You’re right, it does not sound good. In fact, it sounds like total bs.
California still has a massive problem with underfunded pensions. I suspect this will not be the last tax increase there. In fact, not even the tenth from the last tax increase …
The proposed hike won’t hit me directly, but I don’t mind paying a bit more in state tax if needed. I do mind the limits Trump’s reforms put on deductions for mortgage interest and property tax.
But I was assured right-wingers were totally opposed to all those wealthy types living in Silicon Valley and Hollywood. Now they’re objecting to them paying higher taxes.
1 Like
I think it has more to do with the lockdown.
Amended: Like many states, California has a revenue shortfall because of the necessary response to the pandemic. It will be worse than it could have been if the lockdown had happened sooner and people had adhered to it better.
Many doubt just how much of it was necessary.
I would doubt whether it was motivated by the pandemic. Some people get off on bossing people around, and will seize on any excuse. These people gravitate to public office.
I’d argue that more was necessary, and greater compliance as well. A half-ass response is prolonging the misery. It seems like every time a state opens up too fast, they have to dial back quickly. But this is becoming off topic so dropping it now.
No, they don’t have to dial back quickly. They choose to. Shame on them.
You can’t excuse select protests and not excuse church services- or other protests - if you want any credibility. Their behavior is all too transparent.
I disagree, and I am not excusing anything that promotes spread of the virus. If you want the pandemic to end, avoid unneeded morbidity and mortality, and get back to normal, we need to stop the spread through creation of and adherence to sensible policies. Masks in public, maintenance of physical distancing, temperature checks entering buildings, closure of venues that foster crowding (especially indoors), contact tracing and isolation. All the fun stuff.
Edit to keep on topic: emphasis on enforcement and adherence in California, where people are not following even simple distancing practices.
Panicking is usually not constructive. For people on crowded California beaches, bidding of heads in sand might help.
1 Like
That is so going to suck. Uber, Lyft, and local taxi services are competing among themselves to make city transportation both responsive and affordable. I can’t imagine navigating a large, American city without the options of Uber and Lyft, both of which are superb ime.
In Austin, TX, the longest I ever waited for either Uber or Lyft was 6 minutes. I loved being able to tell the service my destination and within seconds having the service lock in a price. Paying (with my phone) was as simple as a thumbprint. All locked in before driver even arrived.
No taking advantage of tourists’ lack of knowledge of getting around, no watching the meter, no taxi driver explaining that paying in cash is actually cheaper, no having to hang around at the destination for my credit card to clear the driver’s slow-ass handheld card reader.
So much “social justice” being loaded up on the Cali taxpayer’s plate, gotta suck.
This Californian will be deleting his Uber and Lyft accounts when they pull out if here. I mostly use it on business trips outside the state, anyway.
Yeah, I get the feeling that you’re a true believer, one that Sacramento loves, or should.
Totally up to you, and California, to deny the quality of urban travel that both Uber and Lyft offer. I reckon Texas will disagree, to the benefit of Austin et al.
Less sure about the stake Cali residents have, but like we’ve said already, we disagree.
This or similar laws apply to all large employers in CA and is meant to protect from exploitation. It has caused minor inconveniences for my team in some situations, but no one has talked about pulling out of CA because of it.
I don’t love the way laws are made in California. I believe in representative government, and would really like for appointed positions to carry reasonable minimum qualifications. The proposition system here has created a mess in some aspects.
I initially read this headline to mean that Uber and Lyft didn’t get their way so are taking their ball and going home. If that were the case, I would not want to play with them when I go visit.
However, when I take the time to actually read the article… it looks like they are saying they would have to shut down temporarily to have time to convert to the new employment model. If that is the case, it would make sense to establish a reasonable time frame that would benefit drivers and the company.
Not sure what this means. I am socially liberal but that doesn’t mean I think the government could not be run more efficiently. To my way of thinking I am fiscally conservative, in the sense that spending should be efficient and necessary but also allow for social investments that might not have immediate payoffs.
But be careful about the Texas comment. Some of the people I know who move from CA to TX are more liberal leaning, so you might get outvoted soon there, too 
Mostly joking.
1 Like
Trouble with California, or any states in the US, is you have “liberals”, then “conservatives” who basically all have their own version of how things are done, so every laws passed are political. So you end up with this monster that has the worst of both sides…