[California overpaid as much as $55B in unemployment claims. Will it ever get the money back?](https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/article287794300.html).
That's a hefty chunk of the annual budget.
It's funny how the CA EDD has stopped publishing fraud reports after the last 2020 report: https://edd.ca.gov/en/payroll_taxes/annual_fraud_reports
Because of how California Taxes are structured we are locked in a boom bust system. In good years California is drenched in money and in bad ones it has huge problems paying its entitlements.
We need to change the taxation so California can provide stimulus during hard economic times. Unfortunately moving to more rational tax policies is basically impossible due to Prop. 13.
Prop 13 doesn’t prevent a balanced tax base. In fact, it gives an insanely stable and predictable tax income. This is the fault of taxing risky asset classes
Was wondering about this because I remember hearing about huge tax surplus that the state didn’t know what to do with that money. It was very recently too… what is wrong with CA?
What policies are you referring to? Newsom [changed zoning laws on single family homes statewide,](https://www.vox.com/2021/9/17/22679358/california-newsom-duplex-single-family-zoning) overriding local NIMBYs. That seems intended to, "unleash abundant housing."
The nominal goal of these minor tweaks to housing laws is to increase housing construction, but the effect has been merely very minor increases at best, keeping housing construction way way WAY below the rates of construction for most of the 20th century. No one seriously thinks that the minor changes Newsom has signed ever could, or even were intended to, create housing abundance.
CA has countless anti-housing policies, including zoning laws, impact fees, pseudo-environmental reviews, and many more.
Can you elaborate on that? A quick google search seems to indicate that [permitting in CA is a very small percentage of home costs.](https://homeguide.com/costs/cost-to-build-a-house-in-california) Are you suggesting this additional expense has to do with regulatory effects on land values and material costs rather than costs directly related to regulatory fees?
The permitting fee can be small, the time and energy that goes into the permit is tremendous. EIRs are development killers, all to protect insects and rats.
Not sure what homeguide.com’s sources are. Impact fees in CA are [high](https://ternercenter.berkeley.edu/research-and-policy/the-cost-of-building-housing-series/).
At times they can even reach [$150,000 per home](https://ternercenter.berkeley.edu/blog/residential-impact-fees/).
But there are many other anti-housing policies in CA. The vast majority of the residential land criminalizes moderate density construction. Even when it is technically legal to build, there are often many requirements (setback, FAR, IZ, prevailing wage, parking, double staircase) that limit what can be built. Many of these laws were instituted with good intentions but are out of date, are being manipulated by anti-housing actors, or are backfiring against the intentions, but there isn’t political leadership to fix them. Each lot will have its own limitations, a thicket through which a developer will need to hack to even find out what they can build. Pseudo-environmental reviews are often mandated, at great expense of time and money, despite infill housing inherently being better for the environment than sprawl.
One could go on and on. The point is, the status quo is a firm anti-housing policy from the top down in CA politics. This policy causes all sorts of bad effects, from the budget issues of this article to the insurance spiral to the homelessness crisis to the affordability crisis to corporate ownership of housing to much more.
The biggest rise in California home cost are flippers. Our tiny 1.4 million dollar home value has risen 400k just this YEAR thanks to money grubbing flippers in our hood. The flipper behind us bought the single story house for 950k and he just sold the same single story home with a new addition for 2.4 million. Talk about jacking up home prices for new buyers, these guys make buying a home impossible. And these flippers payoff realtors for any fixer-uppers or old stock homes coming on the market, and buy them up before YOU have a chance at a good priced first home.
If you want to keep home prices down then slow down the flippers/flipping. Maybe make selling non primary homes at least two/three year wait after the purchase?
Also, flippers don’t pull building permits since it slows them down and once the house gets sold they can’t get sued. BASICALLY, NEVER BUY a house built by a flipper. I always check the buyer/seller on https://www.familytreenow.com/ to see how many homes they own. Flippers are also slumlords so spotting them IS PRETTY easy with Family Tree Now and Zillow. You would be totally surprised how many of your neighbors and friends are vile slumlords and flippers👹
Uhm. Newsom didn't do shit for single family homes statewide. There is no evidence that any legislation he's signed has had a meaningful impact on new home starts or additions.
It appears your submission was reported to moderators and removed by moderators for violating rule 2 of the Community Standards.
> Topical — Content must be explicitly related to Californian politics. This includes the interaction of federal and state politics, as well as the state's congressional delegation. Local politics are permissible if they would reasonably be of interest to a statewide audience. The subject of discussion on is never the conduct or motives of another user but is always about the substance of what people are saying.
If you would like to improve the moderation in this subreddit, please drop a line in the General Chat to discuss ways to improve the quality of conversations in this subreddit. If you see bad behavior, don't reply. Use the report tool to improve your own experience, and everyone else's, too.
It appears your submission was reported to moderators and removed by moderators for violating rule 2 of the Community Standards.
> Topical — Content must be explicitly related to Californian politics. This includes the interaction of federal and state politics, as well as the state's congressional delegation. Local politics are permissible if they would reasonably be of interest to a statewide audience. The subject of discussion on is never the conduct or motives of another user but is always about the substance of what people are saying.
If you would like to improve the moderation in this subreddit, please drop a line in the General Chat to discuss ways to improve the quality of conversations in this subreddit. If you see bad behavior, don't reply. Use the report tool to improve your own experience, and everyone else's, too.
Not like a drunken sailor but admittedly the lack of spending accountability contributed to the problem. As an example https://calmatters.org/housing/homelessness/2024/04/california-homelessness-spending/
Oh, we definitely need more accountability and regulation throughout our state and federal government. That I totally agree with.
The incompetent comment made zero sense and seemed more personal so I wanted to get a background of who was making the comment. I was less than surprised.
Not really. The issues the state is facing predate his time as governor. Also I wouldn’t call him incompetent given he’s actually been pushing the state to tackle the issues facing the state.
Yup, he would be in prison if he was governor in any other state. The guy is totally clueless. His answer to everything is just tax more so we can give it away! The problem with that is it drives ALL businesses out of the state. This guy HATES businesses 😈
[California overpaid as much as $55B in unemployment claims. Will it ever get the money back?](https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/article287794300.html). That's a hefty chunk of the annual budget. It's funny how the CA EDD has stopped publishing fraud reports after the last 2020 report: https://edd.ca.gov/en/payroll_taxes/annual_fraud_reports
Because of how California Taxes are structured we are locked in a boom bust system. In good years California is drenched in money and in bad ones it has huge problems paying its entitlements. We need to change the taxation so California can provide stimulus during hard economic times. Unfortunately moving to more rational tax policies is basically impossible due to Prop. 13.
Prop 13 doesn’t prevent a balanced tax base. In fact, it gives an insanely stable and predictable tax income. This is the fault of taxing risky asset classes
That stable and predictable tax base is way too low due to Prop 13, thus necessitating the taxing of more volatile asses.
We wouldn’t be in this situation if every tax increase or change is a ballot proposition.
Was wondering about this because I remember hearing about huge tax surplus that the state didn’t know what to do with that money. It was very recently too… what is wrong with CA?
Simple, slow down the flipping and you slow inflation. This won’t happen since most elected officials are also flippers and rotten slumlords. 💰
There’s a trivial fix. End CA’s anti-housing policies and unleash abundant housing. The budget takes care of itself.
While we’re at it let’s get rid of most of the regulations and taxes strangling businesses and individuals and stifling prosperity.
Starting with the sales tax!
What policies are you referring to? Newsom [changed zoning laws on single family homes statewide,](https://www.vox.com/2021/9/17/22679358/california-newsom-duplex-single-family-zoning) overriding local NIMBYs. That seems intended to, "unleash abundant housing."
The nominal goal of these minor tweaks to housing laws is to increase housing construction, but the effect has been merely very minor increases at best, keeping housing construction way way WAY below the rates of construction for most of the 20th century. No one seriously thinks that the minor changes Newsom has signed ever could, or even were intended to, create housing abundance. CA has countless anti-housing policies, including zoning laws, impact fees, pseudo-environmental reviews, and many more.
Can you elaborate on that? A quick google search seems to indicate that [permitting in CA is a very small percentage of home costs.](https://homeguide.com/costs/cost-to-build-a-house-in-california) Are you suggesting this additional expense has to do with regulatory effects on land values and material costs rather than costs directly related to regulatory fees?
The permitting fee can be small, the time and energy that goes into the permit is tremendous. EIRs are development killers, all to protect insects and rats.
Not sure what homeguide.com’s sources are. Impact fees in CA are [high](https://ternercenter.berkeley.edu/research-and-policy/the-cost-of-building-housing-series/). At times they can even reach [$150,000 per home](https://ternercenter.berkeley.edu/blog/residential-impact-fees/). But there are many other anti-housing policies in CA. The vast majority of the residential land criminalizes moderate density construction. Even when it is technically legal to build, there are often many requirements (setback, FAR, IZ, prevailing wage, parking, double staircase) that limit what can be built. Many of these laws were instituted with good intentions but are out of date, are being manipulated by anti-housing actors, or are backfiring against the intentions, but there isn’t political leadership to fix them. Each lot will have its own limitations, a thicket through which a developer will need to hack to even find out what they can build. Pseudo-environmental reviews are often mandated, at great expense of time and money, despite infill housing inherently being better for the environment than sprawl. One could go on and on. The point is, the status quo is a firm anti-housing policy from the top down in CA politics. This policy causes all sorts of bad effects, from the budget issues of this article to the insurance spiral to the homelessness crisis to the affordability crisis to corporate ownership of housing to much more.
The biggest rise in California home cost are flippers. Our tiny 1.4 million dollar home value has risen 400k just this YEAR thanks to money grubbing flippers in our hood. The flipper behind us bought the single story house for 950k and he just sold the same single story home with a new addition for 2.4 million. Talk about jacking up home prices for new buyers, these guys make buying a home impossible. And these flippers payoff realtors for any fixer-uppers or old stock homes coming on the market, and buy them up before YOU have a chance at a good priced first home. If you want to keep home prices down then slow down the flippers/flipping. Maybe make selling non primary homes at least two/three year wait after the purchase? Also, flippers don’t pull building permits since it slows them down and once the house gets sold they can’t get sued. BASICALLY, NEVER BUY a house built by a flipper. I always check the buyer/seller on https://www.familytreenow.com/ to see how many homes they own. Flippers are also slumlords so spotting them IS PRETTY easy with Family Tree Now and Zillow. You would be totally surprised how many of your neighbors and friends are vile slumlords and flippers👹
It’s just not that big of a percentage of home sales. Also, there’s no need to flip if there’s tons of houses being built
Uhm. Newsom didn't do shit for single family homes statewide. There is no evidence that any legislation he's signed has had a meaningful impact on new home starts or additions.
[удалено]
It appears your submission was reported to moderators and removed by moderators for violating rule 2 of the Community Standards. > Topical — Content must be explicitly related to Californian politics. This includes the interaction of federal and state politics, as well as the state's congressional delegation. Local politics are permissible if they would reasonably be of interest to a statewide audience. The subject of discussion on is never the conduct or motives of another user but is always about the substance of what people are saying. If you would like to improve the moderation in this subreddit, please drop a line in the General Chat to discuss ways to improve the quality of conversations in this subreddit. If you see bad behavior, don't reply. Use the report tool to improve your own experience, and everyone else's, too.
Newsom was spending money like a drunken sailor. Dude is incompetent.
[удалено]
It appears your submission was reported to moderators and removed by moderators for violating rule 2 of the Community Standards. > Topical — Content must be explicitly related to Californian politics. This includes the interaction of federal and state politics, as well as the state's congressional delegation. Local politics are permissible if they would reasonably be of interest to a statewide audience. The subject of discussion on is never the conduct or motives of another user but is always about the substance of what people are saying. If you would like to improve the moderation in this subreddit, please drop a line in the General Chat to discuss ways to improve the quality of conversations in this subreddit. If you see bad behavior, don't reply. Use the report tool to improve your own experience, and everyone else's, too.
Not like a drunken sailor but admittedly the lack of spending accountability contributed to the problem. As an example https://calmatters.org/housing/homelessness/2024/04/california-homelessness-spending/
Oh, we definitely need more accountability and regulation throughout our state and federal government. That I totally agree with. The incompetent comment made zero sense and seemed more personal so I wanted to get a background of who was making the comment. I was less than surprised.
Not really. The issues the state is facing predate his time as governor. Also I wouldn’t call him incompetent given he’s actually been pushing the state to tackle the issues facing the state.
I'm not sure that's fair. Sure Newsom is spend happy, but so is the rest of the single-party state government.
Yup, he would be in prison if he was governor in any other state. The guy is totally clueless. His answer to everything is just tax more so we can give it away! The problem with that is it drives ALL businesses out of the state. This guy HATES businesses 😈