The latest figures are that we are $35 billion in the hole for the current budget. $35 billion. That is one freaking spicy meatball. Before now, the Republicans in the Legislature have demanded no new taxes. But this far above the $20 billion deficit everyone thought would be the case. I don't see any easy way around it. Actually, lots of states and cities are in trouble (as I posted a long time ago). Tax revenues are way way down and unlike the federales, they can't print bonds or green paper to cover shortfalls. This is yet another breeze about to blow on our economic house of cards.
I saw something a few weeks back that said that even if California didn't pay any of it's employees, it would still be several (9?) billion in the hole. That was using the OLD deficit numbers.
It sounds like California is somewhat worse off, but there are a bunch of states the projected deficits for the coming year are in the range of $1000 per resident. Here in Massachussetts, they are using phrases like 'the worst since the Great Depression', and that's after 12 years of Republican governors and at least 6 years of a notoriously tight fisted conservative Democrat running the state house of reps. The big issue here (and I imagine it's part of the problem elsewhere) is state's overall tax structure had become disproportionately dependent on a strong stock market. The overall level of economic activity and average income levels here are, of course, weaker than they were 2 or 3 years ago, but only by a little. Tax revenues, on the other hand, are off by something like 40%. Income and other personal taxes are based on raw economic activity, but capital gains taxes and other taxes on investment are dependant on profits, which are the first casualties of a downturn.
CA's deficit is big as a total number but not as bad as a % of the population or total state GDP as in other states. How bad is it? Try getting soft on crime bad. While I agree with reducing the sentences imposed in the 90s on non-violent drug possession convicts, I cannot believe that governors would choose letting criminals out without a parole officer to raising taxes.
Can you describe what Jarvis did or do you normally bark out of your backside like the Democrat SS does?
Can you describe why "white liberals" are to blame, or do you need to wait until Hannity comes back on the air?
I'm just amazed that someone could, with a straight face, pontificate on Cali's fiscal problems and not know who Howard Jarvis is. Well, no I'm not. Al Franken had a fascinating bit in his book about hard right conservatives and "pseudo-certainty." Except Al pointed out that that academic term could better be translated as "being a f***** idiot."
The WHITE Socialist SucmSuckingMaggot InfestedSlimy SnobShitHead Democrats continue their drive to achieve their Berkeley Radical dream of turning California into a Commune Utopia by: 1. A confiscatory tax policy that drives out businesses. Arizona and Nevada actively court and recruit California businesses that flee California’s "white liberals’" tax policy. 2. Business regulation to the point of strangulation. 3. A vast array of Socialist Social handout programs. Otherwise known as vote buying and appeasement. 4. Waste, Fraud, and Abuse.
Democrats socialist ???. What are you talking about ?. A bit more left of centre than the Republicans, but nowhere near properly socialist, as the rest of the world understands it. I can't imagine a state like California being run by Tony Benn, or Harold Wilson at all. It's another example of how US politics is just different to the rest of the developed world I suppose.
Obviously still doesn't know who Howard Jarvis is or what he did. Hey, Cam, have you heard of George Bush? He's the president. Of the United States. Seriously, talking about taxes in Cali while ignorant of Howard Jarvis is no less ridiculous than talking about mid-20th century European history and not knowing anything about Hitler. Cam, do a google, and come back when you know...something, anything.
Ill let Stephen Moore of the Cato institute give the fiscal-right viewpoint on what Howard Jarvis accomplished for those not in the know http://www.cato.org/dailys/7-30-98.html I am sure some of the resident left will throw their viewpoint on him and prop13. As far as the fiscal troubles of California, there not the only ones.And I wouldnt go blameing it all on Democrats.There are many states who are controlled by Republicans who are in similar circumstances .Sure maybe not in a big of a hole as california.But California is a big ole state. State bodies need to learn the concept of a budget.
> You mean California will actually have to start > supporting itself? You must be joking. For the last decade and a half, California has been subsidising the rest of the nation, and that amount has been expolding the last 5 years. http://www.calinst.org/pubs/Bop2001.pdf Lets just see where Oklahoma is: http://www.cows.org/pdf/research/econ/fiscal/rp-ap-fedmon.pdf (page 14) Hmmm... I think I'd like you to pay your own way, you moochers.
Yes, that was me. Sorry. Can I pay the $35 billion next week? I left my wallet in my other pants. Internet economy faw down and go boom. Once California's surplus - up until 2000 there was a surplus - was handed over to Enron, Duke and Reliant, we pretty much had no safety net left. Someday, some California pol will have the shuttlecocks to call for Prop 13's repeal, but unfortunately, not yet. From what I can tell, this is a nationwide thing, not simply a California thing. The only state to improve its quality of life since Bush took over the White House is Texas.
From 1970-1985, California received far more federal moneys than it gave up in taxation. Payback's a bitch, you whiney little ass-calis.
Re: Re: State of California in State of Disaster We wanted to share him with the rest of you guys. We spread Bushes like an El Paso roadwhore spreads the clap.
> Arizona and Nevada actively court and recruit > California businesses that flee California’s "white > liberals’" tax policy. Arizona is facing a $400 million defecit next year. They had to close down 11 state parks. Nevada has a $300 million defecit. They are going to dip into their rainy day fund and are looking at starting a state lottery. I guess their courtship of California industries did not help them.
> but as long as the worthless ***s of California > have highways 20 lanes wide to drive on, I guess > it's all OK. The first link I posted says that California pays more in gasoline taxes than it gets in Federal highway funds. We have big freeways because we have a lot of people.
I realize this post is about as serious as my Sharpton-for-Dictator crusade, but if I had to guess off the top of my head what the discrepancy was, I'd guess defense spending. The military presence in California is much teenier than it was back when they were building all kinds of evil crap in El Segundo. Er, I mean, the space shuttle, yeah, that's it. Might also have been pollution funds, since LA's air was so hideous during those years. What happened in 1985, I wonder? We had two incredibly expensive earthquakes since then, and we still had to feed and clothe you clowns? Or did they all of a sudden tax the porn industry? Prop 13 is here to stay, I think. Maybe as the people who are paying less in property taxes than sales taxes on a York Peppermint Patty (note - this statistic might be exaggerated for effect) slowly die off, people might come to their senses. But I doubt it. Even the parking meters in Sacramento are Democrats now, and they're still more scared of Joel Fox (Jarvis' heir at Citizens For Tax Justice) than of the NRA, even.
Yes, California's surplus used to come from defense: http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/taubmancenter/publications/fisc/fy1995/FY1995StateProfiles.pdf Texas only paid a lot in the early 1980's, when people "invested" a lot of money under the foolish impression there was still oil to be found there. Since then their deficit has been only a fraction of California's. Oh, and Texas is facing a $5 billion deficit next year.
In a nice piece of symmetry, $300M + $400M = $700M, or exactly 1/50th of Cali's deficit. Is Cali's budget 50 times bigger? Is its population? No. And no.