No shit...

'sok. We'll just hire the illegals to do the work for 5 cents on the dollar. Saves money.

Why do you even care Nanc? Are you trying to prove a point? It is a Republican Gov that got us into this mess. Why aren't you bashing Ahnold?

Arnolds' no conservative. He's a progressive Republican. Liberal policy is at the heart of Californistan's problems.

I am a recovering californian, dx - most of my family still barely surviving there and ahnold is a Kennedy.

Besides, Cali is the largest economy in this nation - if they go, it will be akin to flushing a gigundous toilet - EVERYONE should be concerned.

ok sorry Nanc.

They promised everything and gave everything....unfortunately the bill finally came due. Coming soon to a state - and country near you.

This is the year we start seeing a run of sovereign defaults. At least ten states have serious fiscal problems, not to mention localities. All the feds have is their printing press ... for now.

It was only a matter of time before reckless government spending drained the swamp. That time has come. As obvious as it should be, the financially stupid welfare and warfare statists haven't gotten the message.

They will.

Doc - I will say that the State of Arkansas is still treading water, however, we're now quite beholden to the feds. Depends upon how a state uses the stimulus monies - loads of municipal work going on here. Stimulus site for Ark:

$20 Billion? And they still haven't legalized and taxed pot? Fucking idiots.

"..But as he told me this week, without additional federal help, many states will have no choice but to impose extreme budget cuts, or raise taxes, or most likely do both.."

Where does he think the 'additional federal help' comes from??

The government produces nothing, invents nothing, earns nothing. EVERY single solitary centavo that they spend like shitfaced sailors on leave, comes from ME, and other working saps!

The freaking bill is coming due. The bookie's leg breaker is ringing the doorbell.

California's problems are a result of disgustingly out of control spending, waste, fraud, and (goes without saying...) the colossal illegal immigration travesty and all attendant to that.

Canary in the coal mine. Rest of America to follow.

JM

ahhhnorld hasnt done a damn thing. the problem goes on and on and on. lack of leadership here

SIXTY BILLION dollars, and FOUR years later, they're just now reducing the size and scope of the Regulatory Commissions! Should have been FIRST to go! Put them into limbo until better times, then reinstate them, or NOT!

Limit the taxing til you have workers and businesses to tax! AND PULEASE, Oh Pretty Please,, try to remember that this happened, oh, say seven or even fifteen years from now! Nothing goes up forever, except the bills!

TRUE LIES

Arnold struggles

If the CEC had held crooks like Enron, Williams, Duke Energy et al accountable California would have stabilized. Instead those regulators decided the crooks had the State over a barrel and there was nothing they could do except pony up.

Wilson deregulated that State, and rich crooks immediately seized the opportunity, fucking every ratepayer in the largest industry in the country, power generation.

South America ain't putting up with those assholes anymore. You are next my friend.

Even though the Guvanator is a Repbub (RINO), Cali has had one party rule for over a generation. The Liberal Assembly has been beholden to the Union bosses (thugs)and the SF leftists and now we're in a hole will will never be able to dig ourselves out of.

This State has had an anti-business mentality and the spending in Sacremento will never stop. Those who receive these handouts (parasites) now outnumber the hard working Taxpayers so the Dem's will never be voted out of office.

Stay tuned folks for the same senerio is being played out right now in Washington.

Democracy as we know it has been dead for a long time Komrades.

In the end ARnold is turning out to be an economic girly man.

"The government produces nothing, invents nothing, earns nothing."

Nice talking point but utter bull shit. The government invents most new advances in medicine, the internet, space technology, etc. etc. etc.
The government has been the root of most scientific/economic advances in the past fifty years. Specifically, the American government.

Who controls the California legislature?

How many states will California take down with it?

This land is your land, this land is my land
From California, to the New York Island
From the redwood forest, to the gulf stream waters
This land was made for you and me

California spending over the last decade far exceeded inflation and population growth and the legislature along with an ill-informed and passive citizenry are at fault--California along with other states are now signposts pointing to the federal government which will suffer the same fate--the endgame has begun.

Nice talking point but utter bull shit. The government invents most new advances in medicine, the internet, space technology, etc. etc. etc.
The government has been the root of most scientific/economic advances in the past fifty years. Specifically, the American government.

#20 | Posted by danni at 2010-01-09 10:49 PM | Reply | Flag:

Nice talking point, Danni, but complete and utter bullshit.

medicine, science and technology advances mainly in university laboratories.

The federal government finances a lot of research -- especially through the Department of Defense, NSF and NIH. But even then it is civilian experts who are on the evaluation boards that award grants.

And while we are on the topic, NASA has created nothing. All NASA technology was first developed for the military.

prop 13

Tax Cuts, Tax Cuts, Tax Cuts!

Yes, I know a few liberals will cry mightily and scream all sorts of class envy garbage but people have to get back to work sooner or later. I am in favor of sooner.

NASa technology. LOL YOu realize that the Space Shuttle has 1970's technology. They should blow them all up in July 4th fireworks display in the East River

Ou realize that the Space Shuttle has 1970's technology.

Yes Timbicile, that is why they are being retired you fool.

NASA has created nothing.

#25 | POSTED BY VERNON AT 2010-01-10 01:03 AM | REPLY

Vernon proves himself to be the fool yet again.

Cordless tools.
Ziplock bags.
Satellite television.
Modern PCs.
Teflon.
Kevlar.
Smoke detectors.
Nitinol.
Anti fogging solution for goggles.
Infrared thermometers.
Hand held video camera technology.

A new high-strength aluminum-silicon alloy developed at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Ala., promises to lower engine emissions and could improve gas mileage in cars, boats and recreational vehicles. The new alloy, co-invented by Jonathan Lee, a NASA structural materials engineer, was originally developed for the automotive industry.
Although most Americans associate NASA with space flight, one of the space agency's missions is to share its cutting-edge technologies with U.S. industry. "Partnerships with U.S. industries are the main way NASA transfers these technologies to the public," explains Vernotto McMillan, deputy manager of Marshall's Technology Transfer Department.

Lee and Chen came up with MSFC-398, a wear-resistant alloy that exhibits dramatic strength at temperatures as high as 500 to 700 degrees Fahrenheit. In fact, when tested at 600 degrees Fahrenheit, it is three to four times stronger than conventional cast aluminum alloys. The new metal also can be produced at a projected cost of less than $1 per pound.

Vern, stick to things you know about... as soon as you find something.

Fprmer Dem Presidential Candidate was right when he was a US Senator from Minnesota. NASA should have been defunded long ago.

That is what the fucker gets for embracing the Repubiliconfabulation party and thinking a movie star is fit for politics. Fluffy feel good borrow to kill economics was introduced by his hero Reagan and actuated by the redundant Bush-hole dynasty. Bloated budgets backed by hot air and here you are. Add to that Mr. Steroid head being scooted in by night shift Enron execs on a cocaine binge. Well... we know what happened to Enron.

Go ahead enjoy your schadenfreude the rest of America. California has the largest economy of the United States the ripple effect is enjoyed by all.

That the problem with conservatives... they like to pretend that there is a box where things ought to be... and in the process fail to deal with the real world.

The difference between tax and spend and borrow and spend is with one you are compelled to live within your means... the other... well here we are...a few rich fucks on Wall Street... while the rest live within their means... which are currently not very meaningful.

Cut tax rates and the revenue will come flooding back

"medicine, science and technology advances mainly in university laboratories."

Largely funded by grands from NIH and other governmental agencies....not private industry.
How many industries exist because of NASA, the internet, nuclear power, radar, etc???

"Cut tax rates and the revenue will come flooding back"

What happens when you have cut them all the way to zero and still no jobs, no revenue and no recovery???
Reagan cut tax rates and created debt.
Bush 1 allowed those cuts to remain and increased debt.
Clinton raised taxes and balanced the budget.
Bush 2 cut taxes even more (during two wars for the first time in history) and doubled the debt.
Now Obama struggles with debt and a Congress unwilling to increase taxes.
There is a point at which lowering taxes increases revenues, we long ago cut them well below that point.

There is a point at which lowering taxes increases revenues, we long ago cut them well below that point.

Duh! There is a a point where there is not enough money on the planet to keep this federal Ponzi Scheme going. There are a lot of nasty surprises in store for 2010.

Here is idea 1) close the borders 2) kick out all the illegal aliens from California - this will save 20B in state public schools, health care, policeing.

Then 3) Stop the stupidity on some of these "Eco" projects that is stopping production of food on farms, or drilling or mining.

4) Then take the state budget and take out 20% out of every program. Then Freeze it.

Why should we continue to fund government with the sweat of our brow when they just throw it away? Why is the tax payer never stops paying more? Why not just have the government spend less?

This from a blogger.
"California is averaging just over $63 million per day this week in unemployment borrowing. Average daily sales tax revenue from July through November was roughly $75 million per day (roughly 30% of California's total tax revenue). Unemployment borrowing is not included in the budget (General Fund) as the tax will be levied by the Federal government directly to employers....and the $6+ billion is accruing at 5% interest. It will be impossible to pay back. California is dead....just waiting for the mortician to do the autopsy! "

DANNI#19
Ahh, there you go again...

You just can't seem to get your hands around this simple fact. It's obvious from your every post...

Namely, that EVERY single dime spent by government on EVERYthing(!), is money that the fat cat, lying, non-actual-job-holding bastards did not earn themselves.

And there are far more career politicians in the current administration who have lived most or all of their adult lives feeding from the public trough - than in any administration in recent memory.

Ohhh.. Wouldn't I love to be able to write checks on someone else's endless bank account???

JM

The plain & simple answer is..
STOP the spending on social/welfare programs.
Self responsibility.
The libs are all about evolution WHEN IT FITS!!
This is the essence of evolution, only the strong survive.
If you are reliant upon the gov't., you are weak and should be left to your own demise.

It's not the tax rate that killed California, it's the unequal distribution of wealth and the thousands of multimillionaires that dodge their tax obligations by investing in overseas tax heavens and oversea corporations. It's globalization and private jets full of drugs and money that are skirting around customs and TSA. It is the elite who are unaffected by California's budget crisis and getting richer by snapping up depreciated real estate and bankrupt business.

It's got nothing to do with politicians at the public trough, that has always been the case throughout history. It is what motivates politicians in the first place. This is about a planned takeover of the wealthiest state in the union.

Welfare and government spending was part of that wealth that was stolen by the richest among us. That is what government is formed by the people to do. California's budget is failing because of laws like proposition 13 and lower takes for the rich. The trickle down effect was a dismal failure in a world that is now controlled by globalized corporations. Get used to it and enjoy your tea parties. We aren't going to solve the budget crises by cutting taxes or spending. Imagine what would happen if we cut government spending to zero. There would be 350 million anarchists in America. They are already opening the prisons and starving the poor as we speak. Crime will rule in the next decade. Count on it.

Oh, and don't forget to vote for more guns on the streets, we are all going to need them and soon.

Ring
Has anyone advocated cutting govt spending to zero?
I am not in favor of that, just for the record.

How are the elite getting richer by "snapping up... bankrupt businesses"? Are they somehow reviving these businesses? Making them profitable? If not - they are covering some costs (taxes, etc.) which weren't being covered - yes?

If so - isn't that a good thing? Wouldn't that mean that they are putting some jobless people to work? Paying them wages which don't have to be paid by the taxpayers? Plus, more precious taxes can be sent to govt by these new workers... Just my simplistic thinking.

JM

Imagine what would happen if we cut government spending to zero. There would be 350 million anarchists in America. They are already opening the prisons and starving the poor as we speak. Crime will rule in the next decade. Count on it.

The same thing happens when governments go broke. Count on it.

Dockj...have you ever got a lot to learn about economics and business.

The easiest way in the world to make money in business is to kill the competition and then buy them out.

How the hell do you think Walmart, Target, Costco, Microsoft, Monsanto, AT&T etc., all got so huge? Better Quality? Get real.

What do you have against small business anyway? Why aren't the tea baggers complaining about the current practices of big business and corporations that have legal rights just like real citizens. They are the real tax dodgers. They make the rest of us tax loop hunters look like amateurs.

The same thing happens when governments go broke. Count on it.

What in hell do you think I am trying to say ray? Go back to sleep.

Ringmaster should read what he writes.
Imagine what would happen if we cut government spending to zero.

Public spending has been outrunning private economy growth for decades. It was only a matter of time before government spending outstripped the private economy's ability to support it. That is not cutting. That is fiscal recklessness.

Public spending has been outrunning private economy growth for decades.

No it hasn't. Clinton managed to exit office with a substantial surplus. It's all about proper management. That's the duty of the administrative branch. What Bush did was bailout the bankers, loan sharks, Wallstreet and then the auto companies. He also begged congress how many times for supplemental funds for his illegal war games? He went for the end run, but instead of a touchdown, he dropped the ball and lost possession.

The current economic situation is all about fat cats robbing the till while Bush the rat jimmied the till open for them.

Had Obama not increased spending with his stimulus package we would be in far worse shape to day.

BTW...gold has peaked. Time to sell. With democrats running things, the strength of the dollar is going up and gold is heading down.

No it hasn't.
Yeah sure. There is roughly one taxpayer for two tax consumers.

BTW...gold has peaked. Time to sell.
Yeah sure. ROFLMA

As Warner Wolfe would say, "let's go to the tape."

"Had Obama not increased spending with his stimulus package we would be in far worse shape to day."

Can't wait to hear all the reasons why it is Bushs' fault when all the bonuses are due to be made public.

Can't wait to hear all the reasons why it is Bushs' fault when all the bonuses are due to be made public.

...and who's trying to block those bonuses? Let's get real here folks.

#49...

Who? The same ones who claimed they didn't know about them when they gave those hundreds of billions away? Or the ones who changed that tune to, "well there was nothing we could have done about them"... Either way it is the same players in DC that have received millions in campaign money,(or thank you money, seeing as they have had the most profitable year in history, during a recession no less.) Here's a hint, it ain't Bush and it ain't the repubs.

Why do you even care Nanc? Are you trying to prove a point? It is a Republican Gov that got us into this mess. Why aren't you bashing Ahnold?

#3 | Posted by dxlingr

I guess you think the books were ballanced when he took office, not to mention all the un-funded mandates the feds have passed over the years.

The same ones who claimed they didn't know about them when they gave those hundreds of billions away?

The stimulus money went to the states. The TARP money is the funds that were abused by the bonuses. That was Bush's baby. Always will be.

The stimulus money went to the states.

Damn right and Texas spent $2 million on salaries for the politically connected to insulate 7 homes.

BTW...gold has peaked. Time to sell. With democrats running things, the strength of the dollar is going up and gold is heading down.

#46 | Posted by RingMaster

Boy, Ringmaster, am I going to hold you on this statement---gold is in a normal correction and a long way from its' top. The dollar is correcting higher but it won't last---I won't bore you with the whys since you wouldn't understand what I was talking about anyway.

Actually gold peaked at just above 1200. That was the time to sell. when it goes below 950 it will be time to buy again, but I follow the charts, not what the experts that are trying to sell gold tell us. Let me quess, you get your financial advice from Glenn Beck, Ann Coulter and Alex Jones.

The trick is to buy high and sell low. Not just buy high.

Any way, as usual the smart money was in the FOREX the last four weeks.

No it hasn't. Clinton managed to exit office with a substantial surplus. It's all about proper management.

#46 | Posted by RingMaster

Ringmaster, you should keep to posting about GW and stay away from economics and other esoteric subjects---Clinton did not leave Bush with a surplus--you're accepting parrotted info from people that don't know what they're talking about--if you would like I'll explain--then when you accept the facts you can also accept the facts about GW.

Ringmaster, you should keep to posting about GW and stay away from economics and other esoteric subjects...you're accepting parrotted info from people that don't know what they're talking about

His posting about GW isn't going to improve that situation, either.

I'll take the word of the non-partisan CBO over a right-wing shill like Matsop in regards to the Clinton's surpluses that were 'shock and awed' to oblivion by Chimpy. Read it and weep, Bushling.

I'll take the word of the non-partisan CBO over a right-wing shill like Matsop in regards to the Clinton's surpluses that were 'shock and awed' to oblivion by Chimpy. Read it and weep, Bushling.

www.factcheck.org

#58 | Posted by reinheitsgebot

Okay, now I'm going to have to educate the above and this will be from the U.S. treasury site:

Dan, it looks like I'll have to get into some specifics: Clinton never generated a surplus--all you would have to do is go to the U.S. Treasury site (which updates the national debt daily)--it'll also give you a history of our national debt since January, 1993. Our nat'l debt increased $281 billion from FY1998-FY2000. The deficit was almost eliminated in FY2000 ($17.9 billion deficit) Dan, you have remember the fiscal year is from Oct. to the end of Sept of each year and when Clinton left office he and congress had budgetted for the first year of Bush's presidency a $133 billion deficit (FY2001). Now, Dan, are you still with me ---I'll go to the next posting to continue my info--if you have any questions up to this point, please ask.

#61 | Posted by matsop

Here we go again, Dan. Here's where it gets a little complicated. National debt is made up of "intergovernmental holdings" and "public debt". Public debt of course is held by the public (t-bills,savings bonds, etc); governmental debt is when gov't borrows from itself (social security is the big one). the "public debt" went down 4 years but the governmental debt went up a lot greater and thus the total national debt actually went up--an accounting gimmick---Clinton paid down the public debt by borrowing far more from rhe other side of the ledger (governmental holdings and so every year of his presidency the total national debt went up--he never had a surplus. The government was borrowing huge sums to pay down the public debt and the Washington Press folks (supposed to be smart) didn't have a clue what was happening so they parrotted the surplus line--Dan, do you have any questions?

#62 | Posted by matsop

Man, it's tough educating the uneducated

"I'll take the word of the non-partisan CBO over a right-wing shill like Matsop"

Of course you will. You did see the news today that the Senate bill will modestly raise costs to insure the 34 million, right?

I'll take the word of the non-partisan CBO over a right-wing shill like Matsop in regards to the Clinton's surpluses that were 'shock and awed' to oblivion by Chimpy. Read it and weep, Bushling.

www.factcheck.org

#58 | Posted by reinheitsgebot

Read it and weep?---you would like me to wipe your tears away?

I know being a Republican causes Matsop to be incredulous when it comes to budget surpluses, but it's clear that is exactly what occurred in 99 and 00 under Clinton.

1990 1,032.1 1,253.1 -277.6 58.2 -1.6 -221.0 2,411.6
1991 1,055.1 1,324.3 -321.4 53.5 -1.3 -269.2 2,689.0
1992 1,091.3 1,381.6 -340.4 50.7 -0.7 -290.3 2,999.7
1993 1,154.5 1,409.5 -300.4 46.8 -1.4 -255.1 3,248.4
1994 1,258.7 1,461.9 -258.8 56.8 -1.1 -203.2 3,433.1
1995 1,351.9 1,515.9 -226.4 60.4 2.0 -164.0 3,604.4
1996 1,453.2 1,560.6 -174.0 66.4 0.2 -107.4 3,734.1
1997 1,579.4 1,601.3 -103.2 81.3 * -21.9 3,772.3
1998 1,722.0 1,652.7 -29.9 99.4 -0.2 69.3 3,721.1
1999 1,827.6 1,702.0 1.9 124.7 -1.0 125.6 3,632.4
2000 2,025.5 1,789.2 86.4 151.8 -2.0 236.2 3,409.8
2001 1,991.4 1,863.2 -32.4 163.0 -2.3 128.2 3,319.6
2002 1,853.4 2,011.2 -317.4 159.0 0.7 -157.8 3,540.4
2003 1,782.5 2,160.1 -538.4 155.6 5.2 -377.6 3,913.4
2004 1,880.3 2,293.0 -568.0 151.1 4.1 -412.7 4,295.5
2005 2,153.9 2,472.2 -493.6 173.5 1.8 -318.3 4,592.2
2006 2,407.3 2,655.4 -434.5 185.2 1.1 -248.2 4,829.0
2007 2,568.2 2,728.9 -342.2 186.5 -5.1 -160.7 5,035.1

know being a Republican causes Matsop to be incredulous when it comes to budget surpluses, but it's clear that is exactly what occurred in 99 and 00 under Clinton.

1990 1,032.1 1,253.1 -277.6 58.2 -1.6 -221.0 2,411.6
1991 1,055.1 1,324.3 -321.4 53.5 -1.3 -269.2 2,689.0
1992 1,091.3 1,381.6 -340.4 50.7 -0.7 -290.3 2,999.7
1993 1,154.5 1,409.5 -300.4 46.8 -1.4 -255.1 3,248.4
1994 1,258.7 1,461.9 -258.8 56.8 -1.1 -203.2 3,433.1
1995 1,351.9 1,515.9 -226.4 60.4 2.0 -164.0 3,604.4
1996 1,453.2 1,560.6 -174.0 66.4 0.2 -107.4 3,734.1
1997 1,579.4 1,601.3 -103.2 81.3 * -21.9 3,772.3
1998 1,722.0 1,652.7 -29.9 99.4 -0.2 69.3 3,721.1
1999 1,827.6 1,702.0 1.9 124.7 -1.0 125.6 3,632.4
2000 2,025.5 1,789.2 86.4 151.8 -2.0 236.2 3,409.8
2001 1,991.4 1,863.2 -32.4 163.0 -2.3 128.2 3,319.6
2002 1,853.4 2,011.2 -317.4 159.0 0.7 -157.8 3,540.4
2003 1,782.5 2,160.1 -538.4 155.6 5.2 -377.6 3,913.4
2004 1,880.3 2,293.0 -568.0 151.1 4.1 -412.7 4,295.5
2005 2,153.9 2,472.2 -493.6 173.5 1.8 -318.3 4,592.2
2006 2,407.3 2,655.4 -434.5 185.2 1.1 -248.2 4,829.0
2007 2,568.2 2,728.9 -342.2 186.5 -5.1 -160.7 5,035.1

www.cbo.gov

#62 | Posted by reinheitsgebot

Yep, he just included "public debt" and not "intergovernmental debt"---read my explanation above and your horizons will be expanded and you'll realize there was no surplus---where so many of you make your errors is not realizing the CBO just covers "public debt" and not the total national debt--doesn't cover the "intergovernmental debt"----the water is rising and I'm standing in a lake of reinheitsgebot's tears.

Clinton did not leave Bush with a surplus--you're accepting parrotted info from people that don't know what they're talking about--
Posted by matsop

The folks at the Congressional Budget Office don't know what they are talking about, but Matsop does.LOL. The only tears being generated are a result of the laughter brought about by Matsop's foolishness.

Clinton did not leave Bush with a surplus--you're accepting parrotted info from people that don't know what they're talking about--
Posted by matsop

The folks at the Congressional Budget Office don't know what they are talking about, but Matsop does.LOL. The only tears being generated are a result of the laughter brought about by Matsop's foolishness.

#66 | Posted by reinheitsgebot

Reinheitsgebot is like partisans on both sides---he parrots without doing his due diligence---it's tough for the rest of us who do our due diligence and look for truth---and even when the facts hit him up side the head like a 2 by 4 he tries to deny it---I must say though he doesn't use argumentum ad hominen attacks or slurs and I have to give him credit for that---and the waters continue to rise and i'm getting in my boat.

Why do you even care Nanc? Are you trying to prove a point? It is a Republican Gov that got us into this mess. Why aren't you bashing Ahnold?

#3 | Posted by dxlingr at 2010-01-08 09:38 PM | Reply

Arnold is no conservative, and nowadays neither are the republicans. I can see how you'd have a difficult time understanding Cali's self inflicted state of affairs.

and the waters continue to rise and i'm getting in my boat.

Posted by matsop

Bon voyage.

Waiting for the Hollywood Ending...

Arnold is wondering why this "Movie's" producers didn't write him a better script...???

and the waters continue to rise and i'm getting in my boat.

Posted by matsop

Bon voyage.

#69 | Posted by reinheitsgebot

Bon voyage and it's been a pleasure

re: "...where so many of you make your errors is not realizing the CBO just covers "public debt" and not the total national debt--doesn't cover the "intergovernmental debt"----the water is rising and I'm standing in a lake of reinheitsgebot's tears.

Posted by matsop at 2010-01-10 07:49 PM | Reply

No one claimed that Clinton left Bush with no "debt". What is clear is that Clinton left Bush with a balanced budget with no projected DEFICIT, you fucking moron.

Bush then ran a structural deficit resulting in eight years of additional accumulated DEBT, you fucking moron.

California refused to cut spending or raise taxes...

Serves them right if they go bankrupt...but the rest of us shouldn't be forced to pick up the tab for their stupidity...

Kinda like we should have done with Wall Street

Ringmaster, you should keep to posting about GW and stay away from economics and other esoteric subjects

I don't take advice from right wing crackpots any more. I voted republican for the first time in 2000. Never again.

I damned sure would never take economic advice from one after taking a few college courses in history and economics.

I prefer my tax dollars to go full circle, not down some toilet like Iraq.

The biggest problem Arnold is having is just the same as the Federal government is having, too many years of republicans incessant desire to develop every square foot of the state without planning the infrastructure first. That infrastructure includes, utilities, roads, entertainment complexes, schools, parks, municipal facilities, hospitals, prisons, etc. It also includes making sure there is an ample supply of water and electricity. There are environmental concerns that must me addressed. You can't just ignore it like the money grubbers do. It is not just about making money and get rich quick schemes. These developers sold the buyers homes at ridiculous prices that are for the most part only good for 30 years in the first place.

How many of those planned communities erected in the Reagan days are now nothing but urban blight? The same with the ones built in the Clinton years. The worst are the ones built in the Bush years. Now they are made like Chinese tools. Nothing but cheap crap. Of course the property values were doomed to self destruct. It's a no brainer.

If I was Arnold I would put a moratorium on all new subdivisions and start to encourage people to move out of the state seeing as how half the people are unemployed already and there is no new development going on anyway. The factories were all moved to China and Mexico anyway. There is no potential for job growth anymore in California. It won't hurt the unemployment problem now.

I would also raise taxes on rich and give them tax breaks if they invest in local projects that benefit the people not the bankers.

But of course, I am a dreamer. Arnold is not that smart and will be out in 2011 anyway. He's leave the mess for the next leader like Bush did.

prop 13

#25 | POSTED BY DIBBLDA AT 2010-01-10 02:38 AM | REPLY | FLAG:

Bullshit. Cali's still one of the most highly taxed states. It's also had a net increase in jobs in 08-09, and will have same in 09-10. How fucking stupid is that?

Cali has a waste/spending problem. When all these higher ups retire and we have to fund all these pensions, the problem is just gonna be worse until the business environment improves. With Dem control - as the legis has been for years - that is kinda unlikely.

#73 - he inherited a mess, made it worse and will pass it on. They'll still be in the same mess. Pigs do it and survive. I'm just hoping some of our family and friends see the axe before it drops and move out here with us - my in-laws are a shoe in - we'll be picking them up the first part of May.

Perhaps this why marijuana legalization is suddenly getting green-lighted through the state legislature process.

This is all because of the dot.com crash. All that investment money pouring into the state enticed the bureaucrats to pork their respective agencies with staff and pet projects because of the tax revenue it generated. Then it all went south, leaving the state treasury a way too thin to maintain that level of expenditures. There are some who say they can trace it all back to Pete Wilson's too-cozy relationship with the suits at Enron, but I still think the big wound was the dot.com bust.

Surely people don't believe they'll just be able to grow their own? Oh, no-no-no. The state will own the industry and it will be akin to tobacco in what you're allowed to grow and you'll be able to purchase the weak seeds through the Department of Forestry or some such agency.

Things are not always what they seem. This is more than likely seen as a revenue source solely for the state.

I predict more people giving up marijuana in California's future.