<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 1 Percent of Households Will Pay 80 Percent of California&#8217;s Income Taxes</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/1-percent-of-households-will-pay-80-percent-of-californias-income-taxes/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/1-percent-of-households-will-pay-80-percent-of-californias-income-taxes/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=1-percent-of-households-will-pay-80-percent-of-californias-income-taxes</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2014 04:35:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: nineteen50</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/1-percent-of-households-will-pay-80-percent-of-californias-income-taxes/comment-page-1/#comment-5417821</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[nineteen50]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 May 2014 21:28:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=167109#comment-5417821</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Who pays the greatest % of their income in taxes payroll taxes included&#039;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Who pays the greatest % of their income in taxes payroll taxes included&#8217;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Callawyn</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/1-percent-of-households-will-pay-80-percent-of-californias-income-taxes/comment-page-1/#comment-5368921</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Callawyn]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Feb 2014 03:44:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=167109#comment-5368921</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Death Spiral.

NY City is in a similar situation: 8 million or so residents, 40,000 of whom pay over 50% of the taxes.

So, what do they do?  Everything in their power to encourage those 40k to move someplace else.

Only socialists / Democrats could be that stupid.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Death Spiral.</p>
<p>NY City is in a similar situation: 8 million or so residents, 40,000 of whom pay over 50% of the taxes.</p>
<p>So, what do they do?  Everything in their power to encourage those 40k to move someplace else.</p>
<p>Only socialists / Democrats could be that stupid.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bittman</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/1-percent-of-households-will-pay-80-percent-of-californias-income-taxes/comment-page-1/#comment-5368840</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[bittman]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Feb 2014 00:23:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=167109#comment-5368840</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As of 2010, 10% of the American population paid for 70.6% of the nation&#039;s taxes.  I&#039;m sure that Obama and his fellow Progressives would like to get us up to the top 10% paying CA&#039;s 80%.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As of 2010, 10% of the American population paid for 70.6% of the nation&#8217;s taxes.  I&#8217;m sure that Obama and his fellow Progressives would like to get us up to the top 10% paying CA&#8217;s 80%.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Richard Rider</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/1-percent-of-households-will-pay-80-percent-of-californias-income-taxes/comment-page-1/#comment-5252229</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard Rider]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Aug 2013 17:34:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=167109#comment-5252229</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[CA already had the 2nd worst state income tax rate in the nation. Our 9.3% tax bracket started at $48,029 for people filing as individuals. 10.3% starting at $1 million.  

Now our retroactive (to 1/1/2012) “millionaires’ tax” rate is 13.3% – including capital gains.  Increased taxes now start at $250K. Our total capital gains tax is 2nd highest in the world.

CA now has by far the nation’s highest state income tax rate.  We are 21% higher than the 2nd highest state (Hawaii), 34% higher than the 3rd highest state (Oregon), and a heck of a lot higher than all the rest – including 7 states with zero state income tax. 

CA is so bad, we also have the 2nd highest state income tax bracket.  AND the 3rd.  Plus the 5th and 7th.    

http://taxfoundation.org/sites/taxfoundation.org/files/docs/ff2012.pdf   Tables #11 &amp; 13   

and   

http://www.twitpic.com/9g2pka/full

and

http://tinyurl.com/CA-2nd-CG]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>CA already had the 2nd worst state income tax rate in the nation. Our 9.3% tax bracket started at $48,029 for people filing as individuals. 10.3% starting at $1 million.  </p>
<p>Now our retroactive (to 1/1/2012) “millionaires’ tax” rate is 13.3% – including capital gains.  Increased taxes now start at $250K. Our total capital gains tax is 2nd highest in the world.</p>
<p>CA now has by far the nation’s highest state income tax rate.  We are 21% higher than the 2nd highest state (Hawaii), 34% higher than the 3rd highest state (Oregon), and a heck of a lot higher than all the rest – including 7 states with zero state income tax. </p>
<p>CA is so bad, we also have the 2nd highest state income tax bracket.  AND the 3rd.  Plus the 5th and 7th.    </p>
<p><a href="http://taxfoundation.org/sites/taxfoundation.org/files/docs/ff2012.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://taxfoundation.org/sites/taxfoundation.org/files/docs/ff2012.pdf</a>   Tables #11 &amp; 13   </p>
<p>and   </p>
<p><a href="http://www.twitpic.com/9g2pka/full" rel="nofollow">http://www.twitpic.com/9g2pka/full</a></p>
<p>and</p>
<p><a href="http://tinyurl.com/CA-2nd-CG" rel="nofollow">http://tinyurl.com/CA-2nd-CG</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: fly4vino</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/1-percent-of-households-will-pay-80-percent-of-californias-income-taxes/comment-page-1/#comment-4994857</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[fly4vino]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 May 2013 00:56:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=167109#comment-4994857</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Let&#039;s try it again............  for the rear of t he classroom.   
 
Think of the state of California as a tribe living in LaLa land. Every year the out of state tribes and the CA tribe meet to exchange goods.  In days past we arrived for the annual pow wow with lots of stuff,  airplanes, cars, electronics, medicines, ag products, oil and intellectual items. We raised all the cattle, pigs, lambs and chickens we needed and even traded a few. Pretty much everyone worked.   
 
The foreign tribes brought us iron and other minerals, lumber, paper, coal, books, coffee, spices,  , steel, guns, and lots of cool stuff.   
 
Then the California tribe began to promise its municipal workers an extra cow, larger home and foreign car.  We also decided to give those who did not work a bigger piece of the pie and we would ignore those who claimed not to work but received a full share for their labor plus their welfare benefit. The state became a very popular place to live but had very little to trade with the other tribes.   
 
At Tribal Council the CA representatives apologized that they brought less than before and explained it was a temporary condition , they would make up the shortage next year.  The other tribes believed them and accepted the IOU for 10,000 cows, 30,000 chickens, 500 airplanes .   However the following year the CA representatives arrived with even less to trade.  Again the other tribes bought the story that the state would reform its ways and do better next year.  
 
Finally the other tribes realized that the California Tribe would never repay their debt .  They accepted the last 3 virgins in Hollywood as a partial payment but demanded the deed to the state for the rest.  
 
 ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Let&#039;s try it again&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;  for the rear of t he classroom.   </p>
<p>Think of the state of California as a tribe living in LaLa land. Every year the out of state tribes and the CA tribe meet to exchange goods.  In days past we arrived for the annual pow wow with lots of stuff,  airplanes, cars, electronics, medicines, ag products, oil and intellectual items. We raised all the cattle, pigs, lambs and chickens we needed and even traded a few. Pretty much everyone worked.   </p>
<p>The foreign tribes brought us iron and other minerals, lumber, paper, coal, books, coffee, spices,  , steel, guns, and lots of cool stuff.   </p>
<p>Then the California tribe began to promise its municipal workers an extra cow, larger home and foreign car.  We also decided to give those who did not work a bigger piece of the pie and we would ignore those who claimed not to work but received a full share for their labor plus their welfare benefit. The state became a very popular place to live but had very little to trade with the other tribes.   </p>
<p>At Tribal Council the CA representatives apologized that they brought less than before and explained it was a temporary condition , they would make up the shortage next year.  The other tribes believed them and accepted the IOU for 10,000 cows, 30,000 chickens, 500 airplanes .   However the following year the CA representatives arrived with even less to trade.  Again the other tribes bought the story that the state would reform its ways and do better next year.  </p>
<p>Finally the other tribes realized that the California Tribe would never repay their debt .  They accepted the last 3 virgins in Hollywood as a partial payment but demanded the deed to the state for the rest.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: zagen germaine</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/1-percent-of-households-will-pay-80-percent-of-californias-income-taxes/comment-page-1/#comment-4447170</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[zagen germaine]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Apr 2013 13:42:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=167109#comment-4447170</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If you had the choice between taking out $40,000.00 of your inherited cash which is part of a larger IRA to pay off debts (but did not have to sell stocks to get that $ &amp; your tax bracket is $15% but perhaps less since I am on SSD &amp; earn less than 14,000.00 a year) or take out a 9% re-fill on a 2nd home, which is being rented for $1000.00 a month that will be sold in 3 years with a contract)- is it as simple as comparing interest rates to decide that a 9% re-fill is a better deal than a 15% deal? ( the 9% is non-negotiable as I can only get a &quot;no doc/no asset loan&quot; at that &lt;a href=&quot;http://taxbrackets2013.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt; tax brackets&lt;/a&gt; unfortunately)or are there other matters to consider.  ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you had the choice between taking out $40,000.00 of your inherited cash which is part of a larger IRA to pay off debts (but did not have to sell stocks to get that $ &amp; your tax bracket is $15% but perhaps less since I am on SSD &amp; earn less than 14,000.00 a year) or take out a 9% re-fill on a 2nd home, which is being rented for $1000.00 a month that will be sold in 3 years with a contract)- is it as simple as comparing interest rates to decide that a 9% re-fill is a better deal than a 15% deal? ( the 9% is non-negotiable as I can only get a &quot;no doc/no asset loan&quot; at that <a href="http://taxbrackets2013.com/" rel="nofollow"> tax brackets</a> unfortunately)or are there other matters to consider.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Richard Rider</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/1-percent-of-households-will-pay-80-percent-of-californias-income-taxes/comment-page-1/#comment-4290949</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard Rider]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Feb 2013 18:58:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=167109#comment-4290949</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Good article, but you screwed up the headline -- it&#039;s not the top ONE PERCENT paying 80% of the income tax -- it&#039;s the top TEN PERCENT (as per the body of the article). ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good article, but you screwed up the headline &#8212; it&#039;s not the top ONE PERCENT paying 80% of the income tax &#8212; it&#039;s the top TEN PERCENT (as per the body of the article). </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: @SoquelCreek</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/1-percent-of-households-will-pay-80-percent-of-californias-income-taxes/comment-page-1/#comment-3972106</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[@SoquelCreek]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Nov 2012 04:10:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=167109#comment-3972106</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The over-reliance on upper-income tax payers is an ongoing problem for California.  Proposition 30 is essentially a complete abuse of the &quot;democratic&quot; initiative process.  It asked a simple majority of Californians, who pay a small percentage of the total tax bill, to raise taxes on those who already contribute the most.  It makes for good class politics, as shown in the following chart. 
 
CHART:  Income Produced, Income Taxes Paid, Share of General Fund Revenues, Effective Tax Rates of the Bottom 2/3rds and Top 2% of California Income Tax Payers (before Proposition 30)  &lt;a href=&quot;http://twitpic.com/7pf2a8/full&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://twitpic.com/7pf2a8/full&lt;/a&gt; 
 
Proposition 30 is bad public policy and horrible tax policy.  It does nothing to address California&#039;s real and pressing issues.  &lt;a href=&quot;http://soquelbythecreek.blogspot.com/2012/07/california-proposition-30-governor.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://soquelbythecreek.blogspot.com/2012/07/cali...&lt;/a&gt; 
 
However, Proposition 30 supporters did succeed in one thing.  They made California #1 in state sales tax rates and in state marginal income tax rates--tops in the nation!  Now, can we please work on solving the REAL problems?  &lt;a href=&quot;http://soquelbythecreek.blogspot.com/2012/11/wecandobetter.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://soquelbythecreek.blogspot.com/2012/11/weca...&lt;/a&gt; ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The over-reliance on upper-income tax payers is an ongoing problem for California.  Proposition 30 is essentially a complete abuse of the &quot;democratic&quot; initiative process.  It asked a simple majority of Californians, who pay a small percentage of the total tax bill, to raise taxes on those who already contribute the most.  It makes for good class politics, as shown in the following chart. </p>
<p>CHART:  Income Produced, Income Taxes Paid, Share of General Fund Revenues, Effective Tax Rates of the Bottom 2/3rds and Top 2% of California Income Tax Payers (before Proposition 30)  <a href="http://twitpic.com/7pf2a8/full" rel="nofollow">http://twitpic.com/7pf2a8/full</a> </p>
<p>Proposition 30 is bad public policy and horrible tax policy.  It does nothing to address California&#039;s real and pressing issues.  <a href="http://soquelbythecreek.blogspot.com/2012/07/california-proposition-30-governor.html" rel="nofollow"></a><a href="http://soquelbythecreek.blogspot.com/2012/07/cali" rel="nofollow">http://soquelbythecreek.blogspot.com/2012/07/cali</a>&#8230; </p>
<p>However, Proposition 30 supporters did succeed in one thing.  They made California #1 in state sales tax rates and in state marginal income tax rates&#8211;tops in the nation!  Now, can we please work on solving the REAL problems?  <a href="http://soquelbythecreek.blogspot.com/2012/11/wecandobetter.html" rel="nofollow"></a><a href="http://soquelbythecreek.blogspot.com/2012/11/weca" rel="nofollow">http://soquelbythecreek.blogspot.com/2012/11/weca</a>&#8230; </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mary Sue</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/1-percent-of-households-will-pay-80-percent-of-californias-income-taxes/comment-page-1/#comment-3971283</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mary Sue]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2012 23:13:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=167109#comment-3971283</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Governor Moonbeam is slowly killing the goose that laid the golden egg. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Governor Moonbeam is slowly killing the goose that laid the golden egg. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JWochholz</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/1-percent-of-households-will-pay-80-percent-of-californias-income-taxes/comment-page-1/#comment-3971169</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[JWochholz]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2012 22:32:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=167109#comment-3971169</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I don&#039;t even understand this article, and it&#039;s not because I&#039;m stupid, it&#039;s because this article is poorly written. Just look at the second sentence. I can&#039;t fathom what the author is attempting to say. For that matter, the first sentence is poorly constructed as well, or am I being obtuse and the author being facetious? No matter. The author starts with a statistic, 1% pay 80% of taxes without provind me with a verifiable citation to confirm the premise. Later, the author discusses the middle class as bearing the brunt of the tax load. This &quot;fact&quot; is in conflict with the article&#039;s headline. Don&#039;t get me wrong, I&#039;m against raising taxes, I&#039;m against taxes disguised as fees, and I know we need a State government that will stop spending like a teenager with mommy&#039;s credit card. But this article gets a D-. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#039;t even understand this article, and it&#039;s not because I&#039;m stupid, it&#039;s because this article is poorly written. Just look at the second sentence. I can&#039;t fathom what the author is attempting to say. For that matter, the first sentence is poorly constructed as well, or am I being obtuse and the author being facetious? No matter. The author starts with a statistic, 1% pay 80% of taxes without provind me with a verifiable citation to confirm the premise. Later, the author discusses the middle class as bearing the brunt of the tax load. This &quot;fact&quot; is in conflict with the article&#039;s headline. Don&#039;t get me wrong, I&#039;m against raising taxes, I&#039;m against taxes disguised as fees, and I know we need a State government that will stop spending like a teenager with mommy&#039;s credit card. But this article gets a D-. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: geoplaten</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/1-percent-of-households-will-pay-80-percent-of-californias-income-taxes/comment-page-1/#comment-3971010</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[geoplaten]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2012 21:36:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=167109#comment-3971010</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What do they care, King Barry will just dump them on the rest of us... ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What do they care, King Barry will just dump them on the rest of us&#8230; </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Felix</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/1-percent-of-households-will-pay-80-percent-of-californias-income-taxes/comment-page-1/#comment-3970667</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Felix]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2012 19:51:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=167109#comment-3970667</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The headline is off by an order of magnitude -- 10% of the population pays 80%, 1% pays 50%.  Read the actual source material. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The headline is off by an order of magnitude &#8212; 10% of the population pays 80%, 1% pays 50%.  Read the actual source material. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JK Stretch</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/1-percent-of-households-will-pay-80-percent-of-californias-income-taxes/comment-page-1/#comment-3970665</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[JK Stretch]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2012 19:51:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=167109#comment-3970665</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[it would if the 144,000 are all part of the 1% or 10% that pay that tax.   ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>it would if the 144,000 are all part of the 1% or 10% that pay that tax.   </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mary Sue</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/1-percent-of-households-will-pay-80-percent-of-californias-income-taxes/comment-page-1/#comment-3970660</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mary Sue]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2012 19:49:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=167109#comment-3970660</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[cool story bro. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>cool story bro. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mary Sue</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/1-percent-of-households-will-pay-80-percent-of-californias-income-taxes/comment-page-1/#comment-3970657</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mary Sue]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2012 19:49:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=167109#comment-3970657</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[it will if they&#039;re the rich and everybody else is making peanuts. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>it will if they&#039;re the rich and everybody else is making peanuts. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Good One</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/1-percent-of-households-will-pay-80-percent-of-californias-income-taxes/comment-page-1/#comment-3970641</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Good One]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2012 19:44:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=167109#comment-3970641</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I see what you did there... ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I see what you did there&#8230; </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: riverboatbill</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/1-percent-of-households-will-pay-80-percent-of-californias-income-taxes/comment-page-1/#comment-3970358</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[riverboatbill]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2012 18:16:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=167109#comment-3970358</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[San Andreas will straighten out California&#039;s faults. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>San Andreas will straighten out California&#039;s faults. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Little_Big_Man</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/1-percent-of-households-will-pay-80-percent-of-californias-income-taxes/comment-page-1/#comment-3969975</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Little_Big_Man]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2012 16:09:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=167109#comment-3969975</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A bad, bad scenario might be that to the extent the rest of the country got fed up with them would have them turning to the Chinese who still (I think) run the Panama Canal through Hutchinson Whampoa. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A bad, bad scenario might be that to the extent the rest of the country got fed up with them would have them turning to the Chinese who still (I think) run the Panama Canal through Hutchinson Whampoa. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Deep_Space</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/1-percent-of-households-will-pay-80-percent-of-californias-income-taxes/comment-page-1/#comment-3969964</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Deep_Space]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2012 16:04:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=167109#comment-3969964</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I realize you&#039;re partially making a joke but the number made me recollect something. The Witnesses claim this is the number of the elect which will sit at the right hand of God or Christ.  Quick research but couldn&#039;t find if the KJV actually mentions the number (The Witnesses have thier own translation).  The idea of an &#039;elect&#039; is mentioned several times in the KJV. 
 
Of course 144.000 leaving California for Biblical or other reasons wouldn&#039;t have that much of an effect. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I realize you&#039;re partially making a joke but the number made me recollect something. The Witnesses claim this is the number of the elect which will sit at the right hand of God or Christ.  Quick research but couldn&#039;t find if the KJV actually mentions the number (The Witnesses have thier own translation).  The idea of an &#039;elect&#039; is mentioned several times in the KJV. </p>
<p>Of course 144.000 leaving California for Biblical or other reasons wouldn&#039;t have that much of an effect. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cynthia crran</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/1-percent-of-households-will-pay-80-percent-of-californias-income-taxes/comment-page-1/#comment-3969684</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[cynthia crran]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2012 14:27:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=167109#comment-3969684</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Well, few Republicans put some of the blame on the God Ronald REagan  who was pushed by the Irvine Company to Legalized 3 million and about 2 million of thse illegal immirgants in  1986 lived in California. The white conservatives left because of the flooding of cities with Illegals hispanics in sections of LA, Anaheim and Santa Ana, and parts of San Diego. The aerospace donwturn set even more whites out of state and George H Bush and later Bill Clinton cut the defense budget a lot of Republcians in the LA and Orange and San Diego area moved out of State. THis gave the Bay area more influence since the Republcians from the South left. Then Geroge W Bush support of minority ownership sent thousands of whites from Orange and San Diego to other states since the housing was cheaper remember George W in 2004 won Orange County at 59 while Romeny only at 53, the conservatives left during that time period. Also, Bush won San Diego at 52 while Obama won San Diego at 52  against ROmeny a lot o conservatives left because of the high housing during the bubble period. The aerospace downturn and the housing bubble empty out the Republicans. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, few Republicans put some of the blame on the God Ronald REagan  who was pushed by the Irvine Company to Legalized 3 million and about 2 million of thse illegal immirgants in  1986 lived in California. The white conservatives left because of the flooding of cities with Illegals hispanics in sections of LA, Anaheim and Santa Ana, and parts of San Diego. The aerospace donwturn set even more whites out of state and George H Bush and later Bill Clinton cut the defense budget a lot of Republcians in the LA and Orange and San Diego area moved out of State. THis gave the Bay area more influence since the Republcians from the South left. Then Geroge W Bush support of minority ownership sent thousands of whites from Orange and San Diego to other states since the housing was cheaper remember George W in 2004 won Orange County at 59 while Romeny only at 53, the conservatives left during that time period. Also, Bush won San Diego at 52 while Obama won San Diego at 52  against ROmeny a lot o conservatives left because of the high housing during the bubble period. The aerospace downturn and the housing bubble empty out the Republicans. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Object Caching 693/706 objects using disk
Content Delivery Network via cdn.frontpagemag.com

 Served from: www.frontpagemag.com @ 2014-12-31 00:12:42 by W3 Total Cache -->