Funny how they can comment on lower unemployment for the high end, and in the same breath start talking about taxing all of us more.

Tax the high earners and don't touch Prop 13.

I thought it was interesting that the interviewee points out how the innovation engine of Silicon Valley has helped lift the area. And then immediately suggested we raise taxes on those types of businesses and 'capture' more of their success.

Well, Mr Hancock seems to be saying that if we shop increasingly online and there is no sales tax on those transactions, something must cover the shortfall. Either services like education need to be cut, or the lost revenue must be made up by other taxes. There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.

Seems reasonable, no?

I agree that federal, state and local taxes are too low. I agree a restructuring is needed because the "pain" is least for the rich, and greatest for the working poor.

Here are my suggestions:

The payroll taxes (Social Security, disability insurance and hospital insurance) should apply to all wages not just to those below about $100,000, as Social Security and disability taxes do.

Capital gains should be taxed at the same rate as ordinary income.

The California and Federal income taxes should be more progressive, i.e., higher rates for higher income and lower (or negative) rates for lower wages.

The state sales tax should be extended to a range of services emphasizing those, like legal and financial services, that are bought primarily by the rich.

I also think Prop 13 taxes should apply to the real value of property, not the calculated value. But I'm not holding my breath--way too many people agree with Ned, "don't touch Prop 13."

Actually, I agree with all your points except that Prop 13 reform should only affect commercial properties. But then, that might drive even more businesses out of CA. And good luck on getting legal and financial services taxed. That would definitely drive the lawyers out of CA which would be a great thing--only they love the weather here.