Dan Walters
By Dan Walters
dwalters@sacbee.com
Published: Sunday, Apr. 15, 2012 – 12:00 am | Page 3A
Last Modified: Sunday, Apr. 15, 2012 – 8:33 am
Over the coming months of gestation about taxation, California voters will be inundated with claims, counterclaims and other forms of propaganda.
We still don’t know how many major tax proposals will be on the November ballot. It’ll be at least one, but whether it’s the one that Jerry Brown, other Democratic politicians and labor unions want, or the one that civil rights attorney Molly Munger and the PTA want, is still unknown.
Most likely, it’ll be both.
Brown, having merged his original tax proposal with one pushed by a left-wing coalition, now wants to hike sales taxes by a quarter-cent and raise marginal tax rates on those with high incomes. Munger would raise income taxes on everyone except the very poor, but hit those at the top the hardest.
Both, it’s said, would raise in the vicinity of $9 billion-plus a year, Brown’s to narrow the state’s budget deficit and Munger’s going all to schools.
The revenue numbers, however, are more than a bit squirrelly because it’s really impossible to accurately estimate capital gains and other non-salary incomes of those in the upper brackets. The Legislature’s budget analyst, in fact, says that Brown’s numbers are too high.
Nevertheless, let’s assume that voters opt to raise state taxes somewhere between $9 billion and $10 billion a year. It’s important to place that number in context because campaign propaganda pro and con will certainly distort it.
A $9 billion pop would be less than a 6 percent increase in the level of state and local taxation, now about $160 billion a year. The increase would also be less than one-half of one percent of California’s economic output.
To read entire story, click here.
Once again, you have to rein in out of control spending first, get a real budget in place, then see where the revenue will come from. The left is unwilling to cut anything except traditional fear mongering expenses like safety and schools. Tell Brown and Monger to go lay an golden egg if they want more revenue.
Brown and MUnger and the rest of the filthy, vile Democrats have enough money to give it away to illegal aliens via the dream act. You can go to hell Brown! NO on taxes. FU! Drop dead and go back to hell.As for the filthy daughter of tax evader Berkshire you too go back to whatever e you came from.
The LAO is already saying that the governor’s plan will bring in less than originally projected (http://www.lao.ca.gov/ballot/2012/120208.aspx). That’s why Molly Munger’s is the better initiative, because the money will ALL be spent on education — and that amount of money, $10 billion actually can make a difference there. This is also money that will be over and above any Prop 98 minimum the governor manufactures. This initiative also does not solely rely on the wealthy to contribute. It relies on a broad based sliding scale income tax on all but the poorest, starting at $17,500 households (after deductions) — starting at $9 a year and going up from there.
Schools have been decimated by $20 billion cut over the last four years, with an additional $2.4 billion automatically sliced when the governor shifted $5 billion out of the general fund. There comes a point when you deprive the patient of nutrients for too long, that they have no chance of coming back. Our public schools are being starved and another round f cuts will push them past the brink of no return.
The governor’s tax plan will, in reality, do little to help schools. The money will be diverted and reabsorbed elsewhere. The Molly Muger/PTA initiative sends money to schools in an amount over and above the Prop 98 minimum. The money does not pass through Sacramento and does not become part of the general fund. It is for early childhood programs, pre-school and K-12 — exclusively. It’s time to stop balancing the budget on the backs of the students who need a well rounded and vigorous education so they can get good jobs and help sustain CA in the future.