Posted on Dec 11, 2020
San Francisco Puts Another Nail in Its Own Coffin
1.22K
55
14
16
16
0
Something we can ALL look forward to?!?
San Francisco Puts Another Nail in Its Own Coffin
Posted from yahoo.comPosted in these groups: 
Taxes
Taxes
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 7
9
9
0
They have Nancy Pelosi in congress trying again and again to get Kansas and Oklahoma tax money to pay for blue state problems. Their safety net.
(9)
(0)
SSG Robert Webster
PO2 David Dunlap - Sorry, but Nancy does not belong to Kansas, she belongs to the schizophrenic state of California. Don't send that crap here.
(2)
(0)
SSG Robert Webster
1SG Steven Imerman And every other state as well. New York is also infamous for trying that stuff as well.
(0)
(0)
SPC (Join to see)
Reviewing the literature shows that California, New New York, and other "blue states's" tax money flows in the opposite direction. Blue state tax money goes into red states. Read this article by using the link: https://www.minnpost.com/eric-black-ink/2021/12/what-would-happen-if-blue-states-stopped-paying-for-red-states/.
What would happen if blue states stopped paying for red states? | MinnPost
A recent Rockefeller Institute study makes clear how much money flows out of Democratic-leaning states into Republican-leaning ones.
(0)
(0)
7
7
0
Thank you my friend MAJ Dale E. Wilson, Ph.D. for posting the perspective from yahoo.com author David L. Bahnsen on the recently enacted 'wealth tax' which supporters refer to as the “overpaid executive tax.”
I have never had a desire to visit San Francisco.
I am hopeful that many businesses will break ties from San Francisco and relocate out of state. Elon Musk and others have led the recent exodus from California.
I concur with:
1. the bottom line "San Francisco would be wiser to pursue what it is chartered to do as a city — addressing high crime and homelessness — rather than what it is inherently incapable of doing — serving as the arbiter of what wages should be. So far, it is not doing either very well."
2. Paragraph 4 'The fatal flaw of this bill and others like it lies in the idea that fair compensation should be defined by people other than those who have skin in the game — namely, a company’s principals, board of directors, and ultimately the shareholders to whom it reports. Once one concedes the principle that legislative intervention is required to force those within a company to change the way it pays people, the door is opened to an arbitrary exercise of power. Make no mistake: There is no magic behind the 0.1 percent figure. Setting the tax at that level was arbitrary, and arbitrary judgments are easy to change. Sure, it remains there today, but perhaps 1 percent or 5 percent will be the “right” number next year. And perhaps even higher the year after that. The lack of limiting principle here is frightening, and the slippery slope is easy enough to see.'
FYI COL Mikel J. Burroughs LTC (Join to see)SGT Steve McFarland SFC William Farrell SMSgt David A Asbury SPC Nancy Greene SSG Robert WebsterSSG Franklin Briant TSgt David L. Sgt (Join to see) PO2 Frederick Dunn SSG Michael Noll MSgt Paul Connors SPC Chris Hallgrimson Maj Bill Smith, Ph.D. SSG Stephen RogersonPO2 Frederick Dunn LTC (Join to see) SSG Samuel Kermon
I have never had a desire to visit San Francisco.
I am hopeful that many businesses will break ties from San Francisco and relocate out of state. Elon Musk and others have led the recent exodus from California.
I concur with:
1. the bottom line "San Francisco would be wiser to pursue what it is chartered to do as a city — addressing high crime and homelessness — rather than what it is inherently incapable of doing — serving as the arbiter of what wages should be. So far, it is not doing either very well."
2. Paragraph 4 'The fatal flaw of this bill and others like it lies in the idea that fair compensation should be defined by people other than those who have skin in the game — namely, a company’s principals, board of directors, and ultimately the shareholders to whom it reports. Once one concedes the principle that legislative intervention is required to force those within a company to change the way it pays people, the door is opened to an arbitrary exercise of power. Make no mistake: There is no magic behind the 0.1 percent figure. Setting the tax at that level was arbitrary, and arbitrary judgments are easy to change. Sure, it remains there today, but perhaps 1 percent or 5 percent will be the “right” number next year. And perhaps even higher the year after that. The lack of limiting principle here is frightening, and the slippery slope is easy enough to see.'
FYI COL Mikel J. Burroughs LTC (Join to see)SGT Steve McFarland SFC William Farrell SMSgt David A Asbury SPC Nancy Greene SSG Robert WebsterSSG Franklin Briant TSgt David L. Sgt (Join to see) PO2 Frederick Dunn SSG Michael Noll MSgt Paul Connors SPC Chris Hallgrimson Maj Bill Smith, Ph.D. SSG Stephen RogersonPO2 Frederick Dunn LTC (Join to see) SSG Samuel Kermon
(7)
(0)
6
6
0
GySgt Thomas Vick
I personally hope they fall of into the Ocean and the sharks get Pelosi, and Finstein.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google