Gov. Brown “going directly to voters” for tax raise on “high-income earners”

San Francisco Chronicle ^ | 12/5/11 | Andrew S. Ross

[SmithL]

From “An Open Letter to the People of California”:

I am filing today an initiative with the Attorney General’s office that would generate nearly $7 billion in dedicated funding to protect education and public safety.

I am going directly to the voters because I don’t want to get bogged down in partisan gridlock as happened this year. The stakes are too high.

[mrsmel]

Problem is, they also bring their greenie, liberal, socialistic policies which got them to their pretty pass in California, and what red state wants to have to deal with that? Even when they’re a minority in a red state, they make the most noise and start yammering about regulations and green policies, etc, and try to destroy the very reasons they moved to low tax low regulation red states. I want them to stay where they are and eat it, even their money can’t last forever under ever more draconian leftist taxation rates and then when the state implodes maybe the rest of the nAtion will start asking something besides “what’s in it for me?”

[Gilbo_3]

would generate nearly $7 billion in dedicated funding to protect education and public safety.

why is extortion of the children and public safety always used while the freebies for illegals and other such wasteful spending are off limits ???

Im startin to believe the 'plan' is actually to uproot the wealthy and disperse them, along with their socialist leaning ideologies to more conservative places, watering those down as well...its been happenin for decades and they keep eroding everybody elses FReedom bit by bit...

same strategy with every third world reject allowed to hop the border...we r screwed...

[JakeS]

Even the “home schooled” will pay the taxes voted in.

Yes, but that is no reason to put your own children in them. My tax dollars pay for homosexuals in the military, yet I would not want one of my sons serving with any of them. My tax dollars pay for abortions, yet, God help anyone wanting to kill one of my grandchildren.

My taxes pay for a lot of trash, a lot of sin,. a lot of plain out an d out wrong stuff, but that does not mean I or my family should be part of them.

[arrogantsob]

There are many reasons to make sure your children are well educated and many obstacles to that goal. Almost all of the military defending out nation are graduates of the public schools. There are few parents capable of educating their children in all the aspects of the languages, arts, sciences and mathematics which are available in public schools. Those that are so capable I take my hat off to for many reasons.

Unfortunately, in this nation the fact that it did not overwhelmingly reject Obama’s candidacy is an argument against most parents’ ability to teach anything. Then the Welfare class often uses “home schooling” as an excuse for neglect. It is in no way a panacea.

The fact is public schools were one of the reasons this nation became a great nation. In past societies education was as much an upper class phenomenon as caviar and champagne. Leftist philosophy has conquered education as it has almost all other aspects of American life.

[sickoflibs]

Our Maryland socialist governor O Malley passed two increased taxes on the rich. Unexpectedly*** he collected less revenue from the rich than even before the tax increase. But I think you may miss the REAL reason why liberals raise taxes on the RICH. It’s not to collect more money from the rich specifically even though they argue that.

They raise taxes on the rich as a softener to raise taxes on ‘us’, the non-rich. O Malley also raised the state sales tax (and wants congress to enforce it across state lines) and the alcohol tax and the tabacco tax and is now looking to raise the gasoline tax. But we are supposed to feel better about it because the rich got soaked.

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

They raise taxes on the rich as a softener to raise taxes on ‘us’, the non-rich

They may or may not raise taxes and "fees" on the middle class. It certainly makes sense, from their evil point of view, to raise taxes on the rich first if they are indeed going to tax the little people, e. g. O'Malley. But in either case it serves their purposes to appear to be a "friend of the lower classes."

Obama, for example, seems to want to keep "payroll taxes" at their current low level (he will be out of office before the true effects become obvious), and if he can couple it with "tax the rich -- take it or leave it," he gives the GOP the dilemma of:

1) Voting against the extension of the lower "Payroll tax" rates and thereby giving him a weapon to use against them

2) Voting for a "tax on the rich," and thereby making them GHWB-style traitors

Neither will work if voters are smart, but.....

[DoughtyOne]

Every time they talk about raising taxes on the rich, people with income down to $30,000 are considered well off, according to the U.S. Congress and Senate.

[sickoflibs]

RE :”They may or may not raise taxes and “fees” on the middle class. It certainly makes sense, from their evil point of view, to raise taxes on the rich first if they are indeed going to tax the little people, e. g. O’Malley. But in either case it serves their purposes to appear to be a “friend of the lower classes.” ....Obama, for example, seems to want to keep “payroll taxes” at their current low level (he will be out of office before the true effects become obvious), and if he can couple it with “tax the rich — take it or leave it,” he gives the GOP the dilemma....”

Obama cannot afford to raise taxes on us before the election as O Malley did and got away with it. The political climate is different.

So yes he's got clueless Republicans in a bind over this FICA tax deal. If Republicans had a vocal articulate and sharp leader he/she could convince voters why Obama's FICA proposal is a scam. But no they just repeat over and over 'taxes are bad' and so Obama trapped them with that and the FICA tax cut scam. Pathetic!

Obama plans on raising our taxes and possibly cutting entitlements AFTER the election IF he gets re-elected. That way he can go out of office claiming he did deficit reduction. I suspect he will really veto tax cut extensions after the election. If he loses we will just be accused of promoting racism because Obama was a 'tax cutter'