• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

California -- serious entertainment value

RJKarl said:
We already bailout most of the south with our federal tax dollars. Maybe you guys should carry your own weight for a change.
Click to expand...

California supporting the south is taxing the rich to provide for the poor. Since when did you become a "bootstraps" Republican?
 
You pay for your poor....we'll pay for ours....let's see how the south will do.
 
Virginia gets back much more than $1 for every $1 they pay in federal taxes. This is true for KY, AL, MS, LA, AR, GA, SC, NC, TN. To get the same amount of services each would have to dramatically raise their taxes.

Once again you really don't know what you are talking about.
 
Milhouse said:
CA is already losing a large number of people per year, so it will be interesting to see if this tax increase, and the corresponding super majority in both houses which will enable dem legislators to do whatever the heck they want, will affect this flight even more.
Click to expand...

Should be interesting to watch the Left's wet dream of an economy burn to the ground. RJ is going to love living in Tijuana North.
 
RJKarl said:
You pay for your poor....we'll pay for ours....let's see how the south will do.
Click to expand...

The State's Rights Party approves this post. If you wanna limit the power of the federal government by sending more fiscal decisions to the states, send the petition my way. I'll sign it.
 
RJKarl said:
The article is a lie. The law is you must sign to have money taken of your check and at any time you tell them to stop.

The purpose of this proposition was to start to kill all labor unions' ability to do anything in politics while not stopping millionaires and billionaires from spending unlimited amounts of money with no rules.
Click to expand...

So a very similar process to someone who individually makes a political donation. Gotcha.
 
Already have one company moving to the South:

http://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/...ornia-pharma-puretek-to-relo-hq.html?page=all

"The relocation, codenamed Project PTGA in economic development circles, is driven mainly by financial reasons. The cost of doing business in Atlanta was 20 percent lower than in California, according to the source."

I'm willing to bet that 20% will increase dramatically with the political climate in California.
 
DeacKillsaDevil said:
Already have one company moving to the South:

http://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/...ornia-pharma-puretek-to-relo-hq.html?page=all

"The relocation, codenamed Project PTGA in economic development circles, is driven mainly by financial reasons. The cost of doing business in Atlanta was 20 percent lower than in California, according to the source."

the 20% could be things like rent, cost of employees and things like shipping in that Atlanta is much closer to the populations of the US than Ca is.

If you read the article, you'll see the company had been "courted". This takes a lot of time as does figuring out how to move such a big facility.

Once again you jump to a conclusion without all the facts....
Click to expand...
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
"Unions also ramped up their turnout machine to kill a ballot initiative that would have barred unions from automatically withholding money from worker paychecks for political spending."

Seperate from Union dues? ugh
Click to expand...

Absolutely a lie. I worked on this campaign.

It's already illegal to take a penny from someone's paycheck without prior written authorization. What this proposition would have done is to have made it illegal for people to choose to have cash deducted from their paycheck.

If this had passed, millionaires (like the one who gave $38M to pass the bill) could choose to give unlimited amounts of money but would ban individuals from choosing to do so.

As usual the WSJ is totally full of shit.

By the way this is the third time they tried to pass such a bill. Each time it lost by double digits.
 
RJKarl said:
Absolutely a lie. I worked on this campaign.

It's already illegal to take a penny from someone's paycheck without prior written authorization. What this proposition would have done is to have made it illegal for people to choose to have cash deducted from their paycheck.

If this had passed, millionaires (like the one who gave $38M to pass the bill) could choose to give unlimited amounts of money but would ban individuals from choosing to do so.

As usual the WSJ is totally full of shit.

By the way this is the third time they tried to pass such a bill. Each time it lost by double digits.
Click to expand...

What's the procedure for doing this? Is it part of your initial contract? Is your employment dependent on signing over that authorization?
 
It's part of your signing the papers to start your job. There's a card asking if you want to give money for political purposes. Lots of union members say no.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top