4 ms·
Taxes in California are funding public employee pensions, not supporting infrastructure (as evidenced by countless remedial propositions)
by claydavisss 8y ago
Taxes in California are funding public employee pensions, not supporting infrastructure (as evidenced by countless remedial propositions)
- jorblumesea 8y agoThat's not true, the largest slices of California's state budget goes to healthcare, with education next in line. Pensions are 3rd and account for 18% of the state budget. I'm not denying pensions aren't a significant chunk, but the "your taxes do nothing" argument is getting pretty old. https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/california_state_spending_pie_chart https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/california_state_spendi...
- claydavisss 8y agoMy point remains...you're not paying for infrastructure. You also missed the chicken/egg...high taxes a component of the high cost of living that causes people to move in the first place. California's poverty rate has risen with the population...the poor are moving in and they are not impacted by most tax measures, so they have no reason to oppose them.
- jorblumesea 8y agoYou are paying for infrastructure. $50 / billion a year, 4% of the total budget. Not including specific city budgets and local spending. https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/spending_chart_2009_2024CAb_60t https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/spending_chart_2009_202... Taxes are just one side of the same coin, the high cost of living is really just a density issue. Lots of high paying jobs, lots of Nimby building practices and little density and transit investment. Tokyo is a city of 20 million people yet is far more affordable and even has higher taxes. California didn't build to support it's population. If these secondary cities make the same mistake, they too will be high cost/unlivable places.