PDA

View Full Version : Would "shall issue" change CA's bleak tax basis future?


NoJoke
01-03-2013, 2:23 PM
Companies are leaving.
Families are leaving.
Housing market has taken a huge hit from foreclosures etc.

Could "shall issue" turn it around - at least a bit?
Would our beautiful beaches and the right to self defense be enough to get people to reconsider this state as their home? I certainly doubt any liberal would leave due to "shall issue" - I think in time they might even figure out that life is just a little better-safer and more polite (an armed society is a polite society).

211275
01-03-2013, 2:28 PM
Doubtful. People are FAR more concerned with tax increases, job security, the housing market and the absurd cost of living here. Being able to carry a gun is probably the furthest thing from their mind when considering moving in or out of the state.

ScottB
01-03-2013, 2:30 PM
More Calgunner tunnel vision.

For the vast majority of people, shall issue is the split end on the a-hair of a pimple on a gnat's butt

stix213
01-03-2013, 2:30 PM
I'd hope for the opposite, that the anti gun moochers in this state would move to New Jersey.

bwiese
01-03-2013, 3:14 PM
Only the low performers are leaving (at least for now). My phone is ringing off the hook; Bay Area real estate
prices are rising, and high-grade restaurants are packed.

Joe's Tire & Brake having problems can be as much his fault for stupid business practices as it is on economy.

Poor economies are magnified by dumb/uneducated; Silicon Valley is growing [and pays for much of the rest of
CA and many tax-draining red state's welfare.]

Also, research on the supposed egress from California appears to be less a full egress than in fair part CA being used
as a way station for legal immiigrants to get their footing and then move to whatever other areas they choose.

As to your immediate question, revenues from carry permit issuance - even at $1000 per pop - would comparatively
be a bacteria on a pimple on a tit of a flat midget hooker, relative to the 7th/8th largest economy in the world.

Remember that even in CA counties that are effectively shall-issue, a max of 2% of registered voters even apply,
even when they know the county issues. We need to take off our tunnel-vision blinders.

drd
01-03-2013, 3:38 PM
"Only the low performers are leaving (at least for now). "

Interesting comment to me because I left rather recently and don't consider me or my wife to be "low performers". I had my house on the market for 1 1/2 years before I got out so the planning had been going on for some time.

The primary reason for leaving was taxes. Even though prop-13 existed my property taxes increased 50% over the last 12 years up to $33,000/year. My wife and I are retired and unlike the proverbial on-a-fixed-income retirees we are on a no-income retirement. Basically, our savings are our retirement until we become old enough to collect whatever is left of our social security.

The truck driver for the moving company said he is full time busy moving people like us out of the state (larger homes - ours was 5,500 square feet) and moving into state people moving into apartments. He said it had been this way for the past two years for his business.

Going shall-issue would not bring us back though it would make me a lot happier for my daughter who still lives in California.

I moved to California in 1992 for work and loved the state. I gradually became disillusioned as the state became more nanny-like, more intolerant of conservative opinions and more likely to pass laws that would take what I earned or wanted away from me.

The California gun laws, in my opinion, are a symptom of a larger problem. That larger problem is a belief, becoming more systemic in the state legislature, that the government knows what's best for you and if you disagree then you are, at best, uneducated and, at worst, simply deranged. Combine that with the apathy by many and you have a recipe for disaster. I worked in Silicon Valley for a large company and I was shocked by the lack of knowledge my fellow employees exhibited about issues in general and politics in particular.

I find Arizona to be cheaper, friendlier and easier with fewer requirements to ask permission of my government. But, I do miss California very much. I miss my friends, I miss the landscape, sometimes I miss the weather.

I don't miss being told I'm the problem because I was successful. I don't miss being told I hate children because I don't want to pay even more in taxes for schools.

I wish it was as simple as going shall-issue.

rivraton
01-03-2013, 3:43 PM
I'd hope for the opposite, that the anti gun moochers in this state would move to New Jersey.

WIN / WIN, I'd call it!:D

Moonshine
01-03-2013, 3:51 PM
I'm gonna agree with Bill Weise on this one. There were ALOT of underachievers living off the fat of the land during the real estate boom who had very poor work ethics and judgement but because of low unemployment an plentiful credit they could eek out a comfortable existence.

NotEnufGarage
01-03-2013, 3:58 PM
Only the low performers are leaving (at least for now). My phone is ringing off the hook;

No self-esteem problems for you, eh?

I know many high performers who just aren't willing to split the fruits of their labors to the extent that the state wants them to so they're leaving. In most cases, they're people who came here from somewhere else, started and built a business and now have had enough and are returning to the land of their birth. Many are from Idaho and Montana. I can't blame them. Those states are every bit as beautiful as CA and extend a great deal more freedom to their residents.

donw
01-03-2013, 3:59 PM
"Only the low performers are leaving (at least for now). "

Interesting comment to me because I left rather recently and don't consider me or my wife to be "low performers". I had my house on the market for 1 1/2 years before I got out so the planning had been going on for some time.

The primary reason for leaving was taxes. Even though prop-13 existed my property taxes increased 50% over the last 12 years up to $33,000/year. My wife and I are retired and unlike the proverbial on-a-fixed-income retirees we are on a no-income retirement. Basically, our savings are our retirement until we become old enough to collect whatever is left of our social security.

The truck driver for the moving company said he is full time busy moving people like us out of the state (larger homes - ours was 5,500 square feet) and moving into state people moving into apartments. He said it had been this way for the past two years for his business.

Going shall-issue would not bring us back though it would make me a lot happier for my daughter who still lives in California.

I moved to California in 1992 for work and loved the state. I gradually became disillusioned as the state became more nanny-like, more intolerant of conservative opinions and more likely to pass laws that would take what I earned or wanted away from me.

The California gun laws, in my opinion, are a symptom of a larger problem. That larger problem is a belief, becoming more systemic in the state legislature, that the government knows what's best for you and if you disagree then you are, at best, uneducated and, at worst, simply deranged. Combine that with the apathy by many and you have a recipe for disaster. I worked in Silicon Valley for a large company and I was shocked by the lack of knowledge my fellow employees exhibited about issues in general and politics in particular.

I find Arizona to be cheaper, friendlier and easier with fewer requirements to ask permission of my government. But, I do miss California very much. I miss my friends, I miss the landscape, sometimes I miss the weather.

I don't miss being told I'm the problem because I was successful. I don't miss being told I hate children because I don't want to pay even more in taxes for schools.

I wish it was as simple as going shall-issue.

very compelling.

we had our house on the market for nearly two years and could not sell...we were forced to take another course as a result.

the economic crash of 2008-2009 devastated many...including my wife and myself; the ONLY reason we remain here is the fact that our house is paid for. if this state continues to get even more oppressive to the demands of the left wing "Gimme" crowd, we will be forced to re-locate.

"Shall issue" is a non-issue for me and my wife... being able to survive the economy and the expanding problems of massive tax increases is the issue.

vincewarde
01-03-2013, 11:00 PM
Only the low performers are leaving (at least for now). My phone is ringing off the hook; Bay Area real estate
prices are rising, and high-grade restaurants are packed.

Joe's Tire & Brake having problems can be as much his fault for stupid business practices as it is on economy.

Poor economies are magnified by dumb/uneducated; Silicon Valley is growing [and pays for much of the rest of
CA and many tax-draining red state's welfare.]

Also, research on the supposed egress from California appears to be less a full egress than in fair part CA being used
as a way station for legal immiigrants to get their footing and then move to whatever other areas they choose.

As to your immediate question, revenues from carry permit issuance - even at $1000 per pop - would comparatively
be a bacteria on a pimple on a tit of a flat midget hooker, relative to the 7th/8th largest economy in the world.

Remember that even in CA counties that are effectively shall-issue, a max of 2% of registered voters even apply,
even when they know the county issues. We need to take off our tunnel-vision blinders.

Very happy things are going well for you! I agree 100% with your assessment.

I have to say that my wife is an extended functions dental assistant (RDAEF2) in Auburn, my son is a RDA in Folsom. Both of their offices are way down from pre-2008 levels. We have never seen things this bad in her 35 years in the business. It has to get pretty bad before people don't fix their teeth......... sadly for entirely financial reasons my son will probably move to Idaho where he has been offered the same money. Cost of living makes this a 30% raise. For the same reason, we may not be far behind..... it's not why we are leaving, but the gun laws are nice there.

Librarian
01-03-2013, 11:23 PM
Just to answer the specific question....

There are about 28 million adults in CA who might be eligible.

Using Bill's 2%, which is about what one should expect, we get 560,000. At $1000 each - and the state actually gets $44 - that would be $560 million. The adopted budget for 2012-2013 is 91 BILLION dollars.

0.6% of the current budget might be raised by shall-issue @$1000/LTC.

(Actual $ under current figure is would be $24.6 million to the state, plus $56 million among the issuing agencies - current law allows $100 for local agencies.)

Excelsior
01-03-2013, 11:34 PM
Companies are leaving.
Families are leaving.
Housing market has taken a huge hit from foreclosures etc.

Could "shall issue" turn it around - at least a bit?
Would our beautiful beaches and the right to self defense be enough to get people to reconsider this state as their home? I certainly doubt any liberal would leave due to "shall issue" - I think in time they might even figure out that life is just a little better-safer and more polite (an armed society is a polite society).

I WISH families were leaving! Demand for housing in much of CA is still very strong outside of areas that were horrifically overbuilt like Stockton.

"Shall issue" is a non-issue in this context.

IVC
01-03-2013, 11:55 PM
Only the low performers are leaving (at least for now). My phone is ringing off the hook; Bay Area real estate
prices are rising, and high-grade restaurants are packed.

Talking about tunnel vision :rolleyes:

Poor economies are magnified by dumb/uneducated; Silicon Valley is growing [and pays for much of the rest of CA and many tax-draining red state's welfare.]

This is one of the most typical misuses of statistics, the kind that antis use to "prove" their points.

Just because a state is a "blue state" doesn't mean that the producers are also "blue." Just because a state is a "red state" doesn't mean that their welfare is "red." As an example, the ultra high performers (read: the evil rich) overwhelmingly vote "red," while their states are mostly "blue."

This is a well known and very trivial statistical fact that uses a very well known and also very trivial mathematical fallacy, yet people *still* use it to try to make a point. Again, talking about the tunnel vision...

Carnivore
01-04-2013, 12:18 AM
Funny the moving company's phones are ringing off the hook too. Used to be no charges for dropping a truck off in other states and now they can't get enough trucks here to keep up with demand. Funny how I keep hearing form people that less people are leaving the state then are being reported but yet I am in a business that sees them leaving in the droves. Oh well each to his own I guess.

huntercf
01-04-2013, 1:21 AM
I think it would nice for those of us that are still here but to stem the tide of economic downfall in CA I don't think it will help that much.
Businesses are leaving because of over regulation and high taxes. CA is among the lowest when it comes to starting and maintaining a business with the over bearing regulatory climate (example CARB), also taxes are some of the highest in the country.

What this state needs is a major shift in thinking and actions coming out of sacrapmento which isn't going to happen until the state goes completely bankrupt and the leeches leave the state. When you have 1/3 of the country's welfare population but only 12% of the total population, it is financially unsustainable. Also, they need to create a business friendly environment but instead they keep passing laws that put people completely out of business or hamper their business to the point that they can't make any money. There are quite a few more things they need to fix but those are the 2 major ones.

Sakiri
01-04-2013, 1:31 AM
Very happy things are going well for you! I agree 100% with your assessment.

I have to say that my wife is an extended functions dental assistant (RDAEF2) in Auburn, my son is a RDA in Folsom. Both of their offices are way down from pre-2008 levels. We have never seen things this bad in her 35 years in the business. It has to get pretty bad before people don't fix their teeth......... sadly for entirely financial reasons my son will probably move to Idaho where he has been offered the same money. Cost of living makes this a 30% raise. For the same reason, we may not be far behind..... it's not why we are leaving, but the gun laws are nice there.

Dental is ridiculously expensive comparatively. Welfare here doesnt cover it, but does in every other state Ive lived in(pa, or, wa). Dental is the first thing my poor family and friends drop because of the cost.

And Bill, making concealed carry more expensive than it already is wont get people to do it. I keep hearing my county is effectively shall issue. Between training and paperwork, i could buy a new gun for that. Its effectively removed the option for me. And Im one of the 2% that would apply.

In those other three states Ive lived in, itd have run me nothing in comparison. Friend near Seattle, her and hubby got theirs for less than 60 for thw two of them... and she doesnt carry. Has a ccw... but doesnt carry.... /sigh. Must be nice.

Hopalong
01-04-2013, 6:05 AM
Non sequitur.

rkt88edmo
01-04-2013, 6:12 AM
Only the low performers are leaving (at least for now). My phone is ringing off the hook; Bay Area real estate
prices are rising, and high-grade restaurants are packed.


That may be true for tech where CA is the hotbed for the best and brightest, but there is definitely drain by any large best in class company not based in CA in their industry. More people are making the jump who would not have considered it before.

Excelsior
01-04-2013, 10:28 AM
I think it would nice for those of us that are still here but to stem the tide of economic downfall in CA I don't think it will help that much.
Businesses are leaving because of over regulation and high taxes. CA is among the lowest when it comes to starting and maintaining a business with the over bearing regulatory climate (example CARB), also taxes are some of the highest in the country.

What this state needs is a major shift in thinking and actions coming out of sacrapmento which isn't going to happen until the state goes completely bankrupt and the leeches leave the state. When you have 1/3 of the country's welfare population but only 12% of the total population, it is financially unsustainable. Also, they need to create a business friendly environment but instead they keep passing laws that put people completely out of business or hamper their business to the point that they can't make any money. There are quite a few more things they need to fix but those are the 2 major ones.

Do you have any proof that businesses are moving?

IVC
01-04-2013, 12:16 PM
Do you have any proof that businesses are moving?

For starters, look at the stalwarts of bay area technology hub such as Cisco, HP, Apple, Oracle, ... None of them recognize any meaningful US based profits in CA, which is equivalent to moving out of state.

Excelsior
01-04-2013, 12:29 PM
For starters, look at the stalwarts of bay area technology hub such as Cisco, HP, Apple, Oracle, ... None of them recognize any meaningful US based profits in CA, which is equivalent to moving out of state.

They're moving out of the country. Apples and oranges.

There was a migration of heavy industry from the East/Midwest to the South due to labor costs beginning years ago. Same with the exodus of computers/electronics from California to off-shore.

The Silicon Valley is doing fairly well. No, not with electronics assembly but with design, programming and other product development.

I would like to see some example where huge numbers of businesses from California re migrating to NV, AZ, ID, WY, TX, etc. There are certainly some, but I don't know of any mass exodus.

randian
01-04-2013, 12:36 PM
As an example, the ultra high performers (read: the evil rich) overwhelmingly vote "red," while their states are mostly "blue."
Only if they're moderately rich, say under $10 million (not quite sure where the cutoff is). The really rich are with few exceptions Democrats, and in many cases socialists in all but name. Two of the very few that aren't: John Allison (BB&T) and T.J. Rogers (Cypress Semiconductor).

Kestryll
01-04-2013, 12:42 PM
Do you have any proof that businesses are moving?

Yup, my Wife's company, a very large and multinational medical company, moved nearly all her division and is still moving people to Texas or laying them off.

And yes the move was entirely because the business climate in Texas is so much more business friendly then CA is.

bwiese
01-04-2013, 12:44 PM
And Bill, making concealed carry more expensive than it already is wont get people to do it.

Why you thought I was supporting that I dunno.

In fact carry permit costs constitutionally won't be able to really exceed trivial paperwork/admin costs ($25 maybe, not $300 or $1K). I just threw the $1K out there as a 'revenue generator' number to show how small the monies garnered statewide would really be.

IVC
01-04-2013, 12:45 PM
They're moving out of the country. Apples and oranges.

That as well, but even inside the country they all have offices in NV for processing their USA based profits in order to avoid CA state taxes. Prop 39 that passed recently is partly trying to address this issue.

As for technology, look at the growth of technology centers outside of CA. This comes at the expense of the traditional technology centers. It's a zero sum game.

Silicon Valley these days is best known as a VC center, not technology center it used to be.

drd
01-04-2013, 12:55 PM
I did a google search "businesses moving out of california"

The top result links to an article at Orange County Register.

From the article:

"In 2011, 254 California companies moved some or all of their work and jobs out of state, 26% more than in 2010, according to Irvine business consultant Joe Vranich who has been tracking these departures since 2009."

and

"The pace is accelerating, Vranich said. An average of 4.9 businesses left California each week of 2011, compared to 3.9 per week (202 total) in 2010 and one a week (51 total) in 2009."

The article can be found here:http://www.ocregister.com/articles/moved-342887-companies-texas.html

Excelsior
01-04-2013, 12:59 PM
That as well, but even inside the country they all have offices in NV for processing their USA based profits in order to avoid CA state taxes. Prop 39 that passed recently is partly trying to address this issue.

As for technology, look at the growth of technology centers outside of CA. This comes at the expense of the traditional technology centers. It's a zero sum game.

Silicon Valley these days is best known as a VC center, not technology center it used to be.

"Offices" in NV aren't going to magically mitigate taxes. The Silicon Valley is still the heart of technology in the entire world...

CrazyCobraManTim
01-04-2013, 1:10 PM
Lower performers? California paying for Red welfare states? Perhaps a fact check is called for as California has 1 out of every 3 welfare or social aid recipients within the US. More like the rest of the county is paying for California's continuous and horrible legislative decisions.

The OC Register tracks the tide of businesses leaving, and Silicon Valley is leaving for the greener fields of Omaha and Des Moines on a regular basis. Google, Intel, Yahoo, Microsoft, IBM, eBay and PayPal - just to name a few. The CEO of Intel has some particularly scathing words for Sacramento about how much capital investment Intel would put into this state. http://stream.wsj.com/story/latest-headlines/SS-2-63399/SS-2-63759/

My six figure salary and graduate degree job will be leaving (God willing) within the next few weeks when my promotion job offer comes through (something that So Cal is tight on). I don't see how it's tunnel vision to want to pursue both my livelihood AND my liberty, and I can't believe how callous some of the posters are for those individuals who reached escape velocity.

Oh and most of those dirt farmer states across the Colorado River (the place called America) are Shall issue, so I can have my cake and eat it too.

IVC
01-04-2013, 1:14 PM
"Offices" in NV aren't going to magically mitigate taxes.

Sure they will. That's why they have them and that's how they do mitigate CA taxes. We cannot play the denial game with the facts.

The Silicon Valley is still the heart of technology in the entire world...

Heh. And CA is still the leader of the free world.

Sakiri
01-04-2013, 1:53 PM
Why you thought I was supporting that I dunno.

In fact carry permit costs constitutionally won't be able to really exceed trivial paperwork/admin costs ($25 maybe, not $300 or $1K). I just threw the $1K out there as a 'revenue generator' number to show how small the monies garnered statewide would really be.

Gotcha.

If you look at the time stamp on that you'd figure I was dead tired. Calguns at 1-2 am is generally a bad idea.

And I was somehow picking up that people think going shall issue would become some sort of revenue generation. It wouldn't.

Hoooper
01-04-2013, 2:29 PM
"Offices" in NV aren't going to magically mitigate taxes. The Silicon Valley is still the heart of technology in the entire world...

Apple is probably the biggest $$$$$$ example

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/29/business/apples-tax-strategy-aims-at-low-tax-states-and-nations.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

NoJoke
01-04-2013, 3:12 PM
Just to answer the specific question....

There are about 28 million adults in CA who might be eligible.

Using Bill's 2%, which is about what one should expect, we get 560,000. At $1000 each - and the state actually gets $44 - that would be $560 million. The adopted budget for 2012-2013 is 91 BILLION dollars.

0.6% of the current budget might be raised by shall-issue @$1000/LTC.

(Actual $ under current figure is would be $24.6 million to the state, plus $56 million among the issuing agencies - current law allows $100 for local agencies.)

So, in short your answer to the OP question is, YES, it would help the tax basis. :D

Librarian
01-04-2013, 4:55 PM
So, in short your answer to the OP question is, YES, it would help the tax basis. :D

.6%? IF the fee went up by 2272%

bwiese
01-04-2013, 4:58 PM
So, in short your answer to the OP question is, YES, it would help the tax basis. :D

No, because that amount of money is not even noticeable in 7th largest world economy and can barely be accounted for given state of CA governmental accounting.

Excelsior
01-04-2013, 5:06 PM
Apple is probably the biggest $$$$$$ example

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/29/business/apples-tax-strategy-aims-at-low-tax-states-and-nations.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Apple is remarkable. I wish I had bought shares when they bottomed at 5 bucks each. I remember when Sun Microsystems tried to buy them for LESS than the market value.

Apple is now worth more than GE...

bwiese
01-04-2013, 5:40 PM
Lower performers? California paying for Red welfare states? Perhaps a fact check is called for as California has 1 out of every 3 welfare or social aid recipients within the US. More like the rest of the county is paying for California's continuous and horrible legislative decisions.


Sorry to burst your InfoWars bubble, but CA produces a huge amount of goods and services and then pays MORE THAN ITS SHARE OF FED INCOME TAX.

In turn, 'red states' do not produce that much per capita, and instead have a far higher proportion of nonproducing gov't employees, retirees, farm subsidies, etc.
Small town middle America is populated by folks who have the "good jobs" as Fed employees and everyone else works at Walmart because - well, it's all they know. These indeed are part of Romney's 47% of takers.

CA pays out far far more in Fed taxes than it gets back in services, retirements, etc. In combination with it being a net producer, these other states are "net transfer states". CA - despite its problems - pays for many many other states' lack of skills/productivity. Hell, our illegals are more productive than native residents of some other states.

If CA's Fed tax totals were reduced to the point where the amount we should get back from Feds was instead just left untaxed, other states would starve (somewhat justifiably given their overall skill sets) given their lack of productivity.

So yeah, we got problems. But other states are in effect leeches and can't support themselves so they have to grab onto our monies.

Kansas can't do Genentech, Apple, etc. [Esp not Genentech, with all the biblethumpers in KS.]

Tech stuff that's moving to other states from CA is support functions (server farms, support, etc.) Tech design/innovation stuff is already moving back to CA from Asia because of efficiency/skill/organization etc. to do front-end design.

[CA did kick out semiconductor fabs due to taxing fabs like other capital equipment and nobody wants to pay those taxes/rate on a $1-4 Billion new fab. The fabs and their equipment are still being *designed* here, and design is far higher up the value chain than raw automated mfg.]

speedrrracer
01-04-2013, 5:50 PM
Apple is remarkable. I wish I had bought shares when they bottomed at 5 bucks each. I remember when Sun Microsystems tried to buy them for LESS than the market value.

Apple is now worth more than GE...

Ha! I bought Apple in 1978 with my friggin' allowance money. Also bought Genentech when it was a penny stock! I was a wizard!

Too bad I sold it all as soon as the profits could pay for a car :eek: :facepalm: :(

I was a dumb wizard

Anyways, CA businesses & people leaving means nothing unless we know the number of CA businesses people arriving / being born

Hoooper
01-04-2013, 6:03 PM
the whole "pays more in fed taxes than it gets back" thing is meaningless. A lot of the money that leaves CA to pay for that goes into farming, manufacturing, and projects in lower income states. If you take that away, those places dont starve, the prices on their productions go up to cover the lost subsidies and things like food, airplanes, fuel, cars, furniture, etc go up in price across the country. It doesnt make sense to claim red state or blue state in that unless you actually do the analysis to find out what political lean is paying the most tax in CA and what the political lean is for those actually receiving the aid. Obvious exaggeration, but if "red" pays 90% of the tax in CA and "blue" receives 90% of the subsidies in the other states, its hardly how you described it.

drd
01-04-2013, 6:19 PM
Sorry to burst your InfoWars bubble, but CA produces a huge amount of goods and services and then pays MORE THAN ITS SHARE OF FED INCOME TAX.

This is getting pretty far afield but I'm fascinated by this statement that I've seen in many places.

California doesn't pay federal income taxes. People who work pay that tax.

If the belief is that California should get back as much from the feds as its citizens pay in federal income tax then why have the federal income tax? For that matter, if the definition of fair is that an entity gets back services equal in value to the taxes they pay then there's a whole lot of people who should be lining up for their refunds.

Let's take this a step further - those of us who pay the majority of federal income taxes don't get anywhere near back in service value an amount close to the taxes we pay.

I think this is an odd argument that I saw creep up over the last couple of years as a way of "trashing" red states and building up the value of California to the rest of the nation.

California has a lot of good things to say about it. However, the environment that California used to have to promote the building of businesses that could support the higher-income tax payers just doesn't exist any longer. It wasn't too long ago that Facebook's founder complained that it was a mistake to move to California - they did so at the insistence of their VC and not because they thought the state had anything special to offer for their business.

On the other hand, perhaps your simply proposing a means of measuring productivity of a state based on the income taxes paid by individuals in that state. California ranks 19th in per capita federal income taxes paid with a number of red states ahead. More frightening, Washington, D.C. ranks 1st with its people paying more than 4 times the per capita federal income tax as Californians.