Monday, October 08, 2012

Looking Foward to Post-Election Finances

It's coming close to election time once again, and as such numerous propositions and proposals are on the ballot. But what will California look like if some of these propositions are passed? Just what can the average tax payer expect if any let alone all of the propositions on the ballot get through?

Most of the ballots involving taxes or redistributing money have openly stated where the money made from there will be going. Of the three major tax propositions proposed, that is Proposition 39 (Income Tax Increase for Multi-state Businesses), Proposition 38 (State Income Increase to Support Education) and Proposition 30 (Sales and Income Tax Increase), only Proposition 30 has not specified where at least half of the money made from it will go. Of these propositions Proposition 39 California has been embraced especially, as it targets big businesses with holdings out of state while contributing half of the estimated one billion dollars it gets annually from the change to green energy. 

Proposition 38 has gathered less attention, but still estimates ten billion dollars annually almost all of which will be invested in education. If the propositions go through green energy will be even faster on the track of becoming the norm, schools will be much better funded and numerous green energy related jobs will become available.

However, there is a downside to all of this. In all of the propositions proposed, only Proposition 33 (Automobile Insurance Persistency Discounts) promotes any form of financial break for the tax payer. Even then, it is merely to allow third party agencies to permit discounts in very specific situations. All of the above propositions are taxes that could seriously cut into the Californian citizens pocket. Even though Proposition 39 is the only proposition that doesn't directly cut into the average tax payers salary, it could still have detrimental effects. Many people believe that the increased tax rates to big businesses will make many flee the state, causing a large loss of jobs.

In the end, it's clear that the propositions on this ballot are not made with cutting taxes or helping people match the rising cost of living in mind. Rather they have all been made with increasing the infrastructure of the state in mind. This is not necessarily a bad thing. After all schools deserve funds and green energy is worth investing in. But it is something to keep closely in mind.

Please bookmark!

1 comment:

  1. So the driver that didn't show enough responsibility to insure themselves is charged more than the driver that shows maturity and a steady record. Rewarding responsible drivers is not a bad thing.

    James from