Latest Breaking News

stopdiggin

(14,663 posts)

21. and my post pointed to the fact that your quote

Sat Jun 7, 2025, 11:39 AM

Jun 2025

had very little relevance (and thus an extremely poor fit) for the discussion at hand.

I even went so far as to agree that your 'outrage' (as far as proportional or fair representation) had good basis.
It just doesn't have any applicability to the Newsom 'taxation' discussion - Paul Revere, Tea Party, and all that good stuff aside ....
(yes, we have heard of the American Revolution, thanks)
Still - returning to the point - 'Without representation' simply doesn't make any sense in this context.

Oh, and it's Newsom (even though that is consistently mangled as well)

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

36 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Newsom floats withholding federal taxes as Trump threatens California [View all] highplainsdem Jun 2025 OP

I'm starting to think secession shouldn't be off table. Of course, would have to move from my rube red state. Silent Type Jun 2025 #1

Trump is trying to start a civil war it looks like. Irish_Dem Jun 2025 #26

Aren't those taxes paid by individual taxpayers to the US Treasury? MichMan Jun 2025 #2

Not all - there are federal excise taxes on alcoholic beverages for example DBoon Jun 2025 #3

and paying into the CA system (however that works?) stopdiggin Jun 2025 #8

There could be an escrow account for us Tumbulu Jun 2025 #4

which would disallow the federal gov from presenting me with the bill? stopdiggin Jun 2025 #7

In time, yes Tumbulu Jun 2025 #14

agree with about 90% stopdiggin Jun 2025 #17

About damned time! flying-skeleton Jun 2025 #5

"Maybe it's time to cut that off" could be a campaign slogan. PermatexNo.2 Jun 2025 #6

Welcome to DU LetMyPeopleVote Jun 2025 #22

Thanks. I'll try to behave. Or, failing that, at least try to use good grammar and punctuation. PermatexNo.2 Jun 2025 #34

great talking point! but as a practical matter ... stopdiggin Jun 2025 #9

California can make a case for "No taxation without Representation" thought crime Jun 2025 #10

That would mean that a Wyoming taxpayer would pay $66 dollars in income taxes for every $1 a California resident pays MichMan Jun 2025 #12

No, that would be Absurd. And Wyoming having the same level of representation as CA is just as Absurd. thought crime Jun 2025 #16

the point (fairly obviously) - is that 'no taxation without representation' stopdiggin Jun 2025 #18

Have you ever heard the slogan "no taxation without representation"? thought crime Jun 2025 #20

and my post pointed to the fact that your quote stopdiggin Jun 2025 #21

Happens all the time with city income taxes MichMan Jun 2025 #25

CA has a LOT more Reps in the House. The founders worked out a reasonable balance Attilatheblond Jun 2025 #28

It should have more Senators too, and some of the founders knew it. thought crime Jun 2025 #29

Ah, yes, tranny of the majority. Nope that isn't a good way to govern. Attilatheblond Jun 2025 #30

The Tyranny of the Majority is a problem. thought crime Jun 2025 #33

We have 2 legislative bodies. One by population and one where all states have two members Attilatheblond Jun 2025 #35

But they are represented. Igel Jun 2025 #24

Newsom's argument also falls flat if you take it down to a local level MichMan Jun 2025 #27

What would Gov Newsom's response be if for example Beverly Hills and Bel Air decided to withhold all their state taxes? MichMan Jun 2025 #11

So you support Taco cutting off services to California? Scrivener7 Jun 2025 #32

""Maybe it's time to cut that off," he added." Maybe just "redirect" the tax money to areas tfg cut? nt mitch96 Jun 2025 #13

Sounds like a plan! Fla Dem Jun 2025 #15

Yup, just maybe time, Newsom. republianmushroom Jun 2025 #19

I did not think he was speaking about income tax. quaint Jun 2025 #23

Seems like Rebl2 Jun 2025 #31

Do it orangecrush Jun 2025 #36