CALIFORNIA’S
PROPOSITION 13 - BUT WHO SHOULD PAY FOR THE MASSIVE LA RAZA
WELFARE STATE THE DEMOCRAT PARTY HAS BUILT TO KEEP THEM JUMPING OUR BORDERS AND
JOBS?
California’s Proposition
13, the successful 1978 initiative that limited property-tax increases, has
long been considered the third rail of the state’s politics. Former governor
Jerry Brown, coasting to victory in the 2014 gubernatorial election, called the
constitutional amendment “a sacred doctrine that should never be questioned.”
But now a coalition of public-sector unions, school districts, progressive
advocacy groups, and Democratic politicians are betting that they can overturn
at least half of Prop. 13, in the process enacting a huge tax increase on state
businesses during a steep recession. Theirs promises to be a hard-fought
battle, pitting rich unions against well-financed business groups—a contest
that will prove decisive for California’s future. If the union-led effort
succeeds, it will show that the state has made a pivotal, if not permanent,
move to the left, and the rest of Prop. 13 will likely be the progressive
movement’s next target.
Prop. 13 limited the
amount that commercial and residential properties could be taxed in California
to 1 percent of value. Crucially, the constitutional amendment also restricted
reassessments of value to when a property changes hands, or when construction
enhances the value of a home or commercial property. Several trends encouraged
public support for the proposition, including the rapid growth of California
government, skyrocketing local taxes, and a series of state supreme court decisions that
redistributed property taxes in some wealthy districts to poorer areas.
Watching property assessments soar during the inflationary 1970s, older
homeowners strongly supported the initiative.
Though Prop. 13 has been
a boon for some owners, especially those who have retained their properties for
a long time, it hasn’t restrained the overall growth of taxes in the Golden
State, which ranks 11th
in total tax burden on individuals, in part because of its steeply progressive
income tax—the highest rate in the nation. The Tax Foundation also rates California
as the third-worst business climate among states because of its combined tax
burden—including its corporate, sales, and personal income taxes. When you
consider the state’s heavy-handed regulations, too, the business outlook
already looks glum. According to a survey by Chief Executive, CEOs rate California the nation’s worst
business environment.
Yet businesses are the
target of this new ballot initiative, too, which would create so-called split
rolls in California, with commercial properties getting assessed based on
market value, while residences would continue to be protected from increases
until owners sell them. Advocates note that businesses tend to hold on to their
properties longer than most homeowners, giving some a huge tax break because
they’re paying taxes based on sometimes decades-old assessments. Supporters
also frame this in terms of fairness. At one rally, they carried signs
that read, “Taxing the Wealthy Keeps the Economy Healthy.” The problem: the
current initiative isn’t about reforming the state’s taxes by raising some
money in exchange for tax relief elsewhere. Instead, the new initiative would
amount to an estimated $12 billion tax hike on businesses that own properties.
Supporters conceived of
the initiative before the Covid-19 lockdowns, but they’re not backing off,
though nearly 5 million Californians filed for unemployment claims in the first
two months of the crisis. Passing the initiative “was critical a few months
ago,” Oakland mayor Libby Schaaf said.
“Now, it is a matter of life and death for many California families.”
Business groups, already worried about
outmigration of firms from California to less expensive places, say that the
state would lose one of its last selling points in retaining firms. “From the
point of view of attracting and retaining businesses and jobs, the power of
Prop. 13 was in allowing California to tell a business [that] . . . [w]ith
California, you’re safe” from reassessments, former state director of finance
Tom Campbell wrote earlier
this year. If the initiative passes, some of the biggest losers would be
tourist businesses like Disneyland, which have already seen revenues plummet
because of the shutdowns. Meantime, taxpayer groups worry that the latest
assault on Prop. 13 indicates that homeowners are the next target. “If the
business community loses its Prop. 13 protection,” says Jon
Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, a leading
supporter of Prop. 13, “we’re next on the menu.”
The battle promises to be
costly. Advocates of the initiative have already raised nearly $20 million, led
by a $6 million contribution by the California Teachers Association and $3.5
million from the SEIU’s state council. So far, opponents of the repeal effort
have mustered $3 million in donations, including $1.5 million from Howard
Jarvis Taxpayers. Polls taken before the crisis showed the repeal initiative
enjoying about an eight-point advantage, but the margin narrowed as the economy
crashed. The real sense of how the initiative will perform won’t become clear
until more fund-raising dollars pour into electioneering.
If Prop. 13 is sacred
doctrine in California, this November’s election amounts to nothing less than a
crusade—for both sides.
“The Democrats had abandoned their
working-class base to chase what they pretended was a racial group when what
they were actually chasing was the momentum of unlimited migration”.
DANIEL GREENFIELD / FRONTPAGE
MAGAZINE
A DACA amnesty would put more citizen
children of illegal aliens — known as “anchor babies” — on federal welfare,
as Breitbart News reported, while American taxpayers would
be left potentially with a $26 billion bill.
Additionally, about one-in-five DACA
illegal aliens, after an amnesty, would end up on food stamps, while at
least one-in-seven would go on Medicaid. JOHN BINDER
THE NEW PRIVILEGED CLASS: Illegals!
This is why you work From Jan - May
paying taxes to the government ....with the rest of the calendar year is money
for you and your family.
Take, for example, an illegal alien
with a wife and five children. He takes a job for $5.00 or 6.00/hour. At that
wage, with six dependents, he pays no income tax, yet at the end of the year,
if he files an Income Tax Return, with his fake Social Security number, he gets
an "earned income credit" of up to $3,200..... free.
He qualifies for Section 8 housing
and subsidized rent.
He qualifies for food stamps.
He qualifies for free (no
deductible, no co-pay) health care.
His children get free breakfasts
and lunches at school.
He requires bilingual teachers and
books.
He qualifies for relief from high
energy bills.
If they are or become, aged, blind
or disabled, they qualify for SSI.
Once qualified for SSI they can
qualify for Medicare. All of this is at (our) taxpayer's expense.
He doesn't worry about car
insurance, life insurance, or homeowners insurance.
Taxpayers provide Spanish language
signs, bulletins and printed material.
He and his family receive the
equivalent of $20.00 to $30.00/hour in benefits.
Working Americans are lucky to have
$5.00 or $6.00/hour left after Paying their bills and his.
The American taxpayers also pay for
increased crime, graffiti and trash clean-up.
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2018/08/californias-privileged-class-mexican.html
Cheap labor? YEAH RIGHT! Wake up
people!
JOE LEGAL v LA RAZA JOSE ILLEGAL
Here’s how it breaks down; will make you
want to be an illegal!
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/05/joe-american-legal-vs-la-raza-jose.html
THE TAX-FREE MEXICAN UNDERGROUND ECONOMY
IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY IS ESTIMATED TO BE IN EXCESS OF $2 BILLION YEARLY!
Staggering expensive "cheap" Mexican labor
did not build this once great nation! Look what it has done to Mexico. It's all
about keeping wages depressed and passing along the true cost of the invasion, their
welfare, and crime tidal wave costs to the backs of the American people!
AMERICA: YOU’RE BETTER
OFF BEING AN ILLEGAL!!!
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2018/06/in-america-it-is-better-to-be-illegal.html
This
annual income for an impoverished American family is $10,000 less than the more
than $34,500 in federal funds which are spent on each unaccompanied minor
border crosser.
A study by Tom Wong
of the University of California at San Diego discovered that more than 25
percent of DACA-enrolled illegal aliens in the program have anchor babies. That
totals about 200,000 anchor babies who are the children of DACA-enrolled
illegal aliens. This does not include the anchor babies of DACA-qualified
illegal aliens. JOHN BINDER
“The
Democrats had abandoned their working-class base to chase what they pretended
was a racial group when what they were actually chasing was the momentum of
unlimited migration”. DANIEL GREENFIELD / FRONT PAGE MAGAZINE
As
Breitbart News has reported,
U.S. households headed by foreign-born residents use nearly twice the welfare
of households headed by native-born Americans.
Simultaneously, illegal immigration next year is on track
to soar to the highest level in a decade, with a potential 600,000
border crossers expected.
“More than
750 million people want to migrate to another country permanently, according to
Gallup research published Monday, as 150 world leaders sign up to the controversial
UN global compact which critics say makes migration a human right.”
VIRGINIA HALE
For
example, a DACA amnesty would cost American taxpayers about $26 billion, more than the border
wall, and that does not include the money taxpayers would have to fork up to
subsidize the legal immigrant relatives of DACA illegal aliens.
Exclusive–Steve Camarota:
Every Illegal Alien Costs Americans $70K Over Their Lifetime
Every
illegal alien, over the course of their lifetime, costs American taxpayers
about $70,000, Center for Immigration Studies Director of Research Steve
Camarota says.
During an interview
with SiriusXM Patriot’s Breitbart News Daily, Camarota said his research has revealed the
enormous financial burden that illegal immigration has on America’s working and
middle class taxpayers in terms of public services, depressed wages, and
welfare.
“In a person’s
lifetime, I’ve estimated that an illegal border crosser might cost taxpayers …
maybe over $70,000 a year as a net cost,” Camarota said. “And that excludes the
cost of their U.S.-born children, which gets pretty big when you add that in.”
LISTEN:
“Once [an illegal
alien] has a child, they can receive cash welfare on behalf of their U.S.-born
children,” Camarota explained. “Once they have a child, they can live in public
housing. Once they have a child, they can receive food stamps on behalf of that
child. That’s how that works.”
Camarota said the
education levels of illegal aliens, border crossers, and legal immigrants are
largely to blame for the high level of welfare usage by the f0reign-born
population in the U.S., noting that new arrivals tend to compete for jobs
against America’s poor and working class communities.
In past waves of mass
immigration, Camarota said, the U.S. did not have an expansive welfare system.
Today’s ever-growing welfare system, coupled with mass illegal and legal
immigration levels, is “extremely problematic,” according to Camarota, for
American taxpayers.
The RAISE Act — reintroduced in the
Senate by Senators Tom Cotton (R-AR), David Perdue (R-GA), and
Josh Hawley (R-MO) — would cut legal immigration levels in half and convert the
immigration system to favor well-educated foreign nationals, thus relieving
American workers and taxpayers of the nearly five-decade-long wave of booming
immigration. Currently, mass legal immigration redistributes the
wealth of working and middle class Americans to the country’s top
earners.
“Virtually none of that
existed in 1900 during the last great wave of immigration, when we also took in
a number of poor people. We didn’t have a well-developed welfare state,”
Camarota continued:
We’re not going to stop
[the welfare state] tomorrow. So in that context, bringing in less
educated people who are poor is extremely problematic for public coffers, for
taxpayers in a way that it wasn’t in 1900 because the roads weren’t even paved
between the cities in 1900. It’s just a totally different world. And that’s
the point of the RAISE Act is to sort of bring in line immigration policy with
the reality say of a large government … and a welfare state. [Emphasis
added]
The immigrants are not
all coming to get welfare and they don’t immediately sign up, but over
time, an enormous fraction sign their children up. It’s likely the case
that of the U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants, more than half
are signed up for Medicaid — which is our most expensive program.
[Emphasis added]
As Breitbart News has reported, U.S. households
headed by foreign-born residents use nearly twice the welfare of households
headed by native-born Americans.
Every year the U.S.
admits more than 1.5 million foreign nationals, with the vast majority
deriving from chain migration. In 2017, the foreign-born population reached a record high of 44.5
million. By 2023, the Center for Immigration Studies estimates that the legal
and illegal immigrant population of the U.S. will make up nearly 15
percent of the entire U.S. population.
Breitbart News Daily airs on SiriusXM
Patriot 125 weekdays from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. Eastern.
John Binder is a
reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.
Another
line they cut into: Illegals get free public housing as impoverished Americans
wait
Want some
perspective on why so many blue sanctuary cities have so many homeless
encampments hovering around?
Try the reality
that illegal immigrants are routinely given free public housing by the U.S.,
based on the fact that they are uneducated, unskilled, and largely
unemployable. Those are the criteria, and now
importing poverty has never been easier. Shockingly, this comes as
millions of poor Americans are out in the cold awaiting that housing that
the original law was intended to help.
Thus, the
tent cities, and by coincidence, the worst of these emerging shantytowns are in
blue sanctuary cities loaded with illegal immigrants - Orange County, San
Francisco, San Diego, Seattle, New York...Is there a connection? At a minimum,
it's worth looking at.
The Trump
administration's Department of Housing and Urban Development is finally trying
to put a stop to it as 1.5 million illegals prepare to enter the U.S. this
year, and one can only wonder why they didn't do it yesterday.
According
to a report in the Washington
Times:
The plan would scrap Clinton-era regulations that allowed illegal
immigrants to sign up for assistance without having to disclose their status.
Under the new Trump rules, not only would the leaseholder using public housing
have to be an eligible U.S. person, but the government would verify all
applicants through the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE)
database, a federal system that’s used to weed illegal immigrants out of other
welfare programs.
Those already getting HUD assistance would have to go through a new verification,
though it would be over a period of time and wouldn’t all come at once.
“We’ve got our own people to house and need to take care of our
citizens,” an administration official told The Washington Times. “Because of
past loopholes in HUD guidance, illegal aliens were able to live in free public
housing desperately needed by so many of our own citizens. As illegal aliens
attempt to swarm our borders, we’re sending the message that you can’t live off
of American welfare on the taxpayers’ dime.”
The Times
notes that the rules are confusingly contradictary, and some illegal immigrant
families are getting full rides based on just one member being born in the
U.S. The pregnant caravaner who calculatingly slipped across the U.S.
in San Diego late last year, only to have her baby the next day, now, along
with her entire family, gets that free ride on government housing. Plus lots
of cheesy news coverage about how
heartwarming it all is. That's a lot cheaper than any housing she's going to
find back in Tegucigalpa.
Migrants
would be almost fools not to take the offering.
The problem
of course is that Americans who paid into these programs, and the subset who
find themselves in dire circumstances, are in fact being shut out.
The
fill-the-pews Catholic archbishops may love to tout the virtues of illegal
immigrants and wave signs about getting 'justice" for them, but the
hard fact here is that these foreign nationals are stealing from
others as they take this housing benefit under legal technicalities. That's not
a good thing under anyone's theological law. But hypocrisy is comfortable
ground for the entire open borders lobby as they shamelessly
celebrate lawbreaking at the border, leaving the impoverished of the U.S.
out cold.
The Trump
administration is trying to have this outrage fixed by summer. But don't
imagine it won't be without the open-borders lawsuits, the media sob stories,
the leftist judges, and the scolding clerics.
Los Angeles County Pays Over a Billion in
Welfare to Illegal Aliens Over Two Years
BY MASOOMA HAQ
In 2015 and 2016, Los Angeles County paid
nearly $1.3 billion in welfare funds to illegal aliens and their families. That
figure amounts to 25 percent of the total spent on the county’s entire needy
population, according to Fox News.
The state of California is home to more illegal aliens than any other
state in the country. Approximately one in five illegal aliens lives in
California, Pew reported.
Approximately a quarter of California’s 4 million illegal immigrants
reside in Los Angeles County. The county allows illegal immigrant parents with
children born in the United States to seek welfare and food stamp benefits.
The welfare benefits data acquired by Fox News comes from the Los
Angeles County Department of Public Social Services and shows welfare and food
stamp costs for the county’s entire population were $3.1 billion in 2015, $2.9
billion in 2016.
The data also shows that during the first five months of 2017, more than
60,000 families received a total of $181 million.
Over 58,000 families received a total of $602 million in benefits in
2015 and more than 64,000 families received a total of $675 million in 2016.
Robert Rector, a Heritage Foundation senior
fellow who studies poverty and illegal immigration, told Fox the costs represent “the tip of
the iceberg.”
“They get $3 in benefits for every $1 they spend,” Rector said. It can
cost the government a total of $24,000 per year per family to pay for things
like education, police, fire, medical, and subsidized housing.
In February of 2019, the Los Angeles city council signed a resolution
making it a sanctuary city. The resolution did not provide any new legal
protections to their immigrants, but instead solidified existing policies.
In October 2017, former California governor
Jerry Brown signed SB 54 into law. This bill made
California, in Brown’s own words, a “sanctuary state.” The Justice Department
filed a lawsuit against the State of California over the law. A federal
judge dismissed that suit in July. SB 54 took effect on Jan. 1, 2018.
According to Center for Immigration Studies, “The new law does many things: It forbids
all localities from cooperating with ICE detainer notices, it bars any law
enforcement officer from participating in the popular 287(g) program, and it
prevents state and local police from inquiring about individuals’ immigration
status.”
Some counties in California have protested its implementation and joined
the Trump administration’s lawsuit against the state.
California’s campaign to provide public services to illegal immigrants
did not end with the exit of Jerry Brown. His successor, Gavin Newsom, is
just as focused as Brown in funding programs for illegal residents at the
expense of California taxpayers.
California’s budget earmarks millions of dollars annually to the One
California program, which provides free legal assistance to all aliens,
including those facing deportation, and makes California’s public universities
easier for illegal-alien students to attend.
According to the Fiscal Burden of Illegal
Immigration on United States Taxpayers 2017 report, for the estimated 12.5 million illegal
immigrants living in the country, the resulting cost is a $116
billion burden on the national economy and taxpayers each year, after
deducting the $19 billion in taxes paid by some of those illegal immigrants.
BLOG: MOST FIGURES PUT THE NUMBER OF
ILLEGALS IN THE U.S. AT ABOUT 40 MILLION. WHEN THESE PEOPLE ARE HANDED AMNESTY,
THEY ARE LEGALLY ENTITLED TO BRING UP THE REST OF THEIR FAMILY EFFECTIVELY
LEAVING MEXICO DESERTED.
New data from the U.S. Census Bureau shows that more than 22 million
non-citizens now live in the United States.
No comments:
Post a Comment