Bro!

Mansiere!

Lets not forget the "tax" of cost of living in California. Along with 10% income tax, about 10% sales tax comes housing, etc.

I have calculated that to have the same lifestyle, including car, entertainment (including commuting for Cal games), housing, food, etc and put away the same dollar amount, I have to earn 30% to 35% more in California than Nevada. That was kind of shocking.

Is the constant sweater weather and bad roads worth that much? Geeze.


I would say that is a bigger driver of emigration than a % more tax.

Phantomfan;842066677 said:

---

Lets not forget the "tax" of cost of living in California. Along with 10% income tax, about 10% sales tax comes housing, etc.

I have calculated that to have the same lifestyle, including car, entertainment (including commuting for Cal games), housing, food, etc and put away the same dollar amount, I have to earn 30% to 35% more in California than Nevada. That was kind of shocking.

Is the constant sweater weather and bad roads worth that much? Geeze.


I would say that is a bigger driver of emigration than a % more tax.

---

There's an impact to low income workers but for many of us, we get paid 30% or more higher than what we would get in Nevada. Plus if I lived close to super casinos and smut, I'd be a very poor man.

82gradDLSdad;842066663 said:

---

He can move to some other state and pay less taxes. Seems pretty simple to me. Seems like he's weighing living in CA vs. paying less taxes. We all make that decision.

---

I mean, how much money does this guy need? His reason for the move are too funny. Shows his value set; another empty suit, just like his occupation. When he finds a way to eat his money, I hope he lets the rest of us know how...

Good for Phil.

As a high profile resident, I am sure he was warned he'd be demonized by the professional Left as he is being demonized in this thread.

"Progressives" like to believe that as they gouge the productive in the state (highest sales tax and highest top income tax rate) to transfer their wealth to the public employees who fund their campaigns, there is no dynamic effect on anyone's behavior.

tommie317;842066648 said:

---

He gets hitting a small white ball with a thin stick

---

And he is good enough to get paid lots for it...so what?
He also pays a ton of taxes for his talent.

You'd do the same damn thing....

SmellinRoses;842066717 said:

---

Good for Phil.

As a high profile resident, I am sure he was warned he'd be demonized by the professional Left as he is being demonized in this thread.

"Progressives" like to believe that as they gouge the productive in the state (highest sales tax and highest top income tax rate) to transfer their wealth to the public employees who fund their campaigns, there is no dynamic effect on anyone's behavior.

---

Funny how he uses terms invented by the professional Right.

I am sure the California economy will survive without him and he will have no problem selling his house here for more than he paid for it, too.

Here's a question, say you're almost just like Phil...born and bred Californian living in a very nice area (but not a multi-millionaire). Where would you move outside of CA that's as good or better?

SmellinRoses;842066717 said:

---

Good for Phil.

As a high profile resident, I am sure he was warned he'd be demonized by the professional Left as he is being demonized in this thread.

"Progressives" like to believe that as they gouge the productive in the state (highest sales tax and highest top income tax rate) to transfer their wealth to the public employees who fund their campaigns, there is no dynamic effect on anyone's behavior.

---

Those who are staying need people to leave so there will be less traffic and cheaper housing

Good thing he's the only one leaving...

buster99;842066670 said:

---

If it is just a matter of Calif vs. some other state, then just move. Why hold a press conference? I think it is more than just the CA tax, though maybe the straw that broke the camel's back.

---

That may be the reason this is a bigger deal than some guy just moving to another state to avoid taxes. You're right though, not enough here to warrant a press conference. I have no idea how the super-rich think. All I can say is I understand the tax frustration with California.

SmellinRoses;842066773 said:

---

Good thing he's the only one leaving...

---

Yes, everyone's leaving. That's precisely why Bay Area housing prices were up 32% on the year. Everyone's leaving and hardly anyone is buying high-priced homes.
/sarcasm

beelzebear;842066738 said:

---

Here's a question, say you're almost just like Phil...born and bred Californian living in a very nice area (but not a multi-millionaire). Where would you move outside of CA that's as good or better?

---

A 5-10% difference (just a guess right now) in taxes may make a big difference in how long my retirement funds last. I'd rather live some place worse than California than run out of money. Everyone thinks a few people here, a few people there, a couple of businesses here, a couple businesses there leaving CA is no big deal. It will be. Like everything else you have to stay competitive. I'm not sure CA is doing that. Great place, not so great government. And I was born and raised in SanFrancisco. I had to move from there because I couldn't afford it. Sold my family home after my parents died. Sad but I'm a realist. I may have to move again. Life goes on.

Don't kid yourself -- Of course holding a press conference on inauguration day was the most appropriate and least self-serving way for Phil to discuss his fear of economic catastrophe and plans for the future.

Holmoephobic;842066780 said:

---

Yes, everyone's leaving. That's precisely why Bay Area housing prices were up 32% on the year. Everyone's leaving and hardly anyone is buying high-priced homes.
/sarcasm

---

They keep saying that all the rich people are leaving California, but I'm still waiting to see it.

SonOfCalVa;842066578 said:

---

poor little phil ... whining all the way to the banks (Caymans?)

as to his "bust" ... an opinion shared by many :p

Phil Mickelson = Saggy Man Breasts
An open letter to the US Open golfers, announcers, fans and anyone else connected to it.

1) Phil Mickelson, can you please find a bra? At the very least, stop wearing silk (I'm guessing) shirts with no undershirt. I don't want to see your erect nipples and jiggling breasts any more, especially when you are walking to the green right before missing a 4 foot put. And while you are at it, do a situp. You look as soft as the stay-puft marshmallow man.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070610081649AAetkcW

photo, but be forewarned, it aint purty
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=&imgrefurl=http://www.welcometothe716.com/2012/05/07/ditch-the-man-boobs-bro/&h=350&w=300&sz=35&tbnid=GjgDjNV0kpVfVM:&tbnh=90&tbnw=77&prev=/search%3Fq%3D%2522phil%2Bmickelson%2522%2Bbra%26tbm%3Disch%26tbo%3Du&zoom=1&q=%22phil+mickelson%22+bra&usg=__ZCjqCmk2YJ99X74mIJB4HPFuGkA%3D&docid=Nn2Ev8esNndCGM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Wor9UKrPC5Dw0QGry4CQAg&ved=0CCYQ9QEwAjgK&sei=i4r9UOWLLbPq0QHClYF4&gbv=2

---

Is not a tax (federal or state) dodge. Its a liability dodge. English trust law used in Caymans or similar outposts do not allow US judgments to be enforced. We are Cal alums, not a bunch of stupid, brain dead ASU grad reporters from the Chronicle? Let's get it right. He would put the money in a tax haven instead (one of those funny little island countries that doesn't have a tax treaty with the US).

beelzebear;842066738 said:

---

Here's a question, say you're almost just like Phil...born and bred Californian living in a very nice area (but not a multi-millionaire). Where would you move outside of CA that's as good or better?

---

but most professional athletes move to Florida. Maybe he can move next to another California refugee, Tiger.

BTW, there is 100 billion dollar (Brown's number, not mine) in accrued, unfunded public employee pension obligations "off books" for State and local governments that several new ballot propositions will not put a dent in. The Governor is banking on the purportedly improved economy (and increased income and related taxes) and a revision to Prop 13 that will result in a massive rent increases to commercial tenants (most leases are triple net) to bail us out. Personally, I don't see it. And it will get worse, as different governmental entities use bankruptcy to end their pension payments. A federal bankruptcy judge two weeks ago rebuffed an effort by the state's pension system to sue San Bernardino and force it to meet its $1.7-million-per-month obligation to public workers' retirement funds, a decision that could have wider implications in the ongoing public debate over public pensions and municipal debt. CALPERS is not even appealing, just sending out nasty publications about how unfair San Bernadino politicians are to their employees. Funny thing about that, CALPERS still is under an obligation to pay those employees under a recent State Supreme Court decision. Look for CALPERS to file for BK protection a few years. This is going to get ugly. Public workers can always take solice that they can ride a bullet train in the Central Valley in a few decades.:sarc: FWIW, as I have clients who are public workers, I am somewhat sympathetic to their plight. We really have dug ourselves one big hole.

SonOfCalVa;842066636 said:

---

Rounds played keep dropping ... golf is NOT inexpensive, not to mention the amount of free time needed to play 18 and pay for the 19th hole booze.

A lot of gated communities with courses are suffering as the courses are deep in red ink with no way to reverse the trend. Property values drop as the communities need special assessments to sink into the bottomless golf cup.
Triple bogies or worse, not birdies. Big losses are now par for the courses.

Many municipalities that sucked money from other projects to gain the "prestige" of a muni course are also facing major decisions as schools, etc. seem more important than subsidizing golf courses that can't pay their way.

Palmer and Nicklaus and their cohorts are long gone.
Tiger is no more (despite showing up at furdie football games as a non-grad).
Young players are ... boring. Technicians with the personalities of ... technicians.

---

Not true on an international basis were golf is getting marginally bigger (unlike skiing, backpacking, tennis and some other sports that are in decline). And I think Rory has a great personality, and a nice looking wife. Tiger may have neither, but he can still play. A lot of the decline domestically has to do with demographics and the sour economy. IMO, it would help if we could have another Lee Trevino.

wifeisafurd;842066817 said:

---

Not true on an international basis were golf is getting marginally bigger (unlike skiing, backpacking, tennis and some other sports that are in decline). And I think Rory has a great personality, and a nice looking wife. Tiger may have neither, but he can still play. A lot of the decline domestically has to do with demographics and the sour economy. IMO, it would help if we could have another Lee Trevino.

---

Tiger probably has one of them again (probably wants her back because she stole his mojo):

http://jezebel.com/5976946/tiger-woods-re+proposes-to-ex+wife-elin-nordegren-with-200-million-prenup-because-oh-sure-why-not

wifeisafurd;842066813 said:

---

but most professional athletes move to Florida. Maybe he can move next to another California refugee, Tiger.

BTW, there is 100 billion dollar (Brown's number, not mine) in accrued, unfunded public employee pension obligations "off books" for State and local governments that several new ballot propositions will not put a dent in. The Governor is banking on the purportedly improved economy (and increased income and related taxes) and a revision to Prop 13 that will result in a massive rent increases to commercial tenants (most leases are triple net) to bail us out. Personally, I don't see it. And it will get worse, as different governmental entities use bankruptcy to end their pension payments. A federal bankruptcy judge two weeks ago rebuffed an effort by the state's pension system to sue San Bernardino and force it to meet its $1.7-million-per-month obligation to public workers' retirement funds, a decision that could have wider implications in the ongoing public debate over public pensions and municipal debt. CALPERS is not even appealing, just sending out nasty publications about how unfair San Bernadino politicians are to their employees. Funny thing about that, CALPERS still is under an obligation to pay those employees under a recent State Supreme Court decision. Look for CALPERS to file for BK protection a few years. This is going to get ugly. Public workers can always take solice that they can ride a bullet train in the Central Valley in a few decades.:sarc: FWIW, as I have clients who are public workers, I am somewhat sympathetic to their plight. We really have dug ourselves one big hole.

---

This is why things have gotten so much more productive in Sacramento since Brown and a supermajority of democrats have been elected. The democrats have reformed and raised taxes and cut public union compensation / benefits. Both of which were necessary. A balanced budget is in sight and progress is being made in California, finally. Thankfully, the "my way or the highway" obstructionists have been relegated to a small little bench in the back of the room in Sacramento so that in the future as additional decisions are required, the grown ups can make them.

dajo9;842066822 said:

---

This is why things have gotten so much more productive in Sacramento since Brown and a supermajority of democrats have been elected. The democrats have reformed and raised taxes and cut public union compensation / benefits. Both of which were necessary. A balanced budget is in sight and progress is being made in California, finally. Thankfully, the "my way or the highway" obstructionists have been relegated to a small little bench in the back of the room in Sacramento so that in the future as additional decisions are required, the grown ups can make them.

---

Exactly. And all it took was for that small partisan band of Republican obstructionists to finally get marginalized - so they would stop saying no to everything. Now, since Dems have a super-majority in Cali, we're on our way to a balanced budget.

As far as the bullet train - I say build it. Maybe its not being built in the location that it should, but that's a concession to the long-neglected Central Valley. Sometimes, compromise is necessary.

Phil - please move to Scottsdale or someplace in Florida....NOW.

Maybe there will be shorter lines at Fatburger now. :p

dajo9;842066822 said:

---

This is why things have gotten so much more productive in Sacramento since Brown and a supermajority of democrats have been elected. The democrats have reformed and raised taxes and cut public union compensation / benefits. Both of which were necessary. A balanced budget is in sight and progress is being made in California, finally. Thankfully, the "my way or the highway" obstructionists have been relegated to a small little bench in the back of the room in Sacramento so that in the future as additional decisions are required, the grown ups can make them.

---

Oh really?? And where did all that money promised by Brown to the "kiddies of California" and their education, actually wind up? I do believe a significant amount to pay public employee pensions. Hmmm. Promises, promises. Kinda like lies, lies.

This is the saddest day since Keith and Mick moved to France

philly1121;842066858 said:

---

Exactly. And all it took was for that small partisan band of Republican obstructionists to finally get marginalized - so they would stop saying no to everything. Now, since Dems have a super-majority in Cali, we're on our way to a balanced budget.

As far as the bullet train - I say build it. Maybe its not being built in the location that it should, but that's a concession to the long-neglected Central Valley. Sometimes, compromise is necessary.

Phil - please move to Scottsdale or someplace in Florida....NOW.

---

Lets hope voters for national congressional seats figure out the same thing we learned here -- obstructionist types do very little and vote them out.

That's my beef with the obstructionist Tea Party types -- they oppose everything YET offer no legislation or governance to run things. Not only are they the Party of NO but also the party of do nothing.

For all the talk about running things like a business - WTF is up with that?

The business of government is to run the country. If congress can't/won't pass any laws or attempt to run the country, you're not doing anything and don't deserve the job.

Brainsmile;842066528 said:

---

http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2013/01/21/golfer-phil-mickelson-plans-drastic-changes-over-new-tax-rate/

---

This article isn't really a surprise to me. After all consider France where the government there proposed and passed a new tax rate that put the top level at 75% of all income over $1 million, and then had VAT and wealth taxes on top of that. The most publicized departure was ther iconic actor Gerard D. [I don't remember how to spell his last name], but they also lost several very wealthy business owners who bolted from the country before the tax took effect.

However, the responses here also don't surprise me. It seems to be a combinatoin of envy that Phil M has made so much money playing what many consider a silly game, and a near terror that others might emulate him.

For me, the question comes down to the simple proposition, do I consider the money Phil M makes his before it's taxed or am I a collectivist who believes that people only "deserve" whatever money the government decides not to extort from them. As you can tell by my previous sentence, I consider the earnings to be Phil M's and he has the right to find ways to keep as much of the money as he can.

In fact, if you look at economic history it isn't until after Karl Marx wrote his manifesto that people tried to say that business income belonged to anyone other than the person who invested in, built, and ran that particular business And you really have to look at the last 50 years or so to find people really pushing the idea that a business should only be allowed to keep what money the government deigns to leave it.

And most people seem to forget that many major revolutions over the years were because governments started to take too much from the productive class and failed to provide value for the taxes. It's clear that there is a growing group of people who believe that most current western governements are starting to slide down this slope. And I cannot figure out which way things will spin.

But, in the end this whole episode is just like the ending of a Gilbert and Sullivan operetta. "Full of sound and fury and signifying nothing." The actions of one man will mean little in the current economy, and we have no way of knowing what the future will bring. Personally I doubt that the current government of this state will provide a positive boost to the economy. What little I'm hearing is all propositoins which will lower incomes across the state and almost certainly result in tax revenues dropping over the next 2-3 years (in constant dollars). But what can anyone do. The current set of kleptocrats are in office for the next 2 years, and will almost certianly be relected in landslide elections in 2014 even if the economy is in a tailspin. I just try to improve my personal economic situation every day and ignore the rest.

mvargus;842066911 said:

---

......And most people seem to forget that many major revolutions over the years were because governments started to take too much from the productive class and failed to provide value for the taxes. It's clear that there is a growing group of people who believe that most current western governements are starting to slide down this slope. And I cannot figure out which way things will spin.....

---

Based on how the people at the top of the food chain have been kicking ass and taking names (despite their chronic whining) for many years now, let me help you figure out which way things will spin: there is currently much more danger of the people you consider rabble causing civil unrest than the country club crowd storming the castle walls. You've gotta be sh*ttin us, right?

http://www.vanityfair.com/society/features/2011/05/top-one-percent-201105

mvargus;842066911 said:

---

This article isn't really a surprise to me. After all consider France where the government there proposed and passed a new tax rate that put the top level at 75% of all income over $1 million, and then had VAT and wealth taxes on top of that. The most publicized departure was ther iconic actor Gerard D. [I don't remember how to spell his last name], but they also lost several very wealthy business owners who bolted from the country before the tax took effect.

However, the responses here also don't surprise me. It seems to be a combinatoin of envy that Phil M has made so much money playing what many consider a silly game, and a near terror that others might emulate him.

For me, the question comes down to the simple proposition, do I consider the money Phil M makes his before it's taxed or am I a collectivist who believes that people only "deserve" whatever money the government decides not to extort from them. As you can tell by my previous sentence, I consider the earnings to be Phil M's and he has the right to find ways to keep as much of the money as he can.

In fact, if you look at economic history it isn't until after Karl Marx wrote his manifesto that people tried to say that business income belonged to anyone other than the person who invested in, built, and ran that particular business And you really have to look at the last 50 years or so to find people really pushing the idea that a business should only be allowed to keep what money the government deigns to leave it.

And most people seem to forget that many major revolutions over the years were because governments started to take too much from the productive class and failed to provide value for the taxes. It's clear that there is a growing group of people who believe that most current western governements are starting to slide down this slope. And I cannot figure out which way things will spin.

But, in the end this whole episode is just like the ending of a Gilbert and Sullivan operetta. "Full of sound and fury and signifying nothing." The actions of one man will mean little in the current economy, and we have no way of knowing what the future will bring. Personally I doubt that the current government of this state will provide a positive boost to the economy. What little I'm hearing is all propositoins which will lower incomes across the state and almost certainly result in tax revenues dropping over the next 2-3 years (in constant dollars). But what can anyone do. The current set of kleptocrats are in office for the next 2 years, and will almost certianly be relected in landslide elections in 2014 even if the economy is in a tailspin. I just try to improve my personal economic situation every day and ignore the rest.

---

Oh no, a tax revolution is about to begin! How big of a militia can phil mickelson and gerard depardieu form?

Good for Phil for using his talents to make lots of $$$.

Here's the deal...if Phil, his family or mom/dad used any public services, you know like the freeway, streets, schools, etc., he should pay his fair share. What is his fair share...not going to debate that...but here's a funny cartoon that someone else dropped on BI awhile ago. Good stuff.

mvargus;842066911 said:

---

This article isn't really a surprise to me. After all consider France where the government there proposed and passed a new tax rate that put the top level at 75% of all income over $1 million, and then had VAT and wealth taxes on top of that. The most publicized departure was ther iconic actor Gerard D. [I don't remember how to spell his last name], but they also lost several very wealthy business owners who bolted from the country before the tax took effect.

However, the responses here also don't surprise me. It seems to be a combinatoin of envy that Phil M has made so much money playing what many consider a silly game, and a near terror that others might emulate him.

For me, the question comes down to the simple proposition, do I consider the money Phil M makes his before it's taxed or am I a collectivist who believes that people only "deserve" whatever money the government decides not to extort from them. As you can tell by my previous sentence, I consider the earnings to be Phil M's and he has the right to find ways to keep as much of the money as he can.

In fact, if you look at economic history it isn't until after Karl Marx wrote his manifesto that people tried to say that business income belonged to anyone other than the person who invested in, built, and ran that particular business And you really have to look at the last 50 years or so to find people really pushing the idea that a business should only be allowed to keep what money the government deigns to leave it.

And most people seem to forget that many major revolutions over the years were because governments started to take too much from the productive class and failed to provide value for the taxes. It's clear that there is a growing group of people who believe that most current western governements are starting to slide down this slope. And I cannot figure out which way things will spin.

But, in the end this whole episode is just like the ending of a Gilbert and Sullivan operetta. "Full of sound and fury and signifying nothing." The actions of one man will mean little in the current economy, and we have no way of knowing what the future will bring. Personally I doubt that the current government of this state will provide a positive boost to the economy. What little I'm hearing is all propositoins which will lower incomes across the state and almost certainly result in tax revenues dropping over the next 2-3 years (in constant dollars). But what can anyone do. The current set of kleptocrats are in office for the next 2 years, and will almost certianly be relected in landslide elections in 2014 even if the economy is in a tailspin. I just try to improve my personal economic situation every day and ignore the rest.

---

I read that lots of multimillionaires wind up a lot better off down there.

clipman;842066571 said:

---

NV - well put. Whatever short term benefit the state gets will be offset by many of those businesses & individuals leaving over the next few years. Those with wealth are more portable and moving away from CA where taxes go up to 13-14% becomes an easy decision. Unfortunately the folks in Sacramento are idiots.

---

[COLOR="Blue"][SIZE="2"]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_high-income_effective_tax_rates.png

Boo-Frickin'-Hooo for the poor oppressed rich class !! They took home 93% of the wealth recently but, ask them to contribute to the "general welfare of the society", they start screaming and crying like a kid whose ball has been taken by a bully !!

The truth is: wages for the middle class have stagnated for over 30 years. The minimum wage has lost 30% of buying power over the past 20 years. Tax rates for the rich are half of what they were under "Saint Reagan" who raised taxes in California far more that Gov. Brown has !!

These corporations who want to abandon California to increase their "bottom line", while using every tax avoidance scheme they paid legislators to provide them, can leave and take their minimum wage jobs with them.

As for Phil ... he was educated at a state-supported school, all expenses paid, and he continues to achieve more wealth using a tax code severly slanted to the rich. Do you seriously think he will pay at the TOP TAX RATE?? If he does, he needs to get better accountants !!! I don't feel sorry for him !! Perhaps he ought to drop to his knees and thank this country for a livelihood made by doing something that a majority of us pay dearly to play for recreation !!

So I say, please, take your sorry a$$ outta here and don't let the doorknob hit ya' where the good Lord split ya" !!![/SIZE][/COLOR]

Originally Posted by mvargus:

"...I consider the money Phil M makes his before it's taxed or am I a collectivist who believes that people only "deserve" whatever money the government decides not to extort from them. As you can tell by my previous sentence, I consider the earnings to be Phil M's and he has the right to find ways to keep as much of the money as he can... .

---

So, what you are saying (?) is that there our citizens of this Country that are so self-sufficient and live in such a vacuum...

...that they have no need of the soldiers who protect us, roads, fire protection, police protection, schools, traffic lights, care for the disabled amongst us, public transportation, bridges, levees, disaster relief, etcetera, etcetera (=all of the latter and more which COSTS money...that comes from citizen taxpayers)?

Interesting...

tommie317;842066922 said:

---

Oh no, a tax revolution is about to begin! How big of a militia can phil mickelson and gerard depardieu form?

---

[COLOR="Blue"][SIZE="2"]Note that the peak of the graph is during the Reagan years !![/SIZE][/COLOR]

*