billvon 3,131 #26 November 19, 2004 >I may need to move to Oregon with my brother! LOLOL!!! Just don't let em know you're from California. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #27 November 19, 2004 Quote>I may need to move to Oregon with my brother! LOLOL!!! Just don't let em know you're from California. No joke about that. Oregonians aren't fond of Californians. Never understood why. I know it's not politics... So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #28 November 19, 2004 Quote I depend on my car more than the regular 9-5'ers (although not as much as PeregrinRose, apparently...), and thus it would be a taxation based on occupation...which is a whole 'nother issue. I actually think you stand to make more on this than you'd lose. Lemme ask you, are you driving more than say 120 miles each day? I think this tax proposal really hurts the 9 to 5 middle-class working guy the most. For example, I'm talking about the folks that are trying to make a better living by working in LA, but can't quite afford a home there any more because the property values are so freekin' high. So these people have taken homes further and further out in the suburbs and are the ones you see in grid lock every morning driving in from Riverside and beyond. In order to make the commute -somewhat- affordable, they've bought econo cars that get semi-good gas milage, but with this proposal they'd have to pony up more money. Meanwhile, I think, property values in LA would go up even higher driving (pun) what's left of the middle class there even further out into the burbs. The people that ought to be rejoicing for this proposal are people that already have decent housing close to their work and tend to drive big inefficient cars. They'd get a tax break because gas prices would go down and whatever incremental increase they'd pay for the mileage would be more than offset in their property values. All of that said, I think this entire propsal has ZERO chance of getting passed. For the last couple of weeks I've been driving from my home in Santa Ana to Burbank and I KNOW I have it good because I ONLY have to drive that far. About 120 mile round trip each day about 1.5 hours, each way. I'm not bitchin' though because I know people that have to do far worse than that every single day.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,174 #29 November 19, 2004 QuoteQuoteIf you look at the wear and tear on the roads, it makes sense. The question really is the rate. If it was .18 per gal and it's now .01 per mile and stays at $2/gal for gas without taxes, then a 30 mpg car would pay $40 more per 10,000 miles ($726.67). A 18 mpg would pay the same ($1211.11). No, what California needs to do is devote a greater percentage of the current budget to infrastructure. In the days when California had free higher education for residents, roads and infrastructure had nearly 20% of the budget (this is when Brown and Reagan were Governor). This was, of course, before the days of absurd social programs which started to strain the resources, So free higher education for residents didn't count as an absurd social program? Quote many of which were implemented under Gray Davis (Wilson has his issues too, but I wasn't there when he was). Now, higher education costs money to residents, DOT gets less than 1% of the budget, the legislature is trying to make college free for illegal aliens and they don't understand why there isn't any money. Hmmm - residents pay but illegals get it for free? That's an interesting concept. The only thing I'd give illegals for free is a ticket home.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #30 November 19, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteIf you look at the wear and tear on the roads, it makes sense. The question really is the rate. If it was .18 per gal and it's now .01 per mile and stays at $2/gal for gas without taxes, then a 30 mpg car would pay $40 more per 10,000 miles ($726.67). A 18 mpg would pay the same ($1211.11). No, what California needs to do is devote a greater percentage of the current budget to infrastructure. In the days when California had free higher education for residents, roads and infrastructure had nearly 20% of the budget (this is when Brown and Reagan were Governor). This was, of course, before the days of absurd social programs which started to strain the resources, So free higher education for residents didn't count as an absurd social program? Quote many of which were implemented under Gray Davis (Wilson has his issues too, but I wasn't there when he was). Now, higher education costs money to residents, DOT gets less than 1% of the budget, the legislature is trying to make college free for illegal aliens and they don't understand why there isn't any money. Hmmm - residents pay but illegals get it for free? That's an interesting concept. The only thing I'd give illegals for free is a ticket home. To answer your first point (Free college): The state was able to afford it, while prioritizing and preserving its own infrastructure to keep up with the tremendous growth in the 60s and 70s especially. While other states were offering reduced tuition to their resident students, California was able to absorb it completely, and there were still plenty of out-of-state attendees as well. To answer your second point (illegals): "Free" tuition to illegals is not a reality yet. But it is on the burner for the legislature to address at some point. This falls on the same category as the driver's license issue a couple years ago. The legislature in Sacramento is filled with some real whackos. So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #31 November 19, 2004 QuoteFor the last couple of weeks I've been driving from my home in Santa Ana to Burbank and I KNOW I have it good because I ONLY have to drive that far. About 120 mile round trip each day about 1.5 hours, each way. I'm not bitchin' though because I know people that have to do far worse than that every single day. Agreed. I am not sure I agree with your assessment regarding the housing prices, although I do understand why you think that way. Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #32 November 19, 2004 QuoteAll of that said, I think this entire propsal has ZERO chance of getting passed. Paul, you realize this is the California Legislature, do you not? My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #33 November 19, 2004 QuoteQuoteAll of that said, I think this entire propsal has ZERO chance of getting passed. Paul, you realize this is the California Legislature, do you not? Yep, the same legislature that passed SB60... So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #34 November 19, 2004 Wow, is this opposite day? QuoteSo free higher education for residents didn't count as an absurd social program? I support this, and its quite liberal. QuoteHmmm - residents pay but illegals get it for free? That's an interesting concept. The only thing I'd give illegals for free is a ticket home. You support this, and its quite conservative. What the hell is happening here?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
