alcohol, cigarettes and insurance all on the rise though!!! lol.

There is no way Vehicle could be off by a factor of 50 that I see.

It is official data. Source of this specific difference can be law change, for example, so this payments went to lower/higher level (not state).

@ Dr. Dave There is no way Vehicle could be off by a factor of 50 that I see. <<<<<<<<<<<<<

Gives me pause also.

Topic fully cleared.
And it'll be last time then I allowed economic topic to go off rails in to racism and personal shouting.

not sure california really cares that much. They are one Facebook IPO away from having Zuckerberg's tax returns settle the books.

from WSJ (03 Feb 2012):

Buried in the registration statement of Facebook’s IPO was this startling line:

“We expect that substantially all of the net proceeds Mr. Zuckerberg will receive upon such sale will be used to satisfy taxes that he will incur upon his exercise of an outstanding stock option to purchase 120,000,000 shares of our Class B common stock.”

What that means, in dollar terms, is that Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg may face a tax bill this year of more than $2 billion. The Financial Times puts the figure at $1.5 billion. But if the IPO values the company at the hoped-for $100 billion, his bill could be higher.

Facebook declined comment. But here’s the math. Zuckberberg received the 120 million options in 2005, presumably for being CEO and being, well, Mark Zuckerberg. Those options will be treated as ordinary income, which means he would pay the top federal income tax rate of 35%.

The cost basis for those options is six cents a share. So if the company is valued at $100 billion, and the shares are valued at around $50 each, his gain from the sale would be up to $6 billion. Taxed at 35%, the tax bill would be more than $2 billion. The FT puts a more conservative value on the company for its $1.5 billion total.

What’s more, Zuckerberg would have to pay an additional 10.3 percent for California sate taxes, though he would likely be able to deduct those taxes from his federal bill.

It’s unclear whether the $2 billion would make him America’s biggest taxpayer, since the IRS doesn’t disclose such things. But given that the 400 top earners in the U.S. paid an average of $48 million each in taxes, chances are he’ll be at least one of the biggest taxpayers in 2012 or 2013.

Mr. Zuckerberg’s tax bill will also provide an important counter-point to the notion that the rich pay lower tax rates than the rest of America. That may be true for professional investors and private-equity chiefs, but not for dot-commers and many entrepreneurs.

Wow, so unfair. Zuckerberg is getting totally screwed over with that tax bill. I feel so bad for him.

Just 1 percent of California taxpayers are already providing 45 percent of the state's income tax revenue. And such income taxes now fund half the budget.

But unfortunately, in recent years the number of upper-income earners in California has radically shrunk -- by a third between 2007 and 2009 alone. Apparently, wealthy Californians are either fleeing to nearby no-income-tax states or have become less well-off after years of economic downturn, higher taxes, and overregulation of business.

http://townhall.com/columnists/victordavishanson/2012/03/15/whos_to_blame_for_california/page/2

I go to college in cali and they just cut summer school, the football team, the swim team, about 30% of classes, and are suppose to be laying off a bunch of professors

What's missing from the chart above are revenues from property taxes, and that's where a huge portion of CA's income shortfall lies. The accumulated inequities of Prop. 13 is one of the biggest problems CA has to contend with today.

If you ask me, residential housing is way too high still. 900k for a 2 bedroom house? Crazy. Real estate caused the financial crisis and to me is remains an unsolved puzzle.

It's the norm in Silicon Valley. In general, real estate values are far out of line with incomes.