Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Scumbria who wrote (134941)	3/26/2001 5:44:34 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1570745

I thought you were talking about Reagan as president. As for Prop 13 it was passed in 1978 when Reagan was no longer governor of CA. Government spending in CA increased 75% after adjustment for inflation in the next ten years after Prop13. If the state government of CA did not consider education a high enough priority that they let it erode despite all that new government spending then you can blame Gov. Brown or the state legislature, but Reagan had little to do with it and Prop 13 didn't cause the state to spend less. cato.org "But what is not said in any of these accounts is that Proposition 13 ushered in a second California gold rush in the 1980s. California's economic surge in the years following Proposition 13 was to become the envy of the nation. In the 10 years after the passage of Proposition 13, incomes in California grew 50 percent faster than in the nation as a whole; jobs grew at twice the national pace. Even supporters of Proposition 13 never envisioned that it would unleash the spectacular entrepreneurial and commercial explosion that it did over the next decade. Did Proposition 13 really starve state and local services? Hardly. In real dollars, California's budget climbed from $55 billion in 1980 to $97 billion in 1992 -- a 75 percent increase above inflation! Only in government would a 75 percent real spending hike be considered inadequate and neglectful. What about revenues? In the 1980s state tax revenues as a share of Californian's incomes actually rose -- from 11 to 12 percent. California is not an undertaxed state today. According to the latest Tax Foundation data, the state-local tax burden today in California is 11.7 percent of personal income, compared with a national average of 11.5 percent. Proposition 13 merely moved California from one of the highest tax states in the nation to a slightly above-average tax state. The major effect of Proposition 13 has been to save the average homeowner in California tens of thousands of dollars in property tax payments over the past 20 years. That is money that would have fueled an even more rapid buildup in California's state and local public bureaucracies if it had been sent to Sacramento and city hall. Californians intuitively understand this. That is why a large majority of California residents say that they would vote for Proposition 13 again if it were on the ballot this year -- 20 years later. "