>> Now I know the article is just whining from someone who doesn't want to pay taxes.
Do you know anyone who does want to pay taxes? Also, when did ad hominem arguments become valid?
>> job-killing regulation
The US Chamber of Commerce rates California as the worst state in the nation for business. 50th out of 50. Intel, a CA-based corporation, just announced the creation of 7,000 new jobs. In Oregon, Nevada, Arizona, and New Mexico.
>> public sector unions...
The interchange at I-880 and CA-237 in Silicon Valley took 6 years to complete (yes, you read that right). Just a bit further north, the interchange at 880 and Mission took at least 5 years. Can you say "union featherbedding"?
>> advocacy groups
Enviro impact fees add $7,000 to a house in Texas. In CA, they add over $75,000.
Yes, sure, the author's statements are technically true. The problem is that the arguments are very ill-considered.
You can say any law is job-killing -- a legal prohibition on murder puts all the assassins out of business. Damn the government! As for the "enviro impact fees", that's life. We can't just keep raping the environment and expect our kids to fix the problem. We need to pay for it now.
Nobody wants to pay taxes, but if we want to keep our society around for more than a few more years, it's a necessary evil.
Do you know anyone who does want to pay taxes? Also, when did ad hominem arguments become valid?
>> job-killing regulation
The US Chamber of Commerce rates California as the worst state in the nation for business. 50th out of 50. Intel, a CA-based corporation, just announced the creation of 7,000 new jobs. In Oregon, Nevada, Arizona, and New Mexico.
>> public sector unions... The interchange at I-880 and CA-237 in Silicon Valley took 6 years to complete (yes, you read that right). Just a bit further north, the interchange at 880 and Mission took at least 5 years. Can you say "union featherbedding"?
>> advocacy groups
Enviro impact fees add $7,000 to a house in Texas. In CA, they add over $75,000.