7 ms·

That's my opinion as well. Since Regan, the Republicans have done everything they can to diminish government capability, and increase corporate power. The Democ

That's my opinion as well. Since Regan, the Republicans have done everything they can to diminish government capability, and increase corporate power. The Democrats have been unable to stop them, unwilling to stop them, or actively helping them accomplish this. The why and how is far more then can be adequately explained in an internet comment. But broadly, the US government is capable of doing things to help people, but a lot of time and money has been spent to make sure they're not allowed to help people.

pjscott 4y ago
I'm not sure how this explanation fits with California: it's a very blue state, about 77% of the senators are Democrats, it has one of the highest per-capita tax revenues in the country -- and it's famous for being an administrative trash fire. Is California just a weird outlier? Because I don't think we can blame the Republicans for this one.
- jyounker 4y ago
  California is far less liberal than you imagine. This is the state of Ronald Regan and B-1 Bob Dornan. Conservatives got to have it their way in California long before, and they left their mark on the state. The single greatest accomplishment was Proposition-13. It caps property increases to a level that is lower than inflation, with the end result that property tax bases are more-or-less continually shrinking. This leads to all sorts of effects: * Local governments are poor. In particular, local governments can't afford to pay for their own schools, shifting education to the state level. * It increases NIMBYism because there is no downside to property value increase. * Municipalities strongly prefer high-end development. * Government revenues come primarily from sales tax and income tax. These sources are highly sensitive to economic disruptions, so when the economy tanks, the state becomes extremely poor. * It gives entrenched businesses and landlords some advantages over new ones, as their fixed expenses decline over time. To give you an idea of the scale that we're talking about: In the early 2000's the city of San Francisco had a shortfall of $100 million one year. If the Transamerica building's property taxes had increased along with its value, it would have been paying an additional $50 million in taxes that year. That's was half the city's shortfall. [As an aside, anyone who tells you that California has high taxes probably knows nothing about how property taxes work there.] Also, don't let me get started on the recall systems and the proposition systems. Learn from California. Direct democracy sucks.

pjscott 4y ago

I'm not sure how this explanation fits with California: it's a very blue state, about 77% of the senators are Democrats, it has one of the highest per-capita tax revenues in the country -- and it's famous for being an administrative trash fire. Is California just a weird outlier? Because I don't think we can blame the Republicans for this one.

jyounker 4y ago
California is far less liberal than you imagine. This is the state of Ronald Regan and B-1 Bob Dornan. Conservatives got to have it their way in California long before, and they left their mark on the state. The single greatest accomplishment was Proposition-13. It caps property increases to a level that is lower than inflation, with the end result that property tax bases are more-or-less continually shrinking. This leads to all sorts of effects: * Local governments are poor. In particular, local governments can't afford to pay for their own schools, shifting education to the state level. * It increases NIMBYism because there is no downside to property value increase. * Municipalities strongly prefer high-end development. * Government revenues come primarily from sales tax and income tax. These sources are highly sensitive to economic disruptions, so when the economy tanks, the state becomes extremely poor. * It gives entrenched businesses and landlords some advantages over new ones, as their fixed expenses decline over time. To give you an idea of the scale that we're talking about: In the early 2000's the city of San Francisco had a shortfall of $100 million one year. If the Transamerica building's property taxes had increased along with its value, it would have been paying an additional $50 million in taxes that year. That's was half the city's shortfall. [As an aside, anyone who tells you that California has high taxes probably knows nothing about how property taxes work there.] Also, don't let me get started on the recall systems and the proposition systems. Learn from California. Direct democracy sucks.