Comments on: A Great Editorial On City Spending

By: windows_xp

windows_xp — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 01:52:15 +0000

my God, i thought you were going to chip in with some decisive insght at the end there, not leave it with �we leave it to you to decide�.

By: Clinton

Clinton — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 15:38:23 +0000

I don’t get it, what do you mean by the 3rd paragraph?

By: lowcarbfood

lowcarbfood — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 10:49:32 +0000

Please, can you PM me and tell me few more thinks about this, I am really fan of your blog…

By: Wayne

Wayne — Wed, 20 May 2009 17:15:55 +0000

It sounds like you’re creating problems yourself by trying to solve this issue instead of looking at why their is a problem in the first place

By: Antique Ring

Antique Ring — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 23:56:53 +0000

I usually do not comment on blog posts but I found this quite interesting, so here goes. Thanks! Regards, P.

By: Govindaya

Govindaya — Sun, 08 Feb 2009 15:25:02 +0000

Hey very nice blog!! Man .. Beautiful .. Amazing .. I will bookmark your blog and take the feeds also…

By: SF2OAK

SF2OAK — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 19:47:20 +0000

I was shocked to see that coherent letter published in the Daily Planet, in fact I sent it to people because I was so impressed with it.
I am so glad a “progressive” has taken a regressive city to task. I wish we had one of our city council in OAK make the kind of sense Ms. Gilbert does. I’ve never ever heard a politician in OAK or SF say middle income homeowners bear the lion’s share of tax. Hurrah.

I do encourage everybody to pass this letter on as it is striking in that bursts the bubbles of the liberal, “progressives”, including just about every politician in the Bay Area. It is about time.

By: TheBoss

TheBoss — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 19:50:09 +0000

Agreed.

By: David

David — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 19:06:18 +0000

Yes, things are always complicated — you could also have pointed out that Clinton faced an opposition Congress from 1994 on, which prevented him from spending as much as he perhaps would have otherwise.

My main point, without getting deeper into the economic debate, is that it’s silly to suggest that anyone who cares about fiscal responsibility is crazy to support Barack Obama over John McCain. Even if someone accepts your premise that Obama will likely increase spending more than McCain, there are plenty of other things to consider when deciding which candidate will make wiser choices on economic policy and other matters.

By: dto510

dto510 — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 19:03:03 +0000

On problem with this editorial is that the author explicitly states that Prop 13 isn’t the problem, but then notes that the average taxpayer has an assessed value half that of the market value of a median home in Berkeley. So, Prop 13 is seriously distorting the tax base, making it harder to raise taxes fairly. I know that’s not your concern, Boss, but it’s a problem with this article.

For a little context, Berkeley voters have rejected most (or every?) bond and tax measures put before them since 2002. Though the general direction of the city keeps being reaffirmed in elections, voters do not seem to be keen on giving the city more revenue.