At first, Uber and Lyft driver Michael Richert was undecided about how he would vote on Proposition 22, a California ballot initiative sponsored by gig economy giants Uber, Lyft, DoorDash, Instacart and Uber-owned Postmates that comes up for a vote in November. (Etienne Laurent/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock via CNN)
& nbsp;
Click on our electoral recommendations.
At the beginning of our discussion on proposal 30 on the electoral ticket of November 8, we agree on three things:
Climate change is real. To remedy this, we must make the transition of more Californians from petrol electric vehicles. And people gradually taxed with more money at higher rates are morally correct and good for the economy.
.But none of this is enough to justify the support of Prop.
The state and the federal government already have two main programs to stimulate production and transition to zero emission vehicles. California has the highest tax rate in the country. And it is questionable that spending even more tax revenue in the subsidies of electric cars would be the most profitable way to combat climate change.
Voters must reject the prop. 30. This is an excellent example of budget traps on the initiative. Once again, the Californians receive few independent policies analyzes on which to base a decision of several million donations. However, they are invited to block expenses for a program, this time for 20 years, without the possibility of adjusting future needs.
and prop. 30 is another measure that would disproportionately benefit from a particular interest. In this case, it is Lyft, the transport company which until now has invested $ 15 million in the initiative campaign in the hope that rich taxpayers subsidize the company's transition to electric vehicles.
.The most important tax group in California of 12.3% applies to income above $ 625,370 per year for singles and more than $ 1.25 million for married couples who come together. In addition to this, individual income or sets greater than $ 1 million is imposed in another 1% to help finance mental health programs.
Prop. 30 would add an additional 1.75% for an individual or spouse of more than $ 2 million per year, for a total of 15.05%. That dwarf > a href = "https://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/press-room/uc-contrary-popular-belief-residents- Are-not-fleing-california"> Persecuted < /A> For the high tax rates of California by California, the exceptionally significant increase in Prop. Independent Predict . They can get out of the state, modify their expenditure habits to reduce their tax obligation or claim deductions and tax credits more aggressively.
But the most important question is that if the state goes well to the rich tax, will money be well spent and will it produce the desired result?
States legislators and Governor Gavin Newsom last year began a is one of the many reasons why voters should reject the prop. 30. Associated articles <