SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Strategies & Market Trends : Galapagos Islands -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: MulhollandDrive who wrote (18056)12/22/2002 2:13:20 PM
From: Jorj X Mckie  Respond to of 57110
 
predictable when you consider that california was one of the biggest tax beneficiaries from the bubble. Makes sense the we would build our infrastructure up to unsupportable level



To: MulhollandDrive who wrote (18056)12/22/2002 4:14:39 PM
From: SmoothSail  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 57110
 
This is something that's been out there for quite awhile.

After he took office, he added 46,000 people to the payroll - state workers with wonderful health and retirement benefits. Once hired, impossible to fire. (Boeing is CA's largest employer and their total number of employees is less that what Davis added to the payroll).

He was told by his own people that the budget wouldn't be able to support that many people, but he went ahead and did it anyway.



To: MulhollandDrive who wrote (18056)12/22/2002 4:57:32 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor  Respond to of 57110
 
“I’m just stunned at how it could go from $21 billion to $35 billion in a month.

I have to say I don't get that either.



To: MulhollandDrive who wrote (18056)12/22/2002 5:51:31 PM
From: AugustWest  Respond to of 57110
 
This is interesting.....

The Boston Globe Consumer Beat Column

Dec 22, 2002 (The Boston Globe - Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News via
COMTEX) -- Massachusetts residents are being given the option of paying a higher
income tax rate this year if they want to help out their cash-strapped state.

Tired of the clamor for more tax revenues, Republicans on Beacon Hill succeeded
in inserting into the state budget this year a measure that would give those who
want state programs to receive more money the option to provide the cash.

"This is an opportunity for them to put their money where their mouth is," said
Representative Bradley H. Jones, a Republican from North Reading and a cosponsor
of the measure.

The state's official income tax rate is 5.3 percent; the optional rate is 5.85
percent. Someone with taxable income of $35,000 would pay $192.50 more at the
higher rate. (The higher payment, even though it's optional, would be deductible
on federal taxes for those who itemize, according to the Internal Revenue
Service.)

The idea of letting some taxpayers pay more originated with Mike Huckabee, the
Republican governor of Arkansas, who in late 2001 fended off critics of his
no-new-taxes stance by setting up a "Tax Me More Fund."

The Massachusetts version of the tax-me-more-fund doesn't have a catchy title.
Indeed, the new state tax form being mailed out to nearly 900,000 taxpayers this
week treats the optional tax rate with deadly seriousness and provides no
explanation of why it's there, other than a vague reference to "recent
legislation."

Tucked inside the tax form are a lot of other changes, some that will jump out
at you and others that are harder to spot. Most of the changes reflect the
state's precarious financial situation and are designed to either save money or
raise more.

The big exception is the inclusion of a four-page insert listing Massachusetts
children who are missing. It's the brainchild of Magi and John Bish, the parents
of Molly Ann Bish, a 16-year-old lifeguard from Warren who vanished in 2000.

New York State already lists missing children in its tax forms, and Magi Bish
says the listing has been credited with reuniting at least one child with his
family.

"This is going to end up in many people's hands, and I hope the faces stay in
their hearts," Bish said. "If we can bring one child home, it's worth it."

Even with the addition of the insert on missing children, the 2002 state tax
form will cost the state $890,000, about 22 percent less than last year's form.
Costs were shaved by printing fewer forms overall, trimming eight pages from the
tax form, and including one return envelope with separate color-coded strips for
refund and payment rather than two separate envelopes.

Taxpayers are being asked to sign the front page of their tax form this year
rather than the second page. That will save the Revenue Department time when it
initially opens the returns to check whether they have been properly signed.

Missing from this year's tax form is the short-lived deduction for charitable
donations, which saved taxpayers approximately $185 million last year. With cash
tight, the state got rid of it.

Careful readers of the tax form also will notice a new line for listing use tax
that's due on out-of-state purchases. A use tax is the state's attempt to
recover sales taxes lost when Massachusetts residents buy items out of state for
use here.

For example, someone buying a home entertainment center in New Hampshire, where
there is no sales tax, and using it here is supposed to pay a 5 percent use tax
to the state of Massachusetts. The same goes for taxable items purchased abroad,
over the Internet, or via catalogs from states or countries with no sales tax or
a smaller sales tax than Massachusetts.

Few Massachusetts residents pay the use tax, and the state admits it's a very
difficult tax to enforce. Alan LeBovidge, the Revenue Department commissioner,
said he hoped adding a use-tax line to the tax form (previously a separate form
needed to be filed) will raise awareness of the tax and eventually bring in more
money.

"I have no idea whether this will bring in a lot of money or a little money,"
LeBovidge said. "But people do sign tax forms under the pain and penalties of
perjury, so maybe people will think about it more."

CABLE BOX ALERT: Are you paying for a cable box you don't need?

Peter Yankowski, a retired banker from Rutland, Vt., discovered by accident that
he had been needlessly paying $3.50 a month to Adelphia Communications ever
since he stopped subscribing to HBO about three years ago. He didn't realize
anyone with a cable-ready TV set and no interest in premium or pay-per-view
channels doesn't need a box.

"I thought we needed that black box on top of our TV because we always had it,"
Yankowski said. He demanded a refund for the full three years, but Adelphia
offered him only a six-month refund.

Convinced he's not alone (Adelphia has as much acknowledged that thousands of
others in Vermont may be in the same situation), Yankowski has launched a
campaign against cable-company apathy. He is pressing Vermont officials to force
Adelphia to do more to alert consumers and issue full refunds. He is also
getting out the word to cable customers in other states who may be paying for a
box they don't need.

HDTV COMMENTS: Many readers responded to last week's column on high definition
televisions, with a wide variety of opinions.

Dan Kennedy of North Reading said he thinks the difficulty in recording a high
definition broadcast will slow its acceptance. He said the high volume of data
on a high definition broadcast makes recording nearly impossible with a
videocassette recorder.

Joe Sirbak was more optimistic about high definition's future. He said
programming is plentiful, reception is very good within 20 miles of Needham with
a $5 antenna from Radio Shack, and he predicted AT&T would begin transmitting a
high definition signal during the first three months of next year.

Bruce Mohl can be reached at mohl@globe.com.


By Bruce Mohl
To see more of The Boston Globe, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to
boston.com

(c) 2002, The Boston Globe. Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News.

-0-



*** end of story ***