16 ms·
California's population dropped by 500k in 2 years
- HEmanZ 4y agoWow that’s so large I feel the need to double check it, it doesn’t seem like it could be right
- slater 4y agoWeird that California is the lead, but second paragraph reads "The population decrease was second only to New York, which lost about 15,000 more people than California"
- tannedNerd 4y agoIf you read the original source (not trying to be snarky, just literally saw the same article there a day or two ago) it’s from the LA times which makes sense why it would focus on California
- tannedNerd 4y agoAnd this is why is California is trying to get a 10 year exit tax on your income. They know they’ve fucked their golden goose so they need to extract as much as they can before the system collapses on itself from lack of top earners to pay the majority of the income tax.
- zeruch 4y agoYeah yeah yeah, the latest variation on the theme of California on the brink....it's always the same nonsense, packaged differently. Take a number...
- __pache__ 4y agoerr... the trends are good...? is it possible to hollow out a tax base, or not?
- zeruch 4y agoAlso the same verbiage used repeatedly. Every time. For decades. And I've been here for decades, so I have literally observed this from detractors since the 80s.
- __pache__ 4y agoWhat about the thread we're in right now?
- zeruch 4y agoSame dung, different cycle. If you think taxes are worse now than they were in the 70s and 80s, I'd say the deja vu is ardent. There was a time in this country (back in the 50s and 60s) where the highest tax rate on income was near 90%, and corporate tax rates were several times higher than now. We've fooled ourselves into thinking that CA is "the worst for taxes" when we aren't. We certainly don't carry the lowest tax burden, but this isn't a race for the top or bottom, but what you get for it. I'd argue one of the daftest things about US discourse on taxes is the absolutism of whether "taxation is theft" (it isn't, it's part of the cost of doing business as a country) but what is the return on the service quality of those taxes, are their uses auditable, is the transparency around them good...it usually isn't, but then we also do nothing to improve that, which makes most of our perpetually binary and dumb tax talk that much more annoying.
- __pache__ 4y agoHere's a practical example: I hire people from California. I had to fill out multiple forms and now pay extra tax just for those guys. I don't have to do this anywhere else. California is famous for squandering wealth on huge projects, aren't they? Wasn't like 60k per homeless person spent? We live on different planets. It's awful to do business in/with California, sorry. And yes their taxes are awful. The worst in the USA dude, I'm so confused..? Who is worse? Good luck.
- lotsofpulp 4y ago
- kanbara 4y agothe more you make the more you should pay, it's simple.
- sgregnt 4y agoAnd channel it into inefficient corrupt governments, no thank you.
- refurb 4y agoEven if you no longer live in California? I don't think anyone thinks that's fair.
- necovek 4y agoDoes that not hold true for a static percentage tax? Eg. 15% of 10k is 1.5k, whereas 15% of 100k is 15k ;)
- Ntrails 4y agoThis is obviously both true and not the point. It is a mazlows hierarchy style argument. You shouldn't be taxed on the income you need to eat. You should be taxed gently on the income you need for basic comfort. You should be taxed more heavily on the income used for luxuries etc etc
- necovek 4y agoIf the point is that those earning more should pay more taxes, that is already achieved by using a relative measure like percentages. To be honest, I am not exactly sure what the original goals behind progressive taxes are? Is the goal to discourage employers from giving out exorbitantly large salaries? Is it to equalize salaries? Or simply to collect more taxes from those who can afford it? Or something else? I agree having better criteria around the goals we want to achieve like you suggest should drive our taxation systems. But if we say no taxes for food, is it organic food? What if someone is allergic to common food (gluten, lactose...) and price is significantly higher? How about basic comforts? By virtue of being significantly taller than average, I have to pay the premium for larger cars simply to be able to fit inside (I still drive a sedan and not a SUV: they don't get more space inside). And need custom beds, taller kitchen counters... All of this is more expensive than mass-produced furniture or smaller cars. And even for "luxury" items like flying long haul, you can't tell me it's fair that for the same price, some people get 4" in front of their knees to the backrest in front, and I get my knees stuck into that same backrest. I understand that from the sellers' perspective, but to get the same comfort, I need to pay more for premium economy. Basically, progressive tax is an attempt at some form of equalization, but I wonder which one is it, so I can have a better opinion of how we can achieve fairness. But saying how those who earn more should pay more, when they already do, is simply silly.
- quantified 4y agoWish it were my income. $30 million ain't what it used to be but I'd take it anyway.
- trieste92 4y ago> And this is why is California is trying to get a 10 year exit tax on your income. Context: For net worth over 30 million Leaving this out is disingenuous
- refurb 4y agoIt's the camel's nose in the tent. Once it starts, it's not hard to change later and soon you find out you're rich! https://moskowitzllp.com/californias-exit-tax-explained/ https://moskowitzllp.com/californias-exit-tax-explained/ It's basically a wealth tax of 0.4% on assets above $30M, worldwide. If you leave the state - pay all the taxes due, you are still responsible to pay that wealth tax for 10 years. No distinction is made for assets acquired prior to moving to California. You could acquire wealth prior to moving to California, then as soon as you're a resident you have to pay it, and for 10 years after you leave. What's going to happen is that people with that kind of wealth just won't move to California and people who might have that kind of wealth will make sure they leave before they trigger it. It's a terrible law. Reminds me of places like New Jersey which did an amazing job chasing all their high-net worth people out of the state.
- trieste92 4y agoI'm fine with an 100% wealth tax for anything over 30 million applied at a federal level > What's going to happen is that people with that kind of wealth just won't move to California Even more of a reason to introduce it on a federal level
- refurb 4y agoBut it won't be $30M for long. It's be $20M, then $10M, then $5M including your house. And wealth taxes have failed miserably everywhere they've been tried. France instituted one a few years back and it failed to capture even a small percentage of expected revenue - people just do whatever they can to avoid it, including leaving the country.
- red-iron-pine 4y ago
- mjfl 4y agoSo there should be a lot of housing available? Or is it just young people looking for homes moving out?
- aliqot 4y agoI think as more people were able to work from home, they moved to areas that were cheaper as they no longer had to be near california.
- mjfl 4y agoshouldn't that trend have reversed in the past year as coming in to the office is emphasized?
- DoktorDelta 4y agoDepends on how many people switched to fully remote jobs when faced with mandatory return-to-office
- klyrs 4y agoThe trick with many RTO orders is that people are often exempt if they managed to move more than X miles from the nearest HQ.
- matt-attack 4y agoI moved out during COVID. But retained 2 properties as rentals, so people don't necessarily always have to sell.
- conk 4y agoThe SF bay area alone added over 500k more jobs than housing over the last decade. And it’s not like the area was known for having ample housing before that.
- derstander 4y agoThat’s almost one whole Wyoming worth of people (~578k in 2021)!
- 0_____0 4y agoIf they went to ID, WY, ND, SD, assuming they are largely D voters, they could potentially flip at least a couple of those states…
- selfmodruntime 4y agoIsn't this already beginning to be happening?
- lotsofpulp 4y agoNo, those are all projected to be very safe Republican states. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/republicans-senate-2024-map/ https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/republicans-senate-2024... https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/democrats-senate-chances-2024-and-beyond/ https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/democrats-senate-chance... Also, California has the most Republican voters of any state, there is no reason to assume the people leaving are mostly Democrats.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- red-iron-pine 4y agoA good point -- a lot of those moving to Montana are moving because they're right leaning. Still bring that bougie California BS w/ them tho.
- LinuxBender 4y agoWyoming has a big blue chunk in Jackson Hole Teton County that is mostly multi-multi-billionaires. They are still a rather small population and most are old school democrats. Most of the state are republicans [1] I was a Californian and I am unaffiliated. I meet a lot of former Californians here and like me, most moved here for liberty and not for political reasons. They will not be told what to do and that is most of the population. Here [2] is a transplant to Wyoming that speaks about the state. Laramie county also has a big chunk of Democrats as it is a college town. ~6000 of that 7815 are the students and I assume most of the rest are staff members [1] - https://sos.wyo.gov/Elections/Docs/VRStats/2023/23FebVR_Stats.pdf https://sos.wyo.gov/Elections/Docs/VRStats/2023/23FebVR_Stat... [2] - https://www.youtube.com/c/TheWyomingProject/videos https://www.youtube.com/c/TheWyomingProject/videos
- klyrs 4y agoOnly 100k of that was chalked up to covid.
- rayiner 4y ago> Net migration out of California surpassed that of the next highest state, New York, by about 143,000 people. Nearby states such as Utah have warned Californians who might consider moving to stay out. A similar story is playing out in Nevada, where California migrants are seeking to re-create their lifestyle. Oregon is getting hit pretty bad with Californian immigrants. Prices in places like Bend are nuts now. Too bad there’s no way for states to control immigration from other states.
- lotsofpulp 4y agoSee the first word in the name of the country.
- refurb 4y agoThis is a good thing? I don't think the goal is to pack the majority of the US population into 2-3 states and a dozen cities. Over the past decade we've already seen other states see economic growth and inflows that resulted in high housing prices - Washington State, Oregon, hell, even Colorado is crazy expensive compared to 20 years ago. I think it would be great if people moved to lower cost of living states and improve the economic growth there.
- theGnuMe 4y agoYep it is a great deal to get high tech remote workers to live in your community.
- karmasimida 4y agoWith a population about 40 million people? Didn't see too bad TBH.