7 ms·

I love California. This is the 300th reason why I will never leave the state. It is so good about protecting workers ( when compared to the rest of the US. )

by pm24601 12y ago

robomartin 12y ago
Interesting point of view. Employers beyond a given scale want to LEAVE California because of just how ridiculous things can be here. And so, you like CA because of your perceived (or real) benefits to employees when, in reality the rules that keep piling up are making jobs leave the state and, in effect, cost employees dearly. In other words, employees are not losing small amounts or benefits here and there but rather their jobs and the ability to maintain a standard of living as everything else in the state ads cost to doing business here. Remember that widely reported employment numbers count minimum wage jobs and highly-paid jobs the same way. In other words one could say that CA is gaining, not losing, jobs yet when you dig into the data you discover that jobs that pay well are leaving and the ranks are being filled by people taking pay and standard of living cuts. It's interesting to come to the realization that the average Joe and Jane has no clue as to what a business equation looks like, how businesses run and how costs and legislation affect numbers. You can't keep taking from people and businesses forever without consequences. This isn't a politically charged statement, this is simple mathematics. Eventually we succeed at killing off our own source of income when they decide to pull-up anchor and move to more reasonable shores (sometimes literally). Both businesses and people have choices.
- Daishiman 12y ago
  People keep saying that and, honestly, compared to what it actually means to see companies leaving countries and regions, there's much talk and little evidence of a substantial change in trends. The big software companies and well-funded startups continue to flock to the state. Obviously not as much as before for the simple reason that the Valley is only so big and living expenses are a very substantial part of the cost, but that has little to do with employee regulation (which is comparatively weak in the US compared to many other developed nations for which, apparently, it ain't much of a problem) and more to do with the cost of living in other areas such as housing demand and infrastructure. Other states and countries should consider that a good working environment, not just in the office but in the protections afforded to employees, is pretty damn attractive for talented individuals.
  - jfidosa9 12y ago
    Californian tech companies aren't there for its "worker protection" laws. They're there because of the talent, which Silicon Valley has a monopoly on because of network effects.
    - Daishiman 12y ago
      Sure, but the talent itself does consider those things. Educated immigrants certainly do; I know several people who have chosen to migrate to the EU over the US in no small part due to the social safety net and better work-life balance, or decided that they'd rather stay where they are in the 3rd world over moving to the US. The world is a different place than it used to be in the dotcom boom; tech talent has a lot more options nowadays and those things add up.
- pm24601 12y ago
  Humorous point of view. You are welcome to move to a place that permits employees to be abused. The hardest problem I have is hiring good people: Not taxes. If a business wants to move to out of the largest economy in the U.S. -- well then it is making an interesting choice that other businesses will take advantage of. Funny thing is that Rick Perry has been trying oh so hard to get businesses to move to Texas... but if the best employees are in California then that means a business is trading lower taxes for lower quality workers. That too is an interesting choice.
  - icelancer 12y ago
    Er, IT work in Austin is exploding.
    - pm24601 12y ago
      How much is coming from California?
  - robomartin 12y ago
    You are thinking locally. Nobody cares where Tesla or Toyota build their cars. Having your business located "in the largest economy" isn't a factor for a huge number of businesses. Another way to put it is: You can build a massively successful business anywhere in the country. There is no particular magic in California in this regard. What is different here is that it cost more to simply exist in this state. And there's far more to it than wages at play.
    - pm24601 12y ago
      But the costs of running a business are much more than taxes and regulations. Here is the TL;DR: Businesses want the benefit of low taxes (lower immediate expenses) with the benefit of high taxes locations (government provide services that the business would otherwise have to pay). But low tax utopia fails if no one pays high taxes needed to provide the services. Longer explanation here: http://sworddance.com/blog/2014/10/23/california-is-awesome-for-business-the-myth-of-the-importance-of-low-taxes/ http://sworddance.com/blog/2014/10/23/california-is-awesome-... and here: http://sworddance.com/blog/2014/10/23/low-business-tax-utopia-myth/ http://sworddance.com/blog/2014/10/23/low-business-tax-utopi...
- darklajid 12y ago
  I'm confused. Granted, the whole article surprised me. It seems to imply that - up to now - employees were sometimes required to use their own devices for _work_ and for their employer and .. had to pay that out of their own pocket. Ignoring the bigger fear that you seem to have about California's future, how is this particular case not a direct improvement - and braindead if you think about it. I just assumed this would be the way it works ~everywhere~. Company requires you to use your car/phone/internet connection and .. needs to pay for the use of your car/phone/internet connection. Wrapping up: Are you seriously unhappy about this particular ruling/article or is your fear a general thing and only tangentially related/merely targeted at the praising comment above you?
  - robomartin 12y ago
    Sorry, you misunderstood, my fault. I was only reacting to the comment about California being a place where employees are not abused. One could very well argue that CA abuses everyone, not just employees. How much do you pay in taxes, all taxes, not just income tax? It's huge. Take a a look at our freeways, they are utterly destroyed and being maintained badly. There's a portion of the 5 I travel every day where you have about two miles of seriously messed up road. The two right lanes are kidney killing. This is a tax. How? Your car gets beat up and your cost of maintenance goes up. Where is all that money we pay in taxes to maintain our highways? Stolen to pay ridiculous pensions to government workers. With regards to the phone ruling. Well, I've been paying a portion of my employee's phone bills for, well, I don't know, two decades. Didn't know we had to legislate common sense and decency.
- yuhong 12y ago
  The recent Reddit yishan fiasco shows how ridiculous defamation laws in California are.
  - x0x0 12y ago
    What defamation fiasco? I'm aware of what Yishan wrote.
    - yuhong 12y ago
      http://www.reddit.com/r/bestof/comments/2igkke/reddit_ceo_calls_out_former_reddit_employee_as_to/cl26fha http://www.reddit.com/r/bestof/comments/2igkke/reddit_ceo_ca...
      - x0x0 12y ago
        from your link Defamation is an injury to the reputation or character of someone resulting from the false statements or actions of another [...] In order to be defamatory the statement must be, of course, false. false statements if Yishan lied, then yes -- there is defamation. Otherwise, it seems little different than the rest of the US. BTW, any competent hr department, or legal, or even co-employers like many startups use , will have had you build a paper trail -- emails, notes on conversations, a pip -- to justify firing for cause.
        yuhong 12y ago
        The statement must also seem to state a fact, or that it is based on fact, rather than an opinion, or based only on opinion. And the automatic damages too.
        x0x0 12y ago
        please do this alias hnquote='pbpaste | fold -s -w 77 | sed "s/^/ /g" | pbcopy' edit: nm, you already did; thanks
- x0x0 12y ago
  Let me rewrite that for you: handwaving (what employers) handwaving (CA is ridiculous; no, things are ridiculous) handwaving (jobs are leaving the state) handwaving (CA is losing well-paid jobs based on absolutely no data or proof whatsoever) handwaving (because reasons... NO, BECAUSE MATH)
- dragonwriter 12y ago
  > in reality the rules that keep piling up are making jobs leave the state In actual reality, while opponents of the California's regulatory and tax regimes like to keep saying things like that, California has been adding jobs at far above the national rate. [1] > In other words one could say that CA is gaining, not losing, jobs yet when you dig into the data you discover that jobs that pay well are leaving and the ranks are being filled by people taking pay and standard of living cuts. Surely, if you have found that by digging into the data, you can link or cite the data and explain the methodology you used to find that. [1] http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/california-forum/article2604184.html http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/california-forum/article260418...
bpodgursky 12y ago
I'm happy to trade my $35/mo cell phone bill in exchange for the 12% marginal tax rate California adds.
- x0x0 12y ago
  You don't hit 12% until $520k [1]. If you make that much taxable income in a year, I'm not sympathetic to your plight. [1] https://www.ftb.ca.gov/forms/2014_California_Tax_Rates_and_Exemptions.shtml https://www.ftb.ca.gov/forms/2014_California_Tax_Rates_and_E...
ne0codex 12y ago
I don't even understand why this was necessary, with both my and my husband's employer in Nevada, I am able to get a discount on the cell bill plus I get to claim my cell phone bill for taxes. To us, at least, seems fair already..
hueving 12y ago
CA screws employees. It has one of the worst income taxes in the US.

I love California. This is the 300th reason why I will never leave the state. It is so good about protecting workers ( when compared to the rest of the US. )

by pm24601 12y ago

I love California. This is the 300th reason why I will never leave the state. It is so good about protecting workers ( when compared to the rest of the US. )

robomartin 12y ago

Interesting point of view. Employers beyond a given scale want to LEAVE California because of just how ridiculous things can be here. And so, you like CA because of your perceived (or real) benefits to employees when, in reality the rules that keep piling up are making jobs leave the state and, in effect, cost employees dearly. In other words, employees are not losing small amounts or benefits here and there but rather their jobs and the ability to maintain a standard of living as everything else in the state ads cost to doing business here. Remember that widely reported employment numbers count minimum wage jobs and highly-paid jobs the same way. In other words one could say that CA is gaining, not losing, jobs yet when you dig into the data you discover that jobs that pay well are leaving and the ranks are being filled by people taking pay and standard of living cuts. It's interesting to come to the realization that the average Joe and Jane has no clue as to what a business equation looks like, how businesses run and how costs and legislation affect numbers. You can't keep taking from people and businesses forever without consequences. This isn't a politically charged statement, this is simple mathematics. Eventually we succeed at killing off our own source of income when they decide to pull-up anchor and move to more reasonable shores (sometimes literally). Both businesses and people have choices.

Daishiman 12y ago
People keep saying that and, honestly, compared to what it actually means to see companies leaving countries and regions, there's much talk and little evidence of a substantial change in trends. The big software companies and well-funded startups continue to flock to the state. Obviously not as much as before for the simple reason that the Valley is only so big and living expenses are a very substantial part of the cost, but that has little to do with employee regulation (which is comparatively weak in the US compared to many other developed nations for which, apparently, it ain't much of a problem) and more to do with the cost of living in other areas such as housing demand and infrastructure. Other states and countries should consider that a good working environment, not just in the office but in the protections afforded to employees, is pretty damn attractive for talented individuals.
- jfidosa9 12y ago
  Californian tech companies aren't there for its "worker protection" laws. They're there because of the talent, which Silicon Valley has a monopoly on because of network effects.
  - Daishiman 12y ago
    Sure, but the talent itself does consider those things. Educated immigrants certainly do; I know several people who have chosen to migrate to the EU over the US in no small part due to the social safety net and better work-life balance, or decided that they'd rather stay where they are in the 3rd world over moving to the US. The world is a different place than it used to be in the dotcom boom; tech talent has a lot more options nowadays and those things add up.
pm24601 12y ago
Humorous point of view. You are welcome to move to a place that permits employees to be abused. The hardest problem I have is hiring good people: Not taxes. If a business wants to move to out of the largest economy in the U.S. -- well then it is making an interesting choice that other businesses will take advantage of. Funny thing is that Rick Perry has been trying oh so hard to get businesses to move to Texas... but if the best employees are in California then that means a business is trading lower taxes for lower quality workers. That too is an interesting choice.
- icelancer 12y ago
  Er, IT work in Austin is exploding.
  - pm24601 12y ago
    How much is coming from California?
- robomartin 12y ago
  You are thinking locally. Nobody cares where Tesla or Toyota build their cars. Having your business located "in the largest economy" isn't a factor for a huge number of businesses. Another way to put it is: You can build a massively successful business anywhere in the country. There is no particular magic in California in this regard. What is different here is that it cost more to simply exist in this state. And there's far more to it than wages at play.
  - pm24601 12y ago
    But the costs of running a business are much more than taxes and regulations. Here is the TL;DR: Businesses want the benefit of low taxes (lower immediate expenses) with the benefit of high taxes locations (government provide services that the business would otherwise have to pay). But low tax utopia fails if no one pays high taxes needed to provide the services. Longer explanation here: http://sworddance.com/blog/2014/10/23/california-is-awesome-for-business-the-myth-of-the-importance-of-low-taxes/ http://sworddance.com/blog/2014/10/23/california-is-awesome-... and here: http://sworddance.com/blog/2014/10/23/low-business-tax-utopia-myth/ http://sworddance.com/blog/2014/10/23/low-business-tax-utopi...
darklajid 12y ago
I'm confused. Granted, the whole article surprised me. It seems to imply that - up to now - employees were sometimes required to use their own devices for _work_ and for their employer and .. had to pay that out of their own pocket. Ignoring the bigger fear that you seem to have about California's future, how is this particular case not a direct improvement - and braindead if you think about it. I just assumed this would be the way it works ~everywhere~. Company requires you to use your car/phone/internet connection and .. needs to pay for the use of your car/phone/internet connection. Wrapping up: Are you seriously unhappy about this particular ruling/article or is your fear a general thing and only tangentially related/merely targeted at the praising comment above you?
- robomartin 12y ago
  Sorry, you misunderstood, my fault. I was only reacting to the comment about California being a place where employees are not abused. One could very well argue that CA abuses everyone, not just employees. How much do you pay in taxes, all taxes, not just income tax? It's huge. Take a a look at our freeways, they are utterly destroyed and being maintained badly. There's a portion of the 5 I travel every day where you have about two miles of seriously messed up road. The two right lanes are kidney killing. This is a tax. How? Your car gets beat up and your cost of maintenance goes up. Where is all that money we pay in taxes to maintain our highways? Stolen to pay ridiculous pensions to government workers. With regards to the phone ruling. Well, I've been paying a portion of my employee's phone bills for, well, I don't know, two decades. Didn't know we had to legislate common sense and decency.
yuhong 12y ago
The recent Reddit yishan fiasco shows how ridiculous defamation laws in California are.
- x0x0 12y ago
  What defamation fiasco? I'm aware of what Yishan wrote.
  - yuhong 12y ago
    http://www.reddit.com/r/bestof/comments/2igkke/reddit_ceo_calls_out_former_reddit_employee_as_to/cl26fha http://www.reddit.com/r/bestof/comments/2igkke/reddit_ceo_ca...
    - x0x0 12y ago
      from your link Defamation is an injury to the reputation or character of someone resulting from the false statements or actions of another [...] In order to be defamatory the statement must be, of course, false. false statements if Yishan lied, then yes -- there is defamation. Otherwise, it seems little different than the rest of the US. BTW, any competent hr department, or legal, or even co-employers like many startups use , will have had you build a paper trail -- emails, notes on conversations, a pip -- to justify firing for cause.
      - yuhong 12y ago
        The statement must also seem to state a fact, or that it is based on fact, rather than an opinion, or based only on opinion. And the automatic damages too.
        x0x0 12y ago
        please do this alias hnquote='pbpaste | fold -s -w 77 | sed "s/^/ /g" | pbcopy' edit: nm, you already did; thanks
x0x0 12y ago
Let me rewrite that for you: handwaving (what employers) handwaving (CA is ridiculous; no, things are ridiculous) handwaving (jobs are leaving the state) handwaving (CA is losing well-paid jobs based on absolutely no data or proof whatsoever) handwaving (because reasons... NO, BECAUSE MATH)
dragonwriter 12y ago
> in reality the rules that keep piling up are making jobs leave the state In actual reality, while opponents of the California's regulatory and tax regimes like to keep saying things like that, California has been adding jobs at far above the national rate. [1] > In other words one could say that CA is gaining, not losing, jobs yet when you dig into the data you discover that jobs that pay well are leaving and the ranks are being filled by people taking pay and standard of living cuts. Surely, if you have found that by digging into the data, you can link or cite the data and explain the methodology you used to find that. [1] http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/california-forum/article2604184.html http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/california-forum/article260418...

bpodgursky 12y ago

I'm happy to trade my $35/mo cell phone bill in exchange for the 12% marginal tax rate California adds.

x0x0 12y ago
You don't hit 12% until $520k [1]. If you make that much taxable income in a year, I'm not sympathetic to your plight. [1] https://www.ftb.ca.gov/forms/2014_California_Tax_Rates_and_Exemptions.shtml https://www.ftb.ca.gov/forms/2014_California_Tax_Rates_and_E...

ne0codex 12y ago

I don't even understand why this was necessary, with both my and my husband's employer in Nevada, I am able to get a discount on the cell bill plus I get to claim my cell phone bill for taxes. To us, at least, seems fair already..

hueving 12y ago

CA screws employees. It has one of the worst income taxes in the US.