New California governor vows 'painful' cuts

[The Northerner]

LOS ANGELES (AFP) – Jerry Brown was sworn in as California governor on Monday -- the oldest holder of the office 36 years after he was its youngest -- vowing "painful" cuts to pull the state out of a deep budget hole.

Succeeding Arnold Schwarzenegger, the 72-year-old Democrat said the Golden State's finances were in a "dire" state and needed immediate action, starting with a new budget next week.

"The year ahead will demand courage and sacrifice," Brown said in an inaugural address in the state capital Sacramento, at a ceremony attended by Schwarzenegger.

"The budget I present next week will be painful, but it will be an honest budget," he added. "It's a tough budget for tough times."

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20110103/ts_alt_afp/uspoliticscalifornia

[bluestateguy]

1. Might want to start with California's overpaid prison guards

and stop putting so many people in jail for non violent drug offenses.

[cutlassmama]

2. That's a great place to start. Second should be taxing the rich.

[Johonny]

11. +1

[skyounkin]

3. Yay...get ready to take it in the shorts

the poor, the elderly and the infirmed...

Don't think he is talking about the rich...but of course it will explained as everyone is getting hit when in reality it will be just the ones I listed above.

[blogslut]

4. Are you familiar with Jerry Brown?

I could be wrong but I would be willing to bet he will, indeed, suggest tax cuts for the wealthy and those entities that fall under their concern.

[FreakinDJ]

12. Yes I am - and NO he will not propose Tax Cuts for the Rich

nothing in his political history even remotely suggest any thing like that

[Imajika]

5. So long as so much of our taxation is in states and localities...

...it is very challenging taxing the rich more.

Like it or not, the rich can just move or invest elsewhere. They constantly take their businesses to states actively advertising no/low taxes and massive incentives. Both Democratic and Republican governors/states do this to one another.

This is a major problem that doesn't effect the federal government in quite the same way.

So long as the states are forced to effectively compete against on another for businesses and investment, it is very difficult to go after the absurd wealth of the top few percentage.

One idea might be a surtax on the wealthy at the Federal level that is then given back to the states in the form of block grants. For this specific surtax, we could return the money to the exact state coffers from which the tax payers came from. This might have the effect of creating a tax the wealthy can't so easily avoid, while at the same time providing the state/local governments with revenue they'd otherwise have difficulty getting due to the super rich slinking out of town to lower tax localities/states elsewhere. Just an idea anyway.

[Xithras]

6. California has never had a problem with taxing the rich.

According to our current (Democratic) State Controller John Chiang, that's part of the problem with our budget right now. California pulls a disproportionate percentage of its revenues from the income taxes of the wealthiest Californians. The wealthiest Californians tend to make their money from things like investments and real estate, which haven't been doing well lately. A billionaire who makes no new money is still a billionaire, but because our taxation policy is based on income, that billionaire would owe no taxes.

California's wealthiest are, of course, making money, but they're doing so at a slower rate than normal because of the global down economy. Chiang himself cited an example of a wealthy Central Valley developer who went from paying millions of dollars in taxes every year, to paying only a few tens of thousands. Why? Because his company isn't building anything, and his investments are barely breaking even. The guy is still rich as hell, but a smaller income means a smaller tax debt.

Chiang is no friend to the wealthy, but he's also the one who audits our tax dollars, and has described California's tax system as "totally broken".

[DBoon]

7. because per dollar of market value, property taxes are low

among the lowest in the country

People point to states with no income tax and low sales tax, but neglect to mention that a shack in those states pays higher property taxes than many mansions in CA.

I'm all for keeping housing affordable for homeowners, but it has gone beyond ridiculous here. It is effectively a subsidy to businesses that own lots of property and have maintained ownership for decades.

Property taxes have the benefit of being very stable - property values don't fluctuate as much as sales or income taxes.

I'd personally restrict prop 13 to residential property and allow business property to be taxed at market value.

[Xithras]

9. I don't disagree, but you're banging your head against a wall with that one.

There have been a number of attempts to repeal Prop 13's coverage of commercial and corporate owned property, most recently two seperate acts in 2009, and all have failed. The two in 2009 didn't even gather enough signatures to make it onto the ballot.

I agree with you, but we're in the minority in California. Prop 13 is a lightning rod, and most Californian's won't vote for ANYTHING that threatens to even partially undermine it.

[Cleita]

10. And only primary home residential.

Second and third homes, vacation homes, and any mansion that has more bedrooms and bathrooms than a hotel should be taxed extra. I say up to three bedrooms and two baths should remain 1%. More bedrooms and baths, more than one acre of yard, except in rural and ranching areas, and more extra homes should be taxed at 4 or 5 percent. Also, people like John McCain and Oprah Winfrey who are from out of state, or out of the country should also pay extra including all those Saudi oil sheiks who own expensive properties in the wealthiest neighborhoods of the state. There is so much real estate to tax here without putting an additional burden on working class families, we could be solvent in no time flat.

[DBoon]

16. what about rental properties?

??

[Cleita]

Rental properties would only pass on the

tax to the poor renters. Of course if they are high end rentals, then an additional tax like for mansions could be added.

[DBoon]

18. and rents are "what the market will bear"

as renters quickly found out when Prop 13 did not lower their rents

Which, BTW was the political impetus behind strong rent control in Santa Monica, Berkeley, and other places and helped create the City of West Hollywood

[Cleita]

17. Dupe

[shanti]

15. that would be my suggestion too

restrict prop 13 to residential property. can you imagine what that would bring in?

[CrawlingChaos]

8. The courage to sign SB 810 single payer healthcare?

Do it Moonbeam. Show us that you're not just another corporate Dem and turn our state around.

[catchnrelease]

13. Oh yes

I'm praying that he signs SB810.

[shanti]

14. i believe him

jerry may be a lot of things, but he's not a liar. he's not out to hurt people purposely. i trust him and i never trusted GAS!

[Initech]

19. You want to end the budget deficit? Tax rich people.