Break up California

[keefe]

It's where every educated Asian immigrant wants to be. It's where every computer or electrical engineering grad wants to work

Uh, ever been to Redmond or Bellevue?

[ChicosBailBonds]

Governor Rick used $40 million of tax payer dollars to bribe Toyota away from CA.   What's your take on that?   Honest question.

I'd call that a tremendous ROI and getting off cheap.  That $40M to bring all those folks to Texas who will buy homes, drive property taxes, spend money into the economy, build a manufacturing base which will drive more jobs.  Think about it in these terms, is $40M of money to Toyota to come to Texas vs $500M to a solar company that is out of business within 3 years?  I have no problem with gov't aiding business, I'm not opposed to taxation, either, what I am opposed to giving dollars out for pet projects or to politically connected folks as thank yous, but both sides do it.


In our state, we continue to tax these guys to death and they leave...massive brain drain, good jobs, etc.  Been going on for years but they don't care...they point to Silicon Valley and Hollywood as beacons of light. Manufacturing is evil for some people here, it is truly an amazing thing to see.  At some point I anticipate the adults will arrive, but I'm worried that too many of them have left along with the high paying jobs.  But hey, unemployment is coming down here, because we've landed a bunch of $9 food service gigs.      It's going to be interesting to see if Kia, Mazda, Hyundai, and others follow suit.  Isuzu pulled up a few years ago, Nissan took everything to Tennessee.  Sad, but as the mayor of Torrance said today "doing business in this state is very difficult".  A number of people here impacted because their spouses work for Toyota.

[brandx]

I'd call that a tremendous ROI and getting off cheap.  That $40M to bring all those folks to Texas who will buy homes, drive property taxes, spend money into the economy, build a manufacturing base which will drive more jobs.  Think about it in these terms, is $40M of money to Toyota to come to Texas vs $500M to a solar company that is out of business within 3 years?  I have no problem with gov't aiding business, I'm not opposed to taxation, either, what I am opposed to giving dollars out for pet projects or to politically connected folks as thank yous, but both sides do it.


In our state, we continue to tax these guys to death and they leave...massive brain drain, good jobs, etc.  Been going on for years but they don't care...they point to Silicon Valley and Hollywood as beacons of light. Manufacturing is evil for some people here, it is truly an amazing thing to see.  At some point I anticipate the adults will arrive, but I'm worried that too many of them have left along with the high paying jobs.  But hey, unemployment is coming down here, because we've landed a bunch of $9 food service gigs.      It's going to be interesting to see if Kia, Mazda, Hyundai, and others follow suit.  Isuzu pulled up a few years ago, Nissan took everything to Tennessee.  Sad, but as the mayor of Torrance said today "doing business in this state is very difficult".  A number of people here impacted because their spouses work for Toyota.

And the biggest plus for you is that this welfare is going to the rich.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Just the invisible hand of the government giving big business a reach-around. Pure capitalism. Totally fine when a R does it, cuz he did the right thing paying lip service to tax cuts and "freedom." Nothing to see here.

I'm not a R or a D, thank God.  Feel free to check my voter registration if you wish.

Actually what I'm all for is a company being able to do what is in their best interests, and if the location they are doing business in makes it so onerous with taxation, regulation, etc and they feel they need to leave, then they should.  If an enterprising state, city, etc, wants to bring them there and IT MAKES SENSE TO DO SO, I'm absolutely for it.  Please make note of that last sentence....MAKES SENSE TO DO SO.  This doesn't mean spending $400M on a stadium with an upside down ROI.  Spending $40M to get a Fortune 50 company to move to my state....$40M...I almost think that is a typo it is so absurdly low.

So its case by case JJ man.  $500M for Solyandra...$40M for Toyota...I don't think this is really that hard and I certainly don't give a rip who is doing it, as long as they are making the right decisions with data to back it up.

[brandx]

I'm not a R or a D, thank God.  Feel free to check my voter registration if you wish.

Actually what I'm all for is a company being able to do what is in their best interests, and if the location they are doing business in makes it so onerous with taxation, regulation, etc and they feel they need to leave, then they should.  If an enterprising state, city, etc, wants to bring them there and IT MAKES SENSE TO DO SO, I'm absolutely for it.  Please make note of that last sentence....MAKES SENSE TO DO SO.  This doesn't mean spending $400M on a stadium with an upside down ROI.  Spending $40M to get a Fortune 50 company to move to my state....$40M...I almost think that is a typo it is so absurdly low.

So its case by case JJ man.  $500M for Solyandra...$40M for Toyota...I don't think this is really that hard and I certainly don't give a rip who is doing it, as long as they are making the right decisions with data to back it up.

Should Milwaukee taxpayers help pay for a new arena? Lots of $$$, jobs, tax income from all these millionaires "working" in Wisconsin, world recognition being home to a franchise in the world's 2nd most popular sport, etc.

Maybe I misread your opinion on that, but I thought you said you were against it.

As far as not being an R or D - that is meaningless. I am not either. I am an avowed liberal which basically equates to being a D since there are usually only 2 options.

[ChicosBailBonds]

And the biggest plus for you is that this welfare is going to the rich.

   The irony in your statement is California's approach to all of this hurts the middle class and poor.  There are two sides to this coin.

You can make this a class warfare argument all you want until the cows come home.   The people of Texas, rich, poor, middle income will benefit.   The people of California, rich, poor, middle income take a hit, again. 

At some point people have to understand basic business, and it is clear to me by comments made here by many posters, certainly state officials, etc, that folks just don't get it.  Its as if they never took a basic business class in their life.  It costs MONEY to run a business, and part of those costs include taxation of many kinds.  Also the pool of labor, how easy is it to attract qualified people based on how much it costs to also live in your locale.

Toyota will have ZERO trouble attracting very high level people in Texas or those wanting to move to Texas where they will pay NO STATE INCOME TAXES, will be able to buy a 4,000 square foot house for $350K, and moving into a state that is booming.  Zero trouble. 

The saddest part, I guarantee you there are some folks in the CA Assembly cheering and high fiving this happened.  An evil corporation is leaving, and one that makes products that they don't like.  Bizarro world, but guarantee that is happening with a select group.

[warriorchick]

  The irony in your statement is California's approach to all of this hurts the middle class and poor.  There are two sides to this coin.

You can make this a class warfare argument all you want until the cows come home.   The people of Texas, rich, poor, middle income will benefit.   The people of California, rich, poor, middle income take a hit, again. 

At some point people have to understand basic business, and it is clear to me by comments made here by many posters, certainly state officials, etc, that folks just don't get it.  Its as if they never took a basic business class in their life.  It costs MONEY to run a business, and part of those costs include taxation of many kinds.  Also the pool of labor, how easy is it to attract qualified people based on how much it costs to also live in your locale.

Toyota will have ZERO trouble attracting very high level people in Texas or those wanting to move to Texas where they will pay NO STATE INCOME TAXES, will be able to buy a 4,000 square foot house for $350K, and moving into a state that is booming.  Zero trouble. 

The saddest part, I guarantee you there are some folks in the CA Assembly cheering and high fiving this happened.  An evil corporation is leaving, and one that makes products that they don't like.  Bizarro world, but guarantee that is happening with a select group.

+1000000000000000

[Spotcheck Billy]

+1000000000000000

we need a comma rule for numbers like this

[reinko]

I'd call that a tremendous ROI and getting off cheap.  That $40M to bring all those folks to Texas who will buy homes, drive property taxes, spend money into the economy, build a manufacturing base which will drive more jobs.  Think about it in these terms, is $40M of money to Toyota to come to Texas vs $500M to a solar company that is out of business within 3 years?  I have no problem with gov't aiding business, I'm not opposed to taxation, either, what I am opposed to giving dollars out for pet projects or to politically connected folks as thank yous, but both sides do it.


In our state, we continue to tax these guys to death and they leave...massive brain drain, good jobs, etc.  Been going on for years but they don't care...they point to Silicon Valley and Hollywood as beacons of light. Manufacturing is evil for some people here, it is truly an amazing thing to see.  At some point I anticipate the adults will arrive, but I'm worried that too many of them have left along with the high paying jobs.  But hey, unemployment is coming down here, because we've landed a bunch of $9 food service gigs.      It's going to be interesting to see if Kia, Mazda, Hyundai, and others follow suit.  Isuzu pulled up a few years ago, Nissan took everything to Tennessee.  Sad, but as the mayor of Torrance said today "doing business in this state is very difficult".  A number of people here impacted because their spouses work for Toyota.

Mr.  Nolan put it best.

These sorts of corporate welfare programs—that use public money in the form of tax breaks and financial incentives to lure businesses from one state to another—sound good, if you pretend that only your state matters, and furthermore, that your state is at war with all of the other states in America, and that you can only win by cannibalizing the resources of another state. If you see America as a nation, though, it quickly becomes clear that these programs are counterproductive and downright idiotic. Here is what the United States of America as a whole has gotten with this deal, which is typical of countless others of this nature:

California (-3,000 jobs) + Kentucky (-1,000 jobs) + Texas (+4,000 jobs)= 0 net jobs.

Financial cost to the public: -$40 million.
So our nation as a whole, thanks to politicians like Rick Perry, has gained zero jobs at a cost of $40 million. Great patriotic financial management there, you swaggering moron. If our federal government was rational it would ban these sorts of state vs. state corporate giveaways, because they only benefit one state at the expense of another state, and they cost public money, so on the whole they represent nothing more than a transfer of public funds into the pockets of corporations. If companies have actual compelling business reasons for moving their operations to a different state, they will do so even without public subsidies; if they don't have an actual compelling business reason to move their operations to a different state, then paying them public money to do so is the opposite of "efficiency" or "common sense." It is a desperate move by suckers (us).

[ChicosBailBonds]

Should Milwaukee taxpayers help pay for a new arena? Lots of $$$, jobs, tax income from all these millionaires "working" in Wisconsin, world recognition being home to a franchise in the world's 2nd most popular sport, etc.

Maybe I misread your opinion on that, but I thought you said you were against it.

As far as not being an R or D - that is meaningless. I am not either. I am an avowed liberal which basically equates to being a D since there are usually only 2 options.

In reverse order, I don't agree at all.  Ralph Nader is a liberal, today he called for Obama's impeachment. Is he a Dem?  Not on your life. Many examples like that.  I'm not a big government fan for many things, doesn't mean I hate gov't, nor does it mean I don't want gov't, but they are inefficient as hell and crooked as the day is long.  Does that make me an R?  Or more libertarian (not Libertarian, but libertarian).  I can tell you I'm no R, but like R's, much of the stuff on the other side rubs me wrong, but usually for different reasons.

On the arena, I answered that earlier.  All depends on the ROI.  If the city needs to spend $400M for a new arena, what's the ROI?  I guarantee you it isn't as good as $40M to bring Toyota over.  I've been on record many times on arena funding, it's a local issue, put it up for the vote of the citizens and present why they should or shouldn't vote for it.  What is the ROI, what is the accountability if the ROI turns out to be complete BS, etc.  I'm not against it, I want the data and the consequences if they are wrong.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Just the invisible hand of the government giving big business a reach-around. Pure capitalism. Totally fine when a R does it, cuz he did the right thing paying lip service to tax cuts and "freedom." Nothing to see here.

This is how you do it....note the requirements.  Wow, common sense and money well spent

http://bizbeatblog.dallasnews.com/2014/04/texas-enterprise-fund-will-grant-40-million-to-toyota.html/

[WellsstreetWanderer]

"Don't Mess with Texas"      The well paid people from Toyota can escape the Summer heat by vacationing in California while being  served by minimum wage Californios.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Mr.  Nolan put it best.

These sorts of corporate welfare programs—that use public money in the form of tax breaks and financial incentives to lure businesses from one state to another—sound good, if you pretend that only your state matters, and furthermore, that your state is at war with all of the other states in America, and that you can only win by cannibalizing the resources of another state. If you see America as a nation, though, it quickly becomes clear that these programs are counterproductive and downright idiotic. Here is what the United States of America as a whole has gotten with this deal, which is typical of countless others of this nature:

California (-3,000 jobs) + Kentucky (-1,000 jobs) + Texas (+4,000 jobs)= 0 net jobs.

Financial cost to the public: -$40 million.
So our nation as a whole, thanks to politicians like Rick Perry, has gained zero jobs at a cost of $40 million. Great patriotic financial management there, you swaggering moron. If our federal government was rational it would ban these sorts of state vs. state corporate giveaways, because they only benefit one state at the expense of another state, and they cost public money, so on the whole they represent nothing more than a transfer of public funds into the pockets of corporations. If companies have actual compelling business reasons for moving their operations to a different state, they will do so even without public subsidies; if they don't have an actual compelling business reason to move their operations to a different state, then paying them public money to do so is the opposite of "efficiency" or "common sense." It is a desperate move by suckers (us).

That math is not accurate at all.  Toyota is building a $300M headquarters from scratch in Plano, that will generate a lot of jobs and more importantly, a 365 day a year facility that drives growth, revenues, taxes, etc (unlike an arena as an example that does some of that, but also gives away a ton of revenue to the tenants).  

Sorry, I think the argument that Mr. Nolan or whomever just made is, to put it mildly, absurd.  Taxation is a true cost and an impediment to business and growth.  It sounds like Mr. Nolan doesn't want to acknowledge this.  What's more absurd, some of the same high tax states and counties are throwing tax breaks around like crazy (ahem...Los Angeles) to incent certain businesses to do more in the area (films and commercials)....a bit of irony knowing that they are throwing those tax incentives around to keep business but that same ideological group is upset that Toyota is leaving.  

To buy in this perverted logic, companies shouldn't offer more money to lure certain people to switch jobs and work for them.  Or baseball teams shouldn't bid on players in free agency.  It's competition.  Texas had something to offer, California is an oppressive tax state, Toyota walked...just like so many others have before them.  Why should Toyota or anyone else be subject to a lesser deal because the state they are located in is so whacked out of control, so out of touch with business, has no problems spending money on the ridiculous of the ridiculous?  Good for Toyota.

The quotes from today are fun or sad.   


“I’m not surprised to see that it occurred, for all of the usual reasons,” said Joe Vranich, a corporate relocation consultant in Irvine. He said corporate clients often complain about “Sacramento’s propensity to tax business some more, some more and some more.”

At an appearance Monday in Lancaster, where a Chinese manufacturer is building electric buses, Brown acknowledged the high cost of doing business in California but said it’s worth it. “We’ve got a few problems, we have lots of little burdens and regulations and taxes, but smart people figure out how to make it,” he said, according to the Wall Street Journal.

[Silkk the Shaka]

I'm not a R or a D, thank God.  Feel free to check my voter registration if you wish.

Actually what I'm all for is a company being able to do what is in their best interests, and if the location they are doing business in makes it so onerous with taxation, regulation, etc and they feel they need to leave, then they should.  If an enterprising state, city, etc, wants to bring them there and IT MAKES SENSE TO DO SO, I'm absolutely for it.  Please make note of that last sentence....MAKES SENSE TO DO SO.  This doesn't mean spending $400M on a stadium with an upside down ROI.  Spending $40M to get a Fortune 50 company to move to my state....$40M...I almost think that is a typo it is so absurdly low.

So its case by case JJ man.  $500M for Solyandra...$40M for Toyota...I don't think this is really that hard and I certainly don't give a rip who is doing it, as long as they are making the right decisions with data to back it up.

I think corporate tax rates should be 0% and I'm dead serious. Just calling out "hypocrisy" where I see it. TTFN!

[brandx]

I think corporate tax rates should be 0% and I'm dead serious. Just calling out "hypocrisy" where I see it. TTFN!

As a crazy liberal, I am on board with that -- as long as not one single penny of our tax dollars was ever given to these corporations, including building infrastructure for them as we regularly.

We don't make  taxpayers pay for roads for oil, lumber and mining companies or for new Business Park complexes. We also make them pay market value for land for these activities, etc. No corporate taxes + no giveaways to corporations, period. If they can't make it on their own, bar the doors.

Unfortunately, corporations would never go for paying their own way without gov't welfare.

[MUBillsTil2017]

I came to CA in 1985 to settle in Newport Beach as a very young guy with a family.  The SoCal experience was electric with opportunity.  I mean anything goes to improve your families well being.  Then in the 1991 time frame the twin booms of defense spending collapsing as the Cold War ended then the savings and loan collapse hammered many SoCal banks.  Massive job losses ensued and the place never really recovered. 

NorCal did well because of computer related businesses but gang that mostly benefited Hindus from India.  Locals just couldn't compete and try to find a US minority in NorCal high tech. 

Politicos went for graft as we've seen with 10% of democrats in the state senate either under indictment or conviction of felonies. 

Then you have the coastal counties stead fast against the agricultural interior.  The place is too big for one state.  A break up isn't half bad. 

[Silkk the Shaka]

As a crazy liberal, I am on board with that -- as long as not one single penny of our tax dollars was ever given to these corporations, including building infrastructure for them as we regularly.

We don't make  taxpayers pay for roads for oil, lumber and mining companies or for new Business Park complexes. We also make them pay market value for land for these activities, etc. No corporate taxes + no giveaways to corporations, period. If they can't make it on their own, bar the doors.

Unfortunately, corporations would never go for paying their own way without gov't welfare.

Totes agree. Corporations should also not have rights as people.

[MUBillsTil2017]

Totes agree. Corporations should also not have rights as people.

Then you must be in favor of high unemployment in the USA.  THE US already imposes some of the highest corporate tax rates in the world.  Strip the remaining benefits and you'll see US corporations abandon the US for other countries.  What you are demanding is that corporations don't benefit from the Bill of Rights.  Ok they walk to were they have a voice.  Your children and mine will suffer as a result.  Already corporations offshore trillions to avoid punitive US taxes.  Great for the Swiss, Brits, Russians, Chinese, etc.  Not so much for joe blow American.

[Silkk the Shaka]

Then you must be in favor of high unemployment in the USA.  THE US already imposes some of the highest corporate tax rates in the world.  Strip the remaining benefits and you'll see US corporations abandon the US for other countries.  What you are demanding is that corporations don't benefit from the Bill of Rights.  Ok they walk to were they have a voice.  Your children and mine will suffer as a result.  Already corporations offshore trillions to avoid punitive US taxes.  Great for the Swiss, Brits, Russians, Chinese, etc.  Not so much for joe blow American.

You may have read me wrong. I am in favor of 0% corporate tax rates in the U.S.

[MUBillsTil2017]

I can be persuaded that corporate tax rates should be close to zero, same for individuals but the idea of corporations as a individual is embedded in our tax code, election laws, libel laws, criminal laws.  We are a different country if you strip corporate rights as people.  If I misread you, a thousand apologies. 

[ChicosBailBonds]

As a crazy liberal, I am on board with that -- as long as not one single penny of our tax dollars was ever given to these corporations, including building infrastructure for them as we regularly.

We don't make  taxpayers pay for roads for oil, lumber and mining companies or for new Business Park complexes. We also make them pay market value for land for these activities, etc. No corporate taxes + no giveaways to corporations, period. If they can't make it on their own, bar the doors.

Unfortunately, corporations would never go for paying their own way without gov't welfare.

That goes both ways.  Corporations are hiring workers that pay taxes, lots of them. 

How much of that infrastructure is built for duel purposes?  Almost all of it.  Plenty of corporations pay their own way...registration of a commercial vehicle here in California is through the roof.  California gas tax, highest in the nation...goes to pay for roads.  So on and so forth.  There are fees, permits, other taxes, etc, that corporations (and individuals) pay that go to offset infrastructure costs.

For me, I would not support $0 corporate tax.  There is a cost of doing business, taxes is one of them.  To me taxes are fine, as long as they make good policy sense.  People and corps need to understand taxes often go for things like infrastructure, policing, etc....it is when they go for other things or are egregious that drive people and corps away.  Everyone should be paying some taxes, they should know what they are getting for it.

[brandx]

I can be persuaded that corporate tax rates should be close to zero, same for individuals but the idea of corporations as a individual is embedded in our tax code, election laws, libel laws, criminal laws.  We are a different country if you strip corporate rights as people.  If I misread you, a thousand apologies. 

Wow

[keefe]

California (-3,000 jobs) + Kentucky (-1,000 jobs) + Texas (+4,000 jobs)= 0 net jobs.

Not true. Movers, cleaners, realtors, maids and front desk people at Marriotts in New Mexico, waitresses in greasy spoons and the guy who fills the Slurpee machines at gas stations along I 10 and I 20 all see an uptick in traffic.

[Marquette Gyros]

Mr.  Nolan put it best.

These sorts of corporate welfare programs—that use public money in the form of tax breaks and financial incentives to lure businesses from one state to another—sound good, if you pretend that only your state matters, and furthermore, that your state is at war with all of the other states in America, and that you can only win by cannibalizing the resources of another state. If you see America as a nation, though, it quickly becomes clear that these programs are counterproductive and downright idiotic. Here is what the United States of America as a whole has gotten with this deal, which is typical of countless others of this nature:

California (-3,000 jobs) + Kentucky (-1,000 jobs) + Texas (+4,000 jobs)= 0 net jobs.

Financial cost to the public: -$40 million.
So our nation as a whole, thanks to politicians like Rick Perry, has gained zero jobs at a cost of $40 million. Great patriotic financial management there, you swaggering moron. If our federal government was rational it would ban these sorts of state vs. state corporate giveaways, because they only benefit one state at the expense of another state, and they cost public money, so on the whole they represent nothing more than a transfer of public funds into the pockets of corporations. If companies have actual compelling business reasons for moving their operations to a different state, they will do so even without public subsidies; if they don't have an actual compelling business reason to move their operations to a different state, then paying them public money to do so is the opposite of "efficiency" or "common sense." It is a desperate move by suckers (us).

Plus unnatural carnal knowledgeing One. Couldn't have said it annnnnnnnnnny better.

Here in 2014, federalism is becoming increasingly irrelevant.

We're supposed to be competing with the BRIC nations, not engaged in hand-to-hand combat with increasingly homogenous, arbitrarily defined "states" within our country.

What's the point of separate states anymore?  

[ChicosBailBonds]

I can be persuaded that corporate tax rates should be close to zero, same for individuals but the idea of corporations as a individual is embedded in our tax code, election laws, libel laws, criminal laws.  We are a different country if you strip corporate rights as people.  If I misread you, a thousand apologies. 

Yup, been almost 200 years.  1819 was the first time the Supreme Court confirmed that corporate rights existed in the same manner as a natural person.  It's essential to commerce as well.  Without it, contractual agreements couldn't be implemented between two corporate entities, or a persona and a corporation. 

Dartmouth vs Woodward.

Stems from the 14th amendment.  Folks don't like it, well....get a constitutional convention going and change the constitution.  It's there for a reason and has served the country well.