Huge bi-partisan support for taxing the rich to fix (Calif.) budget

[Newsjock]

Source: San Francisco Chronicle

Think the budget negotiations are dead? Get ready for something that could contribute to a Plan B: Tax the rich.

We just got our hands on a new poll due out Friday that shows blow-the-roof-off support for something that has only been mumbled about in the most progressive corners of the Dome: Increasing taxes one percent on Californians making more than $500,000. It would raise $2.5 billion towards the state's $26.6 billion deficit.

... How high is the support? Try a whopping 78 percent. Even 60 percent of Republicans and 79 percent of independent and other voters backed it, too.

"Those are the highest numbers I've ever seen. On a tax scale -- that's pretty much a perfect score," said Lenny Goldberg, executive director of the California Tax Reform Association.

---

More info about the poll from The Sacramento Bee:
http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2011/03/teachers-union-calling-for-tax.html

As Democrats scramble to find a new budget course after talks collapsed this week, the California Federation of Teachers is calling for a 1 percent tax hike on the top 1 percent of earners as part of a state budget solution.

... To back its efforts, CFT commissioned research by private pollster Ben Tulchin which shows 78 percent of voters strongly or somewhat support such an income tax hike. Respondents were asked whether they would back that idea "in order to balance the budget and prevent deeper cuts to services."

It's highly unlikely such a proposal would gain the necessary two-thirds vote of the Legislature, as Republicans and leading business groups have opposed targeted tax hikes. But Democrats could attempt to place it on a future ballot with a majority vote or labor unions could gather signatures for an initiative.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/nov05election/detail?entry_id=86164&tsp=1

[aquart]

1. Yet they will not do it.

[Auntie Bush]

2. They'd better! I say why not make that 2%...wouldn't

really hurt them that much.

[Booster]

3. Since most rich Californians are liberals, I'd be willing to bet they

wouldn't mind paying the 1% tax increase. Afterall, they have as much to gain as anyone (actually more) when this state gets back on it's feet and the housing market goes up.

[No Elephants]

11. If you have any factual support for "most rich Californians are liberals." I'd sure

appreciate a link.

[xchrom]

4. Recommend

[Devil_Fish]

5. I just did some math: 26.6/2.5=10.64. Do I really need to explain? NT

[countmyvote4real]

6. Yes. Please splain.

You divided the debt by the proposed savings to get what?

[Newsjock]

7. A 10.64 percentage point increase in taxes on the ultrarich

... would, by that calculation, wipe out the state's deficit entirely.

That would take it to about 20% ... all of which is fully deductible on one's federal return anyway.

[David__77]

9. That's too high.

It's deductible, but not creditable. We would reach a point with such a rate that people would actually for residence purposes flee the state in droves. A study would have be performed (if it hasn't been) to determine the appropriate higher rate that would not result in such losses.

[Devil_Fish]

13. Maby it's not to high. Maby it needs to be raised all over the country.

If people would leave in droves as you say, where woule they go if it went up every ware? take gas as an example. in the 70's if a station raised it's price to $4 a gal. every one would go to a cheeper station. What if all the stations raised it to $4 a gal. as we see today. Conversley what if all the states raised the tax on any one making more then 500K a year to 20%. It wouldn't even have to be that high for very long, a year or two would wipe out the deficits, and then it could be lowered to somthing that would be sustainable after we pay off the credit card. I just reduced my credit card to 0 ballance. because of that, I no longer have to worry about a 18% intrest rate. the U.S.A. could do the same thing.

[David__77]

8. But people don't vote that way.

And I think it's because there has been no WELL-FUNDED proposition increase the marginal rates on high income taxpayers. Indeed, the funding has been pretty one-sided against. Tax increases on the wealthiest must be packaged as a "taxpayers revolt" to ensure "fairness." "Quit making the middle class pay more than its fair share!"

[Taverner]

10. Let it come to pass

[No Elephants]

12. "Huge bi-partisan support for taxing the rich..." NS,S.

[andym]

14. would fix less than 10% of the deficit

"It would raise $2.5 billion towards the state's $26.6 billion deficit."

Perhaps a 5% tax increase on the wealthy (instead of 1% would be better), as it would come close to fixing 50% of the deficit.