AIP column: California’s Morning After
posted at 10:15 am on May 21, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
For those 14% who said I’d wait until today to finally post on vacation, congratulations — but I have a good reason. AIP has my weekly column today on the California tax revolt and its implications. California had its Morning After yesterday, but the ship of state still lists as dangerously as the ship in The Poseidon Adventure, and it could capsize as easily unless Californians themselves awaken to their own folly:
At the same time, Californians kept pushing back against the tax hikes. We started a tax revolt in 1978 with Proposition 13 that put two constraints on California government. First, it limited property-tax evaluations from increasing dramatically except after a sale, after the state abused its assessment power in an attempt to get more money from property owners. It also forced the legislature to get a two-thirds majority in each chamber to raise taxes, which put the power in the hands of the minority – and at least occasionally kept the legislature from hiking taxes.
Today, finally, The Morning After has arrived, and just before California capsizes from the bad leadership of its elected officials and the irresponsibility of its voters. Tax revolts are mighty fine, just like gold rushes, but not when the same electorate insists on spending money on IOUs and demanding a nanny state on the cheap. Californians have to come to terms with their own bad choices as well as a political class that lacks the courage to say “no” to more spending, let alone cut the current level of spending to any great degree.
California voters need to practice what they’ve preached in this election. Bond issues need to go down to defeat. If the state doesn’t have the money to build prisons, schools, or any other facilities it needs, voters should demand that Sacramento find the money in the general fund and not from issuing bonds that will eventually have to be repaid anyway – with interest. Perhaps California civics lessons should start including a specific unit of instruction on what public bonds are, as one way of making this point stick.
Next, California needs to start dismantling its aggressive nanny-state agencies, especially those that overburden business. People come to California for the weather, and they leave from the lack of opportunity. High taxes, regulatory burdens, and oppressive worker-comp laws incentivize flight for those businesses able to relocate. California has to learn to compete for those investments, not by offering one-time breaks to companies looking for a new operations base but by making the state business-friendly to all.
It’s time for Californians to grow up. They have demanded services and refused to pay for them, and while the legislature is hardly blameless for the result, they’re not the entire cause of it, either. More than 30 years after the Proposition 13 tax revolt, the state’s electorate has refused to complete the task of bringing fiscal responsibility to Sacramento. Either they do it now, or be prepared to man the lifeboats or dance on the ceilings until the whole thing sinks into a sea of red ink. Be sure to read the whole column, and then read the others at AIP as well as their fine blog.
Meanwhile, I’m enjoying my vacation in Branson, and I want to thank those of you who dropped me notes wondering whether I was still alive. In fact, I’m one of the most spry people in this city, which isn’t terribly difficult to be, since I’m about 20 years younger than the median age. The shows are a lot of fun; I’ll write more about that when I return home. In the meantime, enjoy the terrific writing Allahpundit and our Green Room contributors keep producing this week, and you’ll hear from me next this weekend.
Update: A couple of commenters resent me blaming Californians instead of exclusively laying the blame on the legislature. Well, sorry, but California voters keep approving bond measures, creating more debt and debt-service requirements that are killing the state budget. Californians approved over $20 billion in bonds just last November, including a $10 billion bond measure for high-speed rail. Why is California, a state with a high-density highway system, going into the choo-choo business, an industry known for its red ink rather than speedy service? Because taxpayers can’t say no any better than the legislature they elect.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
I wouldn’t hold my breath.
seymour on May 21, 2009 at 10:21 AM
Hi Ed! Have fun. enjoy.
elduende on May 21, 2009 at 10:22 AM
Heat to the stern, not to the bow!
Mr. Joe on May 21, 2009 at 10:22 AM
Head to the stern, not to the bow.
Mr. Joe on May 21, 2009 at 10:23 AM
Unfortunately California does not presently have a strong, articulate, conservative who can push the momentum forward. All we have here are libs that call themselves democrats and libs who call themselves republicans. Its gonna be decades before this state digs at of the spending “nanny state” hole they’re in.
jbh45 on May 21, 2009 at 10:24 AM
1.) Deport all Illegal Aliens
2.) Suspend all services for Illegal Aliens
3.) Drill off shore
4.) Deport all Ecotards
State will have a surplus next year! DONE!
SDarchitect on May 21, 2009 at 10:25 AM
Enjoy the remainder of your vacation.
rbj on May 21, 2009 at 10:25 AM
Say “Hi” to Yakov Smirnoff for me, and enjoy your well-deserved vacation. AP is doing a great job keeping Hot Air as THE hopping place for cons.
NaCly dog on May 21, 2009 at 10:26 AM
The smart ones have already abandonded ship. Those dependent on the state ship…..well that is a different story…but it has something to do with scurrying rats attacking each other. LOL
Again, time to bring in a forensic auditor and have a bottom up review of the budget!
sargentj on May 21, 2009 at 10:27 AM
I lived in Long Beach in the early 90′s. I was greeted to the state a wek after the Rodney King riots by some fellow in a pickup with an ancient ‘give peace a chance’ bumper sticker waving a pistol at me after he cut me off in traffic after I used the horn in protest. We left after there had been a shooting in a Westminster Vietnamese restaurant that involved 6 dead and only made page 6 of the LA times….California created the hell that is California and should clean it up themselves and leave the rest of us alone. In Idaho the worst thing a person can say is that they were from California.
JIMV on May 21, 2009 at 10:27 AM
Welcome back, Ed!
Vacation pics forthcoming?
jgapinoy on May 21, 2009 at 10:30 AM
I hear some more responsible states like Alaska have billions set aside in case of hard times. That’s right, those greedy people have the money just setting there – doing nothing!
Obama can just take that money and give it to states that are about to implode like CA, MI and PA. The electoral map would be a good place to start if they want to expand the program. Take money from the red ones that are more likely to be solvent and spread the wealth the the blue ones.
forest on May 21, 2009 at 10:31 AM
But what if the CA legislator cuts the budget for the Bureau of Home Furnishings and Thermal Insulation? How will people in CA know what furniture to buy. If they, the voters, do not realize tha their legislators have their best interest at heart, then the CA voters surely cannot buy furniture without this government organization.
WashJeff on May 21, 2009 at 10:31 AM
Branson – great place.
I love the Jim Stafford show and we saw this last time:
New Shanghai Circus – Acrobats of China
I think many entertainers have located to Branson from Kalifornia.
izoneguy on May 21, 2009 at 10:36 AM
Obama WILL bail CA out, without a doubt. And then MA, NJ, NY, and a bunch of others will demand their bailouts, and The 0 will be more than happy to provide.
If this doesn’t push Texas and the other “red” states towards secession, I don’t know what will.
Rebar on May 21, 2009 at 10:36 AM
If California had additional state spending proportional to population growth and inflation it would have a $22 billion surplus.
The only thing that the voters of California can be blamed for is continuing to put a majority of democrats in the legislature.
jukin on May 21, 2009 at 10:36 AM
Kalifornai needs to get rid of their tourism dept. It is all false advertising.
izoneguy on May 21, 2009 at 10:37 AM
California:
State of illusions in a state of delusion.
Handel on May 21, 2009 at 10:37 AM
I think Texas will have a revolt more in terms of shove your Federal money and you ain’t getting any more money, oil, cattle, food or power from Texas.
What the hell will Obama do? Send in the military??? We will start chasing out the IRS, Federal Judges and the like…..
izoneguy on May 21, 2009 at 10:39 AM
5 Steps for Fixing California
1. Across the board 30% budget cut. Nothing is spared. The state has 250,000 workers – lay off 20% and end force the public service employees union to accept drastic cuts in benefits to bring them in line with other states. If they refuse, lay off more workers and keep laying them off until the union collapses.
2. A Constitutional Amendment requiring voter approval to raise income taxes and property taxes, 65% majority voter approval required for passage. Repeal Prop. 13.
3. Part-time Legislature.
4. Repeal Ballot Initiative Law or severely restrict it to ensure that any ballot initiative requiring spending also requires that it be paid for through an off-setting tax hike (see #2).
5. Reduce Corporate business taxes by 50%. Make California and attractive place for businesses again and jobs will return, revenue will go up, and the state will prosper once more.
outOfElement on May 21, 2009 at 10:40 AM
Ed, if you are enjoying Branson check out Pidgeon Forge and Gatlinburg TN. sometime…similiar in touristy things to do but with the addition of having the Smokey Mountain National Park as a neighbor…the park is beautiful with plenty of wildlife…have fun on the rest of your trip and watch out for those all-you-can-eat buffets!
DCJeff on May 21, 2009 at 10:40 AM
Unless the roll out a new motto, “Coome to Kalifornia and see your bailout money at work.“
WashJeff on May 21, 2009 at 10:42 AM
An easier solution: Push San Francisco to secede from California, and the rest of the state would be purplish-red, and could rescue itself. Then let Governor Gavin pay his own bills in Sodom-on-the-Bay.
Steve Z on May 21, 2009 at 10:42 AM
You forgot:
6) All public employees shall be moved from the defined benefit retirement plan to a defined contribution plan.
WashJeff on May 21, 2009 at 10:43 AM
As a Californian…
We need to let this state go BK. Then dismantle all of the ridiculous state employee union contracts.
Then, as SDArch points out, punt the illegal aliens and deny them services (there’s over $10 Billion a year RIGHT THERE) and drill for oil (fast revenue).
Call a Constitutional Convention (well, that will never happen) and kick out all of the retards in Sacramento. Let’s just start over.
Then let’s just BEG Tom McClintock to come down off of Capitol Hill to come back to run our state.
Nigel on May 21, 2009 at 10:43 AM
California is merely a snapshot of Obama’s America in a few short years. Nanny country, owned and operated by unions.
Patrick S on May 21, 2009 at 10:43 AM
California’s budget this year calls for 40 billion dollars for K-12 education, and over 12 billion for higher ed. Talk about an Epic Fail. With all that money, they still can’t produce a population smart enough to understand that you can’t keep spending money you don’t have.
rockmom on May 21, 2009 at 10:44 AM
Work it into #1.
outOfElement on May 21, 2009 at 10:45 AM
nowadays, voters are pretty disconnected from reality.
here is prescott, az, lots of liberal socals have been flooding in for years — fleeing the result of their caring votes.
and wouldn’t you know it, the area now battles those new votes for new taxes and new wasteful spending, like converting industrial-area streets to bike lanes, on and on.
liberals just care, without a clue what their caring really causes.
ps: good to hear from ed!
jimmer on May 21, 2009 at 10:45 AM
If you have seen the ways they are teaching “math” these days, it is all perfectly understandable.
myrenovations on May 21, 2009 at 10:47 AM
Does 4 + 4 feel like 8, Jimmy?
outOfElement on May 21, 2009 at 10:47 AM
Fixed it for ‘ya, Ed………..
……….. and I’ve been a resident of the state since 1964.
Seven Percent Solution on May 21, 2009 at 10:50 AM
“No ma’am, it equals 6 because evil corporations’ pollution killed 2.”
Patrick S on May 21, 2009 at 10:50 AM
Nailed it there, Seven%…and I’ve been here since ’62. When it was a GREAT state.
Patrick S on May 21, 2009 at 10:51 AM
Having lived in both New York and Washington, and suffered through the “We’re Special” entitlement mentality most of hte liberals have there, I have no doubt the liberal politicians in California and a pretty large percentage of the voters are going to try and kick the can down the road and try to dump off their deficit spending on the federal government, even past the $6 billion Arnold is asking for, because California is “special”.
They’ll prattle on about how the state pays more to Washington than it gets back (a complaint I believe is voiced by pols in at least 40-45 of the 57 states), and how vital the state is to the national and world economy, and therefore is entitled to a bail-out as much as GM or Citibank are (never mind the question of whether the feds should be bailing those companies out for their failures). And they’ll get all the support possible from the usual big media outlets with storieson how California already has cut its spending as much as humanly possible. Then is just comes out to how afraid the Congressional Democrats from the other states are about blowback in the 2010 midterm elections as to whether or not they’ll approve opening a door that can’t be closed when other overspending states come calling.
jon1979 on May 21, 2009 at 10:53 AM
Then the state doesn’t build them. Simple.
Need does not cause the money to exist.
cadetwithchips2 on May 21, 2009 at 10:56 AM
Has Michelle seen this?
corona on May 21, 2009 at 10:58 AM
It’s going to be an Oboingo bail-out, just wait and see! So all of us are going to have to pay for the d!ckheads in Kookafornia. Maybe, just maybe this will be the straw that breaks the camel’s back in a national tax revolt.
I think I saw this in another thread: Mark Steyn has it right
mr.blacksheep on May 21, 2009 at 11:03 AM
Here in NJ the courts have ordered the state to pour money down various ratholes, the biggest being the education system. (Not that education is a rathole, but in many communities the system is a rathole.) I suspect that California has similar problems. Can anyone set me straight?
njcommuter on May 21, 2009 at 11:05 AM
Copy everything Texas is doing for business.
marklmail on May 21, 2009 at 11:06 AM
By the way………..
……….. who’s going to play the part of Shelly Winters?
Seven Percent Solution on May 21, 2009 at 11:07 AM
Hopefully Arnold will be looking for work soon.
Patrick S on May 21, 2009 at 11:09 AM
The state is just too damn big. Split it up into 3 states! Northern, Central and Southern (L.A & S.D.). They all have different needs and deserve a chance to stand or fall on their own.
Mr_Magoo on May 21, 2009 at 11:11 AM
Nooooooooooo way, Magoo. Cut L.A. (but not San Diego or Orange Counties) and the Bay Area into one liberal “haven” and you’re left with a very solid red state.
Patrick S on May 21, 2009 at 11:16 AM
The unions did push those initiatives, but it was the voters who sided with them. Remember the special election of 2005? Schwarzenegger tried to limit budget growth and voters sided with the unions by a margin of 25%. California voters are to blame for this mess. They want to have their cake and eat it, too.
Caiwyn on May 21, 2009 at 11:21 AM
Same thing here in California. Plus, any time the voters attempt to cut services to illegals, the courts overturn. The unions and nanny staters are a huge problem in California, but the liberal courts are as bad or worse.
speed911 on May 21, 2009 at 11:21 AM
California is a lot like a lush field of grain just before the locusts finish devouring the last wheat kernel. The exodus from California that has been occurring over the last decade was comprised of the beneficial insects who did not want to be devoured by the locust horde.
Soon though, and troubling to the lush fields that remain, the locusts will also begin to move.
Obama will attempt to keep this from happening by providing a continuous supply of grain, taken from the other lush fields. In the end, the result is the same.
BobMbx on May 21, 2009 at 11:21 AM
That would be too smart & conservative. Kalifornia just does not have the proper leadership, the will or the skill to move forward and fix it;s own problems. Now Kalifornia is asking for a Federal Bailout. Soon you will have a federation of states with no soverign rights. You will have Kalifornia, New Yark, Jersery, and Illinois being wards of the Federal Government.
Where can we see up the new government for the anti-federation alliance of states? I say kick all the libs out of Austin, they can move to the new federation based in San Fran Pelosiville.
Austin would be a great place for the birthplace of the new conservative anti-federation alliance.
izoneguy on May 21, 2009 at 11:23 AM
That would be awesome experiment. Blue state california versus red state california. Let’s see which state is more prosperous in 10 years.
WashJeff on May 21, 2009 at 11:24 AM
Since California is to stupid to use it’s own natural resources to pull itself out of the red (drill here,drill now),cutting spending is where they should go unless Obama sends our tax dollars to bail them out to.
The democrats know that cuts in many welfare programs and wasteful projects that are more for buying votes than helping out the people of California would not be felt by a large part of the electorate.
This terrifies the democrats because they would not be able to have an excuse to raise taxes to cover funding their voting constituents like unions,environmentalist,and many social projects that accomplish little to nothing.
Just like the democrats class warfare game to appeal to the
over 50% that don’t pay taxes,spending cuts could appeal to the vast majority that pays for many of these wasteful policies but receives no benefit from them.
The liberal propaganda machine that spent more money (10-1)in an effort to guilt tax payers into accepting the state’s tax hikes did not work.So this effort probably won’t work when a lot of this wasteful spending is cut away so that people may actually have to work for a living and spend within their means,you know,personal accountability.
Baxter Greene on May 21, 2009 at 11:25 AM
They ain’t taking my grain. Give me liberty or give me death.
Here we will stand and if your blood must be spilled on our soil, so be it.
For a new crop will be born from the blood of the locust.
izoneguy on May 21, 2009 at 11:25 AM
All California really needs is the ‘Big One’ to hit in LA to SF corridor. A minute and a half of magnitude 9 will slap folks around sillier than normal… and realize all the ‘social services’ that have been paid into have done zip to address a real earthquake, not the little ones seen since 1903. And SF of 1903 was not as built up or as fragile as the city is today.
A ‘bailout’ will not help. And expecting the federal government to step in and clean up… ahhh… as any one seen New Orleans and the help it got? Now imagine that for SF or LA. Save over a wider region. With less of to spread around. Just either of those cities getting a 9 will do it… and the region is overdue for its next 9. California could have been spending to secure its future, instead it has paid to be ‘nice’ to the present, knowing that disaster will come. And with the way the Nation is, just where would anyone get the money to ‘help’ in CA with such a thing? Oh, private charity which President Obama wants to denigrate and kill… good job, that! The American people spent more than its government in helping out in the Christmas Tsunami 2004. That was the ranking: American people first, its government second, everyone else a distance beyond that. Gotta love how ‘hope & change’ kills long term viability of a Nation…
ajacksonian on May 21, 2009 at 11:25 AM
Once the split is complete though, I want the Red State portion to get at least 47 of the electoral votes.
myrenovations on May 21, 2009 at 11:26 AM
You are vacationing in my state?! Holy cow! You probably saved a couple of jobs with your Missouri, stimulus vacation!
Vince on May 21, 2009 at 11:30 AM
DING-DING-DING! We have a winner! (I guessed Thursday).
We have the same problem in the suburbs of Texas. Big turnouts at the Tea Parties, then voted to approve a city bond package that was 60% Parks & Recreation (and our facilities are just fine and massive). Tax base is shrinking and we’re still piling up 20-year debt like crazy.
michaelo on May 21, 2009 at 11:32 AM
California’s Morning After… there’s a pill for that.
chunderroad on May 21, 2009 at 11:33 AM
I’ve stated it before and will again. A lot of the people voting for this nanny state junk are people who don’t pay the taxes. And a lot of the voters look at some horrendously expensive proposition and think it sounds good, and vote for it, without ever considering how much it’s going to cost, or that the money to pay for it is going to come out of their taxes. There’s a gap between what they vote for and how to pay for it. If a voter had to pony up money monthly, out of his own pocket, for each of these ridiculous boondoggles, you’d get a lot more skeptical voters and a lot less of this expensive nanny-statism voted into law.
I’ve been trapped in this hellhole of a state for nearly forty years, and I think carefully and do a good deal of research before I vote for anything that I know is going to cost me money — but I suspect I’m in the minority. One day I’m not going to be able to afford my house payments because of all the demands the state makes on my pocket book, and I’ll simply have to default and walk away. One more responsible taxpayer chased off by the irresponsibility of the state government and its kiddies. I mean, its citizens.
hachiban on May 21, 2009 at 11:33 AM
No thanks to the 150 million dollars in advertising that the national unions poured into California to defeat Arnolds attempt at fixing the problem in 2005………
…………. we can’t drill for our won oil, we won’t secure our border, our schools are propaganda mills, and the media is in bed with the unions and politicians.
So goes California…………
…………. so goes the rest of the country.
Seven Percent Solution on May 21, 2009 at 11:33 AM
I can look around the (California) conference room I’m currently sitting in and spot a dozen people too smart to make sweeping generalizations like this. Do you have any idea how much worse the situation would be if this were true? Who do you think is paying the bulk of the taxes? The dumb ones? I guess the difference in ideologies boils down sometimes to only this:
which direction your knee jerks.
nico on May 21, 2009 at 11:34 AM
Nj- there in is the problem, can anyone show me in the constitution where spending is any business of the courts? We are supposed to have separation of powers, fat chance. The courts are the first place that adjustments must be made back to their only CONSTITUTIONAL powers. No Judge can order governments on any level to spend or not spend, that is the business of the elected representatives of the people, and not some a##shat in a robe. How we got here is puzzling and how we get back to where we belong is also a problem that only some one with a back bone can fix. Someone to say to the judge “mind your constitutional business” and we will mind ours.
jainphx on May 21, 2009 at 11:35 AM
Captain you have an excellent memory. The Morning After was a huge song at the time and is totally reminiscent of the post-American mindset of the 1970s. Guilt and remorse over a love affair come to an end. Geez. The Rolling Stones had a greatest hits package called Sucking in the 70s, the Ramones had their LP the End of the Century, and as I remember it, most Americans were glad to see the 1970s end. Remember the Pepsi Syndrome skit from SNL? Seems that President Obama looks fondly on the Post-American, guilt ridden Morning After mindset. Alas, with the originality and vision of its inhabitants, Hollywood will soon feel compelled to re-write the Pepsi Syndrome. We are stuck sucking in the 70s, again. Misery index, stagflation, hostage crisis, here we come.
Angry Dumbo on May 21, 2009 at 11:35 AM
Exactly.
nico on May 21, 2009 at 11:36 AM
Hahahaha. I thought you were kidding until I clicked on the link. What unbelieveable idiocy. No wonder the state’s broke.
AZCoyote on May 21, 2009 at 11:43 AM
Where the heck is Hollywood? Should Hollywood put up or shut up?
katablog.com on May 21, 2009 at 11:45 AM
“Never worry, never fear, Ashton Kutcher will soon be here!”
Calling all Pledgers! Calling all Pledgers!
Ashton Kutchers of Californicate, time to pony up and redistribute your multi-million dollar contracts and your illegal alien nanny enclaves to where your own loudmouth soapboxes demand.
EAT IT!
orville on May 21, 2009 at 11:48 AM
From what I’m hearing the fed is refusing to underwrite an emergency loan for California – at least for now.
Even so, there are other states on the cusp of financial failure. They will soon be in California’s shoes. At some point, people need to quit pillorying the entire populations of states and start pinning the blame where it lies. On the 55% (give or take) who voted for massive spending. That’s rougly the same percentage of national voters who elected the Obama money wagon.
The idea that California is chock full of illegals and liberals makes for great copy, but it by no means even approaches the truth. There are as many solidly conservative voters in this state as anywhere else. Indeed, we could populate completely many smaller states.
My company is B2B where the vast majority of our clients family-owned businesses. They’re still here. Some of them are hugely successful. Play a round with me at Pelican Hills. Your eyes will open. Wide.
nico on May 21, 2009 at 11:48 AM
Civic lessons for everyone in California would be a good idea.
Miss reading your articles Ed!
froginthesky on May 21, 2009 at 11:51 AM
Not a responsible proposal. Assuming some grownup actually takes charge the budget has clear wasteful programs that can be cut immediately. Everyone knows what they are. The “across the board” scheme is a gimmick that is meant to deflect responsibility.
They’ll repeal Prop. 13 over my dead body.
What kind of a lunatic are you? You can’t put out a fire by feeding it gasoline.
Not a bad idea but it wouldn’t really change much. These guys don’t work more than half the year as it is. They are part-time legislators and full time crooks.
A clueless suggestion. There isn’t a dime of spending waste that has resulted from an initiative that originated with the people. There are some, like Stem Cell Research, which were started in Sacramento and then sponsored by rich Democrats but most of the initiatives are citizens battling back against the Unions and their whores in Sacramento.
Absolutely correct. Makes me wonder how someone who believes this could also fall for the “off-setting tax hike” policy proposed in #4? Are you schizophrenic or do you actually not see a contradiction here?
Of course, any Californian paying attention would look at this list and realize that this guy is definitely Out of his/her Element; the #1 cost saving step is Totally Missing.
No public welfare or funds of any kind; no tuition, no medical, no NOTHING to illegal aliens. EVER. Ignore the courts. Sue the FEDS. Let’s see if Obama will send Federal troops to make a bankrupt California pay out tax money to illegals.
Savings 10 billion dollars per year at least. The fireworks would be worth watching.
rcl on May 21, 2009 at 11:51 AM
Just cut it down to two…
1. Disallow any benefits to illegal aliens
2. Allow offshore drilling
The budget will be balanced in just a couple of years…
right2bright on May 21, 2009 at 11:51 AM
There may be many conservatives, but I’m sorry, there are more illegals and liberals.
katablog.com on May 21, 2009 at 11:52 AM
The pill is available here.
Has a bitter aftertaste, though.
Loxodonta on May 21, 2009 at 11:55 AM
I don’t disagree. But, please note, that the bond issues, spending referenda, etc. are typically passed in California in the same proportion that Obama won the presidency. California doesn’t have the monopoly on idiot liberals and misguided voters. Not by a long shot.
nico on May 21, 2009 at 11:58 AM
You had me worried for a minute.
MarkTheGreat on May 21, 2009 at 12:08 PM
Better look at the voting stats.
Orange County was just a decade ago, probably the most conservative, Republican county in the U.S., now it is about split.
Most of the “Pelican” hills, are service company’s, manufacturing has dropped to almost nothing compared to just a couple of decades ago.
With 17 million people, you would expect many very wealthy, and with the climate, many having second homes in Newport Beach, Santa Monica.
Pelican Hill is full of pro athletes, attorneys, and high rollers…but drive just 30 miles due north, and take a look, look how many empty buildings in Costa Mesa, Fullerton.
A “pocket” on one of the most exclusive areas is hardly reflective of the changing demographics in Calif. It just shows that they are “congregating” into a specific area.
And since you are so sure that Calif. is not “chock full of liberals”, how did they vote last presidential election?
55-40 or something like that…do the Republicans have a majority or a minority in office?
I assure you, many of those “golfing” buddies, do not have their corp. in the state of California.
right2bright on May 21, 2009 at 12:18 PM
So, what do I win? :-)
Seriously, get back to vacationing!
steveegg on May 21, 2009 at 12:27 PM
BS. When the recession hit, I reduce all my spending across the board except for the absolutes (i.e. things I could not live without). Reducing the overall budget means making people CHOOSE THEIR PRIORIES thus the wasteful stuff falls out naturally.
A clueless response. Who got it on the ballot is irrelevant. The VOTERS voted for them and made them law. Making spending initiatives dependent on tax hikes will put and end to that non-sense very quickly.
Did you miss the part about replacing it with putting all tax increases to the voters with the 65% plurality for passage or are the words “Repeal Prop 13″ the only ones you clued in on?
Less time to f**k things up means less time for non-sense and less pay to the legislators. See TEXAS, ALASKA. You know, the States not falling into a black hole?
Good start, but doesn’t quite cover the bill.
That won’t make even the smallest dent in this hole we’re in and is more an ideological response than a reasoned one. Of course, I don’t disagree with the sentiment.
outOfElement on May 21, 2009 at 12:27 PM
Amazing. You know my business better than I do. What part of “family-owned business” didn’t compute? And which foursome of mine was it you played in? Were you that guy swinging the knock offs?
Bottom-line, the economy is down everywhere. Nevertheless, there is still a vibrant business community in California. San Diego, Orange, and Riverside Counties are still populated by conservative business owners. Funny you should mention manufacturing. These are the businesses my B2B serves. Down, but not out. And, we broke even 1st quarter. Headquartered where? On the outside edge of your 30 mile radius. Do you honestly think that nobody is making money right now?
And it was worse: O-Hole 61, McLite 37
But, that wasn’t really my point.
nico on May 21, 2009 at 12:32 PM
Do you think there is a possibllity that liberalism is really a mental disorder afterall? They think they are so much smarter that the average person, but do such idiotic things. There is not a correlation between thought and action. Disorder???
volsense on May 21, 2009 at 12:36 PM
Well look who has a hard time understanding.
Of course, as I stated some are doing well, but even you come up with 61% voted liberal, and you say “not chock full”.
Of course a “few” will make it, 20% of the U.S. economy is centered in Calif, massive money, and many will make it.
Meanwhile you have major corps moving out, and have as a pattern for the past couple of decades. Just ask Fullerton when Borden’s bought out Laura Scudders, where did Fidelity Title go? How about SteelCase, right off the 55 are they still there? Add a couple of major lock companies, some aerospace, furniture manufacturing, and you have a problem, that you don’t see.
And who is taking the place of these people, the illegal aliens who take care of the ones who are staying.
It is a Ponzi scheme, and you can stick your head in the sand at Pelican, but that is what it is.
Seen the values in houses in Ladera Ranch, El Toro lately? San Clemente? East San Diego, since you are so sure everything is going great down there…care to rent office space, about 30% less now then a year ago…if you get snotty, at least back it up with some facts like this.
Beating the national average by almost 10 points…a two thirds liberal is “chock full”…
right2bright on May 21, 2009 at 12:49 PM
Illegals cost Calif. 10 billion per year…I think that is bigger then the smallest dent.
But I agree, it won’t be done because you are a liberal state.
right2bright on May 21, 2009 at 12:50 PM
We do have one – My House Rep, Tom McClintock. Be he’s seen as an extreme fringe candidate (wants to inflict global warming, tax the poor & middle class and give yachts to the rich! Plus, he’ll kick your kitten!).
The fact is, there are just too many nanny staters here to overcome. One candidate cannot do it, it has to be a LARGE group. A conservative Governor would be a start, but that Governor would be overwhelmed by the legislature. Too many folks are takers and not producers. If we could get that ratio to change, even a little bit, that’s when we could make effective change in the state.
I really believe that we’ll have to hit rock bottom, where services get cut, and we simply tell folks they’ll have to take care of themselves, before we can see a change in the attitudes of the “takers”.
This is MY state. I have lived here my entire life, third generation. I will not leave. The takers will have to leave, or be MADE to leave.
juanito on May 21, 2009 at 12:55 PM
They are smarter. They’re conning you out your money, aren’t they?
OldEnglish on May 21, 2009 at 1:01 PM
Let’s skip the debate about who got snotty, you know, “since I’m so sure”. After all, I haven’t presumed to call your life a lie.
And let’s put home values in perspective. My home tripled in value in 7 years. Was it worth that? No. Was a natural correction in order? Yes. But, it’s still worth 50% more than I bought it for in 1998, (just had it reappraised for a 4.875 fixed refi).
Have businesses left, folded? Yes. Have the majority of them? No. Are there manufacturers in California making money today? Yes. There. Are.
Will I move? No. Will my business move? No. My customers are still solvent and still here.
And when, precisely, did I say everything was going “great”? I said there’s still money here and there is still money to be made. Did I say California had more liberals and illegals than conversatives? No. That’s asanine on its face. What I did say is that all the knee-jerk naysayers are discounting a major economic engine, largely fueld by conservative business owners, many of which are still in the game. Chock full means, well, chock full. 37% of us voted against the O-Hole. There’s a lot of people in California. 37% of roughly 17,000,000 voters is larger than the population of many other states. But, again, that wasn’t really my point.
nico on May 21, 2009 at 1:03 PM
No one knows what the actual cost is because the state refuses to keep records on the subject. I am not disputing the guess, but it is just a guess
Let’s also not forget that the “state” is not liberal, the major population centers (SF, LA) are. I live in Concord and although I can find no rational reason for George Miller (D) to keep his job in Congress other than he keeps getting put there by union members, the majority of the “state” is not liberal per se.
outOfElement on May 21, 2009 at 1:09 PM
I’d also point out that there are serious structural issues with California government. It isn’t just an issue of budget cutting. There are fundamentally flawed laws in this state that need to be fixed to ensure a long-term solution. Cutting illegal alien services out of the picture saves money, but it doesn’t address the fundamental issues.
outOfElement on May 21, 2009 at 1:12 PM
chock-full or chock·full (chŏk’fŏŏl’)
adj. Full to the limit; as full as possible: a report chock-full of errors.
syn: brimming, bursting, overflowing, stuffed
And since you want to split hairs. 2/3rds = overflowing? As full as possible? I don’t think so.
nico on May 21, 2009 at 1:12 PM
Just as Ron Schmeits is my president (Newly installed president of the NRA), Tom McClintock is my Governor. I have voted twice now for him, so don’t blame this mess we are in on me! I join Nigel, Come back Tom, we need you!
California’s biggest problem is the Teacher’s Union. They buy and own the legislature and then let their collective heart bleed all over the productive citizens of the state. They protect all of their pets, only now realizing they too will be hurt by the foolishness. Notice the half-hearted campaign for Props 1A-1F? The coming S$*! storm is going to hit them and they don’t like it. Too damned bad, they brought this on themselves and all of us will suffer.
InTheBellyoftheBeast on May 21, 2009 at 1:12 PM
I for one would love to see them try to repeal Prop. 13. You’d have half a million Californians on the steps of the Capitol Building the next day, screaming for legislator blood.
Prop. 13, while it keeps property taxes from skyrocketing, also hides the true cost of government from most taxpayers. Long time residents are given a break at the expense of new home buyers (many of whom are priced out of the market because of those same tax burdens).
In any case, you can make the argument that property taxes should be illegal anyway. If you stand to lose your property because you have missed payments (i.e. property taxes), and the state reserves the right to seize that property in lieu of payment, then you don’t really own the property, the state does. It amounts to serfdom, and it prevents the individual from being truly secure on their own property.
TheMightyMonarch on May 21, 2009 at 1:18 PM
Bravo!
nico on May 21, 2009 at 1:19 PM
EXACTLY!
juanito on May 21, 2009 at 1:30 PM
outOfElement on May 21, 2009 at 1:12 PM
C’mon, element, stop refuting the talking points. You’re in danger of dousing the effigy.
nico on May 21, 2009 at 1:33 PM
I can’t help myself. I was infected with the Common Sense virus at an early age. I also amd a born-and-bred Texan that has only spent 10 years in California, so the stupid here hasn’t quite gotten to me yet.
outOfElement on May 21, 2009 at 1:38 PM
You’re not far from Springfield, you should stop by Bass Pro Shops gigantic main store, I was amazed that they had preserved the old Herters stuffed animal display which was something in itself and don’t go walking in the deep woods by yourself there’s probably still a feud or two.
Speakup on May 21, 2009 at 1:42 PM
More perspecitve:
States that have less total population than Californians who voted against the Obama:
Tennessee, Missouri, Maryland, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Colorado, Alabama, South Carolina, Louisiana, Kentucky, Oregon, Oklahoma, Connecticut, Iowa, Mississippi, Arkansas, Kansas, Utah, Nevada, New Mexico, West Virginia, Nebraska, Idaho, Maine, New Hampshire, Hawaii, Rhode Island, Montana, Delaware, South Dakota, Alaska, North Dakota, Vermont,
Wyoming
I guess we have a few conservatives.
nico on May 21, 2009 at 1:46 PM
Just not enough conservatives……..
juanito on May 21, 2009 at 2:00 PM
Here’s a hint to the folks in California: If the politician wants to balance the budget with more taxes, vote him out. If the politician (or candidate) wants to balance the budget by cutting spending, vote him in. If he wants to cut spending that the government has no business in, or he wants to take on the entrenched interests, write him a check. If he wants to fix the California Constitution to get the courts out of the business of spending public monies, campaign for him.
njcommuter on May 21, 2009 at 2:04 PM
Because of taxes, businesses in CA have been leaving for other states or China, yet, the Democratically controlled Legislature seems clueless on the ways to keep them. It is getting so that the highest paid jobs are now in the Government, which does nothing to improve our economy. Stupidity Incorporated….
DL13 on May 21, 2009 at 2:19 PM
Sat on the bench of the bench team huh? (17,000,000 did not vote),
I had three businesses in Calif. sold one, and moved the others out. Best move I ever made.
The only reason to have a business in Caif. is to sell and service who is there…besides the ag. business which rely’s on illegals.
Bsicall the only ones making money is the B2B, because the customer base is shrinking in Calif.
Highest workman’s comp, highest energy, taxes and fees, AQMD, state, county, city regs fighting against each other. Just to maintain your Corp status is 10 times what it is in NC.
It makes no economic sense to stay in Calif, unless your customers are there. And every year your customers are diluted from “white collar” to illegals.
The only net gain in population is from illegal’s, and they don’t have the purchasing power.
Thank your lucky stars for importing from China, take that away and So. Cal is a ghost town…they drove off all the manufacturers.
Thanks to your “61%” of liberals…
right2bright on May 21, 2009 at 2:19 PM
I would like to see that implemented in other states.
IL/Chicagoland in particular.
Chaz706 on May 21, 2009 at 2:45 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »