|
Post by hammer on May 21, 2009 13:27:36 GMT -5
Let's put it in perspective, the budget deficit is $21B on paper, but in all likelihood effectively higher due to decreases in tax receipts. But let's go with $21B for the sake of argument. With a state population of roughly 36 million (but actually higher if you count illegal aliens), that means every CA citizen owes $583. As pointed out, only 50% of CA families actually pay any income taxes, so that means minimally each of these families are on the hook for $1166. (Ok, probably a little less since people who don't pay CA income tax still pay some gas, cigarette, liquor, and sales taxes.)
The obvious solution to our problem is to just change the state law that requires us to balance our budget. In other words, just go down the same road as the Federal Government. After all, our deficit pales in comparison to the debt level of the average US citizen (around $35,000 per person and growing fast). Barring that, declaring bankruptcy seems to be the next best option. This will allow us to rewrite union contracts and really clean house. I suspect if we threaten to declare bankruptcy, the Obama administration will bail us out because our unions will put tremendous pressure on Obama and Company to give us your (the other 49 state's) money.
|
|
|
Post by soothsayer on May 21, 2009 13:36:36 GMT -5
Or you all could just pony up the $1166 (on average).
|
|
|
Post by bunnywailer on May 21, 2009 13:54:15 GMT -5
I agree with Bob that Arnold turned out to be worse than Davis....At least Davis was fairly straightforward with his politics:...spend, spend, spend, tax, tax, tax, spend, spend, spend. Something that one might criticize Davis about is that he should have known the Internet Bubble and all the revenue from Silcon Valley would not last forever....He couldn't refuse any of the demands by state government unions, but that is true of almost all California politicians. However, Arnold made all kinds of promises during his campaign in the recall election....stop the spending, cut taxes, renegotiate all the state government employees pension contracts that were obviously not going to be sustainable. Arnold broke all his promises about fiscal discipline.... Now he won't even be honest about it....Arnold was a disaster for California. Would you please stop putting words in my mouth? I never said Davis was better than Arnold, only that he was a good guy who tried his best. Same thing with Arnold, he has tried his best to and has been fair in his methods, and free of partisanship. If you want to find fault with the current state of affairs in California, then the blame is not with the governor, it is with the state legislature that has repeatedly shot down all of the proposed solutions that Arnold has proposed and caused him to repeatedly take actions which were contrary to what he wanted to do and what he promised to do when he was elected.
|
|
|
Post by hammer on May 21, 2009 15:45:40 GMT -5
Or you all could just pony up the $1166 (on average). Hey, I wouldn't mind doing that if I knew it was a one time cost -- never to occur again. But. alas, we are dealing with politicians here -- pols who never met a dollar they didn't want to spend (plus a little more for good measure).
|
|
|
Post by soothsayer on May 21, 2009 17:00:44 GMT -5
"Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger on Wednesday promised to make severe cuts in education, health care and law enforcement."
Man, that's going to be one fun place to live. Sooner or later, people are going to realize that maybe forking over the money is worth the alternative. Probably later.
|
|
|
Post by paloalto on May 21, 2009 17:08:02 GMT -5
Does anyone really think there are enough jobs in private enterprise to employ the Californian populace? What happens when you take away these state jobs? The answer is simple: Make Bruce Willis share. If only we could make government bigger here in California, that would solve our problems.
|
|
|
Post by paloalto on May 21, 2009 17:17:08 GMT -5
I agree with Bob that Arnold turned out to be worse than Davis....At least Davis was fairly straightforward with his politics:...spend, spend, spend, tax, tax, tax, spend, spend, spend. Something that one might criticize Davis about is that he should have known the Internet Bubble and all the revenue from Silcon Valley would not last forever....He couldn't refuse any of the demands by state government unions, but that is true of almost all California politicians. However, Arnold made all kinds of promises during his campaign in the recall election....stop the spending, cut taxes, renegotiate all the state government employees pension contracts that were obviously not going to be sustainable. Arnold broke all his promises about fiscal discipline.... Now he won't even be honest about it....Arnold was a disaster for California. Would you please stop putting words in my mouth? I never said Davis was better than Arnold, only that he was a good guy who tried his best. Same thing with Arnold, he has tried his best to and has been fair in his methods, and free of partisanship. If you want to find fault with the current state of affairs in California, then the blame is not with the governor, it is with the state legislature that has repeatedly shot down all of the proposed solutions that Arnold has proposed and caused him to repeatedly take actions which were contrary to what he wanted to do and what he promised to do when he was elected. OK, Davis was a good guy and you are not comparing Arnold to Davis. I will compare the two... Arnold was far worst....He went back on his campaign promises....He did not try his best to fulfill his campaign promises...He made a half-hearted effort and then just decided it would be better to be popular with the Democrats and the liberal media. This is something I have followed closely...When I have more time I will expand on the topic. Right now I have some meetings to attend....Sometimes I think I am the only one left working in private enterprise in Cali....
|
|
|
Post by hammer on May 21, 2009 17:17:40 GMT -5
Does anyone really think there are enough jobs in private enterprise to employ the Californian populace? What happens when you take away these state jobs? The answer is simple: Make Bruce Willis share. If only we could make government bigger here in California, that would solve our problems. Reminds me of mathematical speak -- in the limit. Keep making the CA Government bigger and bigger, keep taxing more in more and "in the limit" what happens?
|
|
|
Post by soothsayer on May 21, 2009 17:21:16 GMT -5
Does anyone really think there are enough jobs in private enterprise to employ the Californian populace? What happens when you take away these state jobs? The answer is simple: Make Bruce Willis share. If only we could make government bigger here in California, that would solve our problems. Where did I suggest making government bigger? This is your idea of civil debate? What I'm worried about is what happens when spending is cut. You should be, too, if you live in the state.
|
|
|
Post by paloalto on May 21, 2009 17:24:54 GMT -5
Have to go right now... You win. You got the last word.
|
|
|
Post by soothsayer on May 21, 2009 17:44:46 GMT -5
Woo-hoo!
I'm pouring champagne on myself as I type.
|
|
|
Post by hammer on May 22, 2009 12:13:38 GMT -5
If only we could make government bigger here in California, that would solve our problems. Where did I suggest making government bigger? This is your idea of civil debate? Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have ... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases. What I'm worried about is what happens when spending is cut. You should be, too, if you live in the state. We are worried, but at some point someone or something will have to pay for the "Sins of our Fathers." As you said, we can pay now or we can pay later. I'm the first to admit we need services from our government, but when the cost of those services are "raided" by huge pension and benefit costs, we, the citizens, have to put on the brakes. As Thomas Jefferson said, "Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have."
|
|
|
Post by hammer on Jun 20, 2009 12:33:08 GMT -5
A few days ago Arnold said, "We must look at every bold proposal out there, no matter how daring or radical -- even the idea of a flat tax." Finally, our Governator is facing the music and saying something logical. Now if only the legislature would get onboard with him.
Arnold appears to be going back to his roots as a reformer. That is good for us here in Kalifornia. On Thursday he declared that he won't sign another tax increase and he will no longer allow the state to issue short term debt to kick the budget can down the road. He told the legislature to make cuts now or it will be a long hot summer that may end in a shutdown of all funding and "grind to a halt" of nearly all government services.
Arnold has called for cutbacks in education, Medicaid, prisons, and pensions -- the sacred cows of California politics. That's where 3/4ths of the money goes and the dollars are buying us far too little in results. We have the highest teacher salaries in the nation and 2nd poorest math and reading scores. We also spend $49K per prison inmate, or 50% more per criminal that the national average.
Our esteemed Governator found out that the richest 1% of CA tax payers pay somewhere between 50 and 55% or all income taxes. Sounds like a good idea to "soak the rich," but the whole system is collapsing upon itself as more and more Californians move to places like Nevada and Texas where they pay zero income tax versus our 10.55% top rate. The bottomline is when we have boom years revenues rise rapidly because the richest 1% are making money, but when we have bust years, that same group contributes much less. That leads to wild swings in revenue collection. And guess what, during the boom years, politicians added on new pensions and commitments that are now unsustainable.
Arnold has appointed a bipartisan tax reform commission to explore a uniform 6% tax rate on individuals and corporations. This in theory would reduce the sharp revenue shifts and attract new business to the Golden State. We need a miracle out here, and just maybe something good can come out of our huge budget shortfall.
|
|
|
Post by stonehands on Jun 21, 2009 9:32:29 GMT -5
I can't remember who said it, but "there's always someone out there worse off than you". Try owning and running a business in a state that rewards idiots. Our governor can't read but 2 ft in front of him and our state congress hasn't done any work in the past 2-3 weeks at our expense. I live in NY my friend, I had to sell my business because taxes were too high. While business was good we create at least 20 jobs at our company while cascading the creation of a dozen or so more in our affiliated sectors. All of that hard work went down the drain when it was decided to give "john" the old heave-ho (pardon the pun). Sold my business, they moved it to North Carolina where it is twice the size it was here. SO the idiots be: State politicians getting paid but not doing any work, the tax man taking every cent he can from owners so that local govt can mismanage it, failing minor league teams that get a handout when their product obviously isn't good enough for their respective location. You think you've got it bad, try living in New York.
|
|
|
Post by holidayhusker on Jun 21, 2009 10:47:28 GMT -5
Stone...could not agree with you more. The entreprenaurs that built this country on an idea and saving are a thing of the past. No one can afford to build a business anymore. In the meantime....those businesses that were built on an idea and went global are now going broke. We have huge problems in this country when no one is creating new jobs. I want to add that due to the cost of healthcare, everyone wants the security and a sure thing opposed to following their dream.
|
|