have a choice to take up arms. Take up arms, attack the government, and it they attack back, so bet it. Choices!

Are you an anarchist? If you aren't an anarchist, and you want some level of government, how is it to be funded? What if some people want to live in a society where there is X level of taxation and you don't?

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

Oh ye of little knowledge,

If you neocons/democraps actually took the time to get educated on what you spout off on, you'd find you were wrong on so many levels.

maybe that's why you stay willfully ignorant.

Do you think the income tax has been here throughout history?

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

Of course it hasn't. And I am

Of course it hasn't. And I am not saying that there has to be an income tax. But government has to collect revenue somehow. Through income taxes, excise taxes, sales taxes, whatever. In 1796 they collected what today would be equal to 600 billion in taxes, for example.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

That's where we started this sorta..

Taxpayer money is not taxable and has been ruled upon multiple times throughout history. Not even the 16th gave income tax legitimacy.

Some taxes are Constitutional.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

If taxpayer money is not

If taxpayer money is not taxable, then how are some taxes constitutional? You are conflating all taxes with income taxes.

Personally, a tax is a tax. It doesn't really matter the source; it is all coming out of the economy in some way. Income tax is just a way to shift the burden in a particular way.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

income tax doesn't shift the burden.. It defines the tax.

As in coming from the labor of the person earning the income. A tax is not just a tax.. Read the Constitution.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

I am reading the 16h

I am reading the 16h amendment:

"The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived"

"The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived"

"The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived"

I also cite Wikoffs vs Commissioner and Abrams vs. Commissioner.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

..

The IRS always cites to the Brushaber v. Union Pacific R.R. Co., 240 U.S. 1 (1916), to inform the public that the income tax was held to be constitutional by the Supreme Court. What the IRS doesn’t inform the public about Mr. Frank Brushaber, the central character in the Supreme Court case, is that he was a withholding agent for several foreign investors in the Union Pacific Railroad, acting as their fiduciary.

The Supreme Court, obviously being aware of all of the pertinent details, ruled in the Brushaber case that the federal government always had the power to tax income as an excise tax and, therefore, the 16th Amendment is constitutional.

The Supreme Court then ruled in the very next case it decided, Stanton v. Baltic Mining, 240 US 103 (1916), the following: “… that by the previous ruling it was settled that the provisions of the Sixteenth Amendment conferred no new power of taxation, but simply prohibited the previous complete and plenary power of income taxation possessed by Congress from the beginning from being taken out of the category of indirect taxation to which it inherently belonged and being placed in the category of direct taxation subject to apportionment by a consideration of the sources from which the income was derived…”. The ”previous ruling” cited in the Stanton decision was referring to the Brushaber decision.

The Supreme Court has ruled in multiple cases that the 16th has given no new avenues of taxation. That anyone that wasn't taxable before the 16th wasn't taxable after the 16th.

It was ratified on February 3, 1913. So what do we know about pre-1913 tax on individual income? It was ruled unconstitutional.

You've been robbed.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

Rp4pres

Unfortunately you will not get through to dr no -see my exchanges with dr no on this thread.

It's good to continue to engage dr no not to change or influence his mind but for the other readers

Dr no appears to be an avowed statist -it's hard to change that view just as it would be hard to change our views that we abandon free market principles and start looking to govt for answers and ultimately worship the state and it's actors- not going to happen.

Please subscribe to smaulgld.com

You are correct but as you have mentioned

it's good for others to see. Our arguments come from Constitutionally logical stances whereas their arguments are formed in the same manner as FRN's are made. It's completely baseless and made up out of thin air.

Maybe one day, these modern day slaves will awaken to their natural rights despite the fear they have of being free.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

Why should he read the constitution?

If would just run interference with his socialist goals

Please subscribe to smaulgld.com

:)

.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

Taxing the labor of the

Taxing the labor of the earner, the profits of the Investor, the manufacturing of the producer, the spending power of the consumer, the property of the homeowner....etc.

I understand that you and I differ on the ruling if the 16th amendment.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

You mean me and the Supreme Court differ on the ruling

compared to you.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

So?Are we accepting the

So?

Are we accepting the Supreme Court as credible? I guess you support Obamacarea constitutionality, the war on drugs, roe vs wade, etc.

Btw, pet peeve; "supreme court and I"

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

In this case they are correct.

.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.