Wake Up Folks! California's Financial Implosion Is About To Grab All Headlines...

[Blackhatjack]

California's impending financial implosion is about to become the 'front and center' horror show that the MSM will be unable to ignore.

No matter how important healthcare reform is, or any other item on DEMS' Agenda, the oxygen will be literally sucked out of any kind of media coverage and substituted in its place will be 'Katrina-like coverage' of one of the world's largest economies in free-fall.

Everyone knows what is coming... but the pictures of those who will suffer the loss of essential government services will be heartrendering.

And the short-term solutions will be shattering. Would not surprise me to see people marching in the streets outside the State Capitol --calling for the blood of legislators who have refused to act in a manner to head off this disaster.

President Obama has stated the US Govt won't step in to help, because that would encourage other states in need to also request help. But as this horror show unfolds, the pressure is going to multiply on the President to do something to help California.

I personally hate reality tv shows... but no one knows how this one is going to end.

[cagesoulman]

1. If no bailout, then what?

Poverty?

[Terran]

189. Show some sense and freaking raise taxes and fees, that's what.

On the whole, a tax increase is going to have far less long-rage negative impact than the loss of a ton of human services and the fall-out that will cause. I hate politicians, of any party, who are so chicken-shit about getting re-elected that they won't ever consider the real need for higher taxes.

And higher federal taxes, that's one thing, but higher state taxes? Pfft, who even notices them? Mine are less than 4% of my gross. To keep things from falling apart, you bet I'd be willing to pay more. And who cares if you pay a few dollars more to renew a driver's license?

[mainer]

194. California's top state income tax rate is 10.3%.

How much farther are they going to be able to raise it? To 15%? 20%?

Why should Californians have to be hit with crushing taxes when their federal taxes go to support other states that don't have ANY state income tax?

You say you only pay 4%. How'd you like to more than double that?

[Terran]

213. A *temporary* rise of 1% would have minimal impact

on earnings. I don't know how much money it would generate, but I'm sure it would help the problem. And yes, if I knew that state tax revenues would be used wisely, as they generally have been in California, I'd be willing to at least double my state tax burden. Missouri's taxation is a trifle, and it shows in our state. Missouri is what you might call a "low service" state, and there's very little public investment in new infrastructure or ideas here.

[PassingFair]

2. How are people liking Arnold now?

How are his tax cuts being viewed?

[grantcart]

18. Its pretty clear that Arnold has been willing to compromise that the

problem rests entirely with the requirement for supermajority in the state legislature and the Republican minority in the Senate.


When the minority leader and whip joined the Democrats the last time, KFI (largest talk radio in US) launced a 'heads on a stick' to destroy any Republican who voted with the Democrats on any tax increase of any kind.

Arnold probably has more Democrat support than Republican now. In any case it is irrelevent, the Republican minority in the Senate is determined to bring the state down regardless of the cost.





http://recalladams.org/default.aspx

http://recallroy.com/

[nadinbrzezinski]

22. You got it, why the cuts were designed to hit everyone

you should hear the screaming at the Fair Grounds to ahem SAVE THEM... but don't mention the T word

[goclark]

46. No Summer School for kids in LA and I believe the same thing

is happening in all the other counties. :cry:

[Cant trust em]

49. THis whole crisis is the republican's greatest dream

This way they're getting to make the cuts they've always wanted to make nearly without impunity.

Their ridiculous minority is holding the entire state hostage.

[kevinbgoode]

112. From what I understand, the public isn't too fond of the idea of Republicans

running the show either, which makes one wonder what they hope to gain.

[inna]

113. wait, i don't get it....

you're saying that Ah-nold is open to raising taxes? i thought he was against it.

[mike_c]

108. he's not even remotely the cause of this meltdown....

Arguably, he might have done more to alleviate it, but if he didn't neither has anyone else in state government, including previous democratic party governors who could have worked to prevent this crisis, and recent dem gubernatorial candidates who avoided the topic of fixing dysfunctional state affairs like the plague.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

3. They forced Gray out,

and wanted their guy in.

They got him, and now they've got all this.

Nice work, Darrell Issa and other GOPigs....................

[wroberts189]

25. And the irony is Arnold got in promising to fix the budget. nt

[babylonsister]

4. If that was going to happen, it should have by now. CA is a mess. nt

[XemaSab]

9. The budget hasn't come up for a vote yet

:shrug:

[LooseWilly]

129. Actually, I picked up a paper the other day...

"Neither side will budge on budget" was the headline... and it pretty much says that the Republicans voted down $11.4 billion in budget cuts... because it wasn't enough... they apparently preferred $0.

Gotta love that Republican sense of honor and ... ideology. Wonder what the Republican donors will think when they start getting paid in IOUs for their contracts with the state...

I'm guessing this isn't a good sign for the passing of a budget...

[Blackhatjack]

15. The last of Calif $$ runs out at the end of this month ... just wait.

The state needed to borrow a huge amount of $$ by the end of the month to stay solvent, and that was dependent upon the legislature having passed a budget weeks before the end of this month --which did not happen.

When essential government employees like fire, police, emts, suspend their services for nonpayment the situation will become critical quickly.

[babylonsister]

32. I've heard; I have two sisters who live there, so I'm trying to

pay attention.
I also heard CA was going to distribute IOUs. It's broken.

[xxqqqzme]

51. June 29th we're out of money

Disaster capitalism right here in the US. The wet dream of the 'chicago' devotees.

[inna]

115. guys, please, links!! anyone?? please?

i live in SF and.... how did i miss all this? (about running out of money by the end of the month)


seriously, any links will be greatly appreciated.

[YvonneCa]

185. Here are a few...

...to keep you busy. :7


http://www3.signonsandiego.com/tags/sacramento/

http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stories/2009/jun/29/ca-california-budget-062909/?california&zIndex=124235

http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stories/2009/jun/29/1n29reorg01186-turf-wars-loom-services-retooled/?politics&zIndex=124164

[inna]

204. thank you! :)

:7

:fistbump:

[4_TN_TITANS]

136. When essential government employees like fire, police, emts, suspend their services

You nailed it. When people feel the loss of essential services that they have taken for granted is when the shit hits the fan. In that sense, it's good awakening to what all those tax dollars pay for. In the other sense, it's going to devastate those who can affor it least.
What happens when there's no one on the payroll to put out the wildfires?

It's going to take people watching Norquist drowning the gov. in a bathtub for them to wake up.

[960]

121. Why do you always spout off about things you don't understand.

The budget hasn't come up for a vote yet. This story will break open soon...

[varelse]

151. Wow, how rude

and definitely not accurate :(

[Cleita]

5. Heart rending won't make the news except locally. The coast to

coast broadcasters and cable outlets will ignore it, which means Washington can ignore it. It will only become a national issue if things get so bad that they have to call the national guard to maintain order. But even that won't make the news unless you have riots on the level of the burning and chaos of the race riots of the sixties.

[XemaSab]

8. Like the national guard isn't in Kandahar

:eyes:

[Cleita]

17. Yep, that too, so probably nothing will happen except hungry and

homeless people increasing in numbers.

[nadinbrzezinski]

26. Think 1930s and that is coming

those would make the 1960s look like walk in proverbial park

And no, most people don't know about those anymore. We don't teach history 'ter all

[WCGreen]

36. The national guard is funded by the state....

Just a reminder...

[Cleita]

63. Don't worry, they probably won't be called until all hell breaks loose and

the federal government will have to intervene.

[Donnachaidh]

92. they won't be called until all hell breaks loose in the WEALTHY areas

I doubt seriously if they give a rat's ass about the poor areas.

[question everything]

6. "Grab all headlines?"

After the orgy with MJ, after the Orgy with Anna Nicole I doubt that any media outlet will let go of the these stories to try to cover a complex issue like a budget.

[Blackhatjack]

7. The natural comparison will be with trillions of $$ for Wall Street and Nothing for Calif...

Make no mistake about it, when essential government services shut down PEOPLE WILL DIE. Guaranteed. And tv cameras will be there to capture it for the evening news.

I predict government leaders will say 'no one could have imagined it getting this bad.'

Arnold better be dusting off his acting chops because he may be driven from office sooner than he thinks.

[Ladyhawk]

210. Yes, people WILL die, but no one will care.

I predicted an increase in suicides here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5865283

I stand by that prediction.

[napi21]

10. Gee, maybe the idiot Pubs will HAVE to actually RAISE TAXES!

I don't completely understand all of Calif's laws, but I've read many times that part of the problem is because part of Prop 13 mandated a super majority vote to ever raise any taxes on anything. Because almost no state ever has a one party super majority, nothing ever gets done.

I don't blame Obama for refusing to help Calif. He's right. Mich., Ohio, etc. would be begging right behind Calif. and their problems weren't caused by stupid legislators.

[MadHound]

11. Fine, you want a bailout for California?

Then we as US taxpayers who are going to bail out California have the right to demand that you rescind Prop. 13 in order to stabilize your state's economy and balance sheet.

If Prop. 13 isn't on the table, well, oh well. Because quite frankly if Prop. 13 is kept in the mix the state of California is always going to have economic problems and we'll be bailing them out again in another ten, twenty years.

[Veruca Salt]

65. I just read up on prop 13

and I'm rather at odds of rescinding it totally. I've always been for a sort of 'grandfathering' of property taxes for people who have lived in their homes for years and years. I hate to see the seniors and families that live in generational homes forced out of their homes by property taxes that skyrocket if the area they live in gentrifies.

Just take Cape Cod for example; we have family friends who used to live on the cape in a generational home who had to leave because their property tax turned into a mortgage they couldn't afford. This was on a home paid off long, long ago. And if someone in California has a beautiful property by the ocean that's been in the family for forever... should they have to lose it if the property tax all the sudden is unaffordable? I would absolutely hate to see that happen!

[rvablue]

70. The only problem is Veruca is either you rescind all of it or none of it.

Yes, the referendum should have been written to protect the poor and middle classes who were trying to hang on to primary residences.

It was not written that way. It gave a free pass for the super rich to buy up commercial and rental properties and freeze their tax rates at a 1979 level on assets that are now worth ten, twenty times more than when they were purchased.

As a result the working and even upper middle class has had to fill the gap with sales taxes, income taxes and fees.

Prop. 13 must go. But neither the state legislature, which would need a 2/3 vote to overturn it, nor the California electorate, who could overturn it by referendum, have the will to do it.

So, California is now paying the piper. They have no one to point a finger at, except themselves. And if they are unwilling for the necessary task that must be done -- the repeal of Prop. 13 -- no bailout is going to help them.

[KakistocracyHater]

82. this is the 21st C, we are sophisticated enough to remove Prop 13

protection from the wealthiest while maintaining it for the middle & under classes.

[Veruca Salt]

145. That would be the optimal way of doing it

and I really hope that's the case!

[LuckyLib]

85. Indeed. My elderly folks, who have resources, live in a $800,000 house

and pay $400 per year in property tax. They can afford more. They should pay more.

[Jakes Progress]

171. Limiting property taxes was one of the igniters

for exploding housing prices. If people had to pay taxes on what they bought, you wouldn't have a bunch of two-bedroom million dollar houses.

[Veruca Salt]

144. Reading what you and MadHound wrote

as I didn't consider the corporations property at all either; both of what you say makes perfect sense; and the income from normalized property taxes would definitely go a long way towards rightening the CA budget from what I read. It just really sucks for the poor and middle class who are going to get kicked out of their homes. :(

[create.peace]

101. my dad benefits from prop 13 rather well

but he has always contributed to the schools independently. he and a number of his friends.

[MadHound]

132. The trouble is, you're not just grandfathering in the property of private citizens

But also the property of corporations and companies as well. This is a huge boon for business. The funny thing is, back when Prop. 13 was being debated on by the public, Big Business came out against Prop. 13, even though they had the most to gain. Even then, Big Business realized that this would lead to the destruction of infrastructure, etc. thus leaving a hollowed out shell of a state that wouldn't be a good business climate.

[rvablue]

69. Amen, MadHound. Glad to see someone talking sense on the subject! n/t

[mainer]

163. California's been bailing out the red states for years

But now it's not okay to help out California by at least letting them keep some of their own tax dollars?

[Nevernose]

12. The oxygen won't be "literally sucked out of any kind of media coverage"

If it were, dozens of people on TV would suddenly be asphyxiating due to the sudden lack of oxygen. On the plus side, the fire department would get a day off.

Sorry, the misuse of "literally" is one of my pet peeves. Yes, I already know that I'm an asshole.

[bertman]

89. Welcome to the club, Nevernose. Actually, like, you know, I mean, yeah, no, for real.

What everrrr.

[billyoc]

13. Set up FEMA tents in Nevada and tell them Burning Man is early this year.

[sam sarrha]

14. THEY NEED TO SPLIT THE STATE.. LA takes about 80% 0f all th state taxes, that way only LA goes under

they've been a leach the state tooo long.

they should have had north and south CA a long time ago..

[Cleita]

19. Eh, since LA employs the largest amount of people who are taxed, why

are you saying that? I don't get the math. Do you have some stats to back that up?

[flamingdem]

106. No doubt just another Bay Area snob meh nt

[Cleita]

118. I live on the central coast between Santa Barbara and San Francisco so

what kind of snob does that make me?

[flamingdem]

122. A near to the Bay Area Snob nt

[Cleita]

124. Could you really define why we are snobs. Did we piss on something dear

to you? Or are we a convenient scapegoat for your problems?

[flamingdem]

126. Umm weren't you posting about tossing L.A. in a ditch?

That is just the old yap from those up North. So I am defending my territory from the likes of you.

[Cleita]

128. Absolutely not. I was saying we pay the most taxes so we

aren't leeching the most of services as someone else accused us of. I am originally from LA myself.

[anigbrowl]

161. No, that was Sam Sarrha, a completely different poster. Reread the thread.

[mopinko]

90. there should be 3 californias-

log, fog, and smog.

ba dum pum ping.

[Cleita]

123. I guess.

There are so many Californias you can't really define them and the are populated from around the world. It is a different place.

[dysfunctional press]

16. the money can only come from where the money is.

taxes will have to go up on the wealthy.

[Cleita]

20. Yes, and California has one of the largest populations of wealthy people

in the country who have not paid their fair share for a long time. The working class has borne the brunt of funding the state. It's time to make the wealthy pay more taxes.

[mike_c]

109. this californian agrees COMPLETELY!

:thumbsup:

[Veruca Salt]

66. +1

Correct solution IMHO. :thumbsup:

And if the wealthy love California, they will be more than happy to pay their share.

[Blackhatjack]

21. IF Obama decides to help one of the world's largest economies avoid default ...

... you can bet everything will be on the table, and the terms dictated from Washington will indeed be 'shattering' -- not because Washington wants to punish Calif, but because the medicine required to fix the situation has to be strong.

I cannot see any 'easy way out of this fix.'

[JVS]

55. Don't confuse the economy with the state government's finances.

They're not the same thing

[Veruca Salt]

67. Please correct this if i'm incorrect,

As I sometimes mix up details on tax rates, but I'm pretty sure this is right (highest tax rate comparison from 1913-2003):

This graph is a plot of year (first column in the table) against the corresponding top marginal rate (second column in the table) (in blue). Where the top marginal rate on earned income differs (1971--1981), it is also plotted (in red).

Source:
http://www.truthandpolitics.org/top-rates.php

And even if I did get the wrong tax brackets - taxes really do need to be looked at closely because I do know that the wealthy are paying a hell of a lot less due to * tax cuts. Cuts that should never have been done with two wars going on and a recession looming. Cuts that * touted would create jobs which anyone with half a brain knows is a load of crap. That's only a start though, and Clinton doesn't get out of it either as we need the jobs to come back here to America and stop flowing overseas. Someone had mentioned that Germany has a really good set of laws to keep jobs in country; though I will have to do some research into that to get the details.

on edit: something to note; the US great depression started in Oct of 1929 and then ended when we entered WW2 in 1941. The graph looks rather similar during the great depression and how it is trending today... and it jumped astronomically right around when the GD ended. Am I totally off? Feeling conspiratorial? Is my graph absolutely incorrect? I'm just a commentator on a public forum so feel free to correct any factual errors I post! :)

[Blackhatjack]

23. IF you live in Calif and have been following the specifics, please update us....

This is bound to be the #1 concern on Californians' list.

[pennylane100]

42. One solution is to amend prop 13 to increase taxes

on large businesses asap and to gradually equalize the amounts paid by small businesses and property owners. (My spouse and I now benefit from prop 13 so this is not a self interest solution)

[rvablue]

71. Prop. 13 cannot be amended. Only repealed. n/t

[KakistocracyHater]

83. they used to say no one could go to the moon

yet now.....

[ContinentalOp]

116. I've seen you say this on other threads and I don't get it.

For example you could have prop "X1" which would eliminate 13 for everyone and prop "X2" which would reinstate prop 13 but only for primary residences, not for business, investment, or vacation real estate. Then X2 would be contingent on the passage of X1 and the two could be promoted together.

[rvablue]

137. Your plan is a magnificent one! But that ain't how the referendum system works.

If you want to doubt what others are stating as simple fact, you should read up on the referendum system first.

You are indeed correct that you would have to pass a referendum first repealing Prop. 13. And then, of course you could pass another referendum that includes the "good" parts of Prop. 13.

However, #1, they couldn't legally appear on the same ballot and #2 there would be no way to make one contingent on the other.

[ContinentalOp]

149. Is that just because they are constitutional amendmennts?

Because those recent props of Arnold's had one contingent on the passage of another.

[rvablue]

150. Which two props were these?

I'd like to read up on it.

[ContinentalOp]

152. Prop 1a / 1b

"Proposition 1B would have mandated supplemental payments of $9.3 billion to schools and community colleges. ...
If approved by a popular vote majority, the measure would only have been enacted if Proposition 1A had also been approved."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_1B_(2009)

This is what actually gave me the idea. I'm also wondering about Phil Ting's proposal to create a "split roll" for property taxes so that corporations wouldn't be covered under prop 13. I can't really find any details about how his plan would be accomplished.
http://www.closetheloophole.com/index.php

[anigbrowl]

166. Just what I was thinking, yes.

Business may not mind reinstating property taxes since they'd be able to write them off against federal taxes in any case. to the extent that the property taxes are going up, so is their asset base and creditworthiness.

[anigbrowl]

165. I think you're mistaken

At the last election we indeed had propositions that were dependent on another proposition passing first, although as it happened neither of them passed. Can you explain your reasoning?

[Double T]

24. The solution is to sell colliefornia, the land of the setting sun, to china.

[Blackhatjack]

27. Arnold already proposed selling hundreds of state parks, right? n/t

[U4ikLefty]

31. He also proposed selling the Coliseum.

[Brother Buzz]

103. San Quentin should be placed on the auction block

The price offered for that choice piece of waterfront real estate could easily build a state-of-the-art prisons that would double the capacity of San Quentin and still put a big chunk of change in the state coffers.

I'm not a fan of prisons, but the economics I understand.

[Ian David]

28. Arnold is an economic girlie-man. n/t

[Blackhatjack]

29. Things are certainly different this time ... issuing IOUs may not work... LINK

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-budget27-2009jun27,0,2399686.story

But even that seems familiar. California has issued IOUs before, back in the early 1990s. Then it got its budget, the economy improved, and everyone wanted to lend the state money. We survived that, so what's the big deal?

The familiarity is an illusion. The state has had enough cash to pay its bills since July 2007 only because it borrowed from various supposedly off-limits special funds. Now that money too is almost gone. IOUs, coupled with anticipated monthly tax revenues, might preserve the state through September, but only with permanently decimated access to the credit market. After that, default.

[madville]

30. Just a preview

The feds are going to run out of money eventually also, there's a storm coming and it's starting in California and heading east.

[stopbush]

33. There's a relatively simple solution to this no one seems to mention:

and that's to give CA a 1 to 1 return on the $ we send to the Feds in taxes.

Right, now, CA gets back about 77¢ on every dollar we send to the Feds. That means that we Californians send $48 BILLION to DC every year that ends up in some other state's coffers, states like NM who get back $1.35 for every $1 they send to the Feds.

The sorry truth is that something like 38 of these United States get more back from the Fed each year than they send in taxes. Those 38 are living off the 12 states who are producing the most in Fed revenues. The biggest offenders in this respect are red states like Alaska and Wyoming and Alabama.

Ah-nold says that our current deficit is $24B. Economists at Chapman U put it at $12B. Whatever it is, were CA to get back the $48-Billion we are being shortchanged each year for only a single year, it would put the state in the black for at least a couple of years, maybe even fix some systemic and chronic problems that we have here.

Of course, we're not as bad off as NJ, which gets only 66¢ back for every $1 they send to the Feds, but the ugly truth is that every time a bridge to nowhere is built in Alaska or another relatively unused highway is repaved for the 100th time in WV, states like NJ and CA take it on the chin and in the wallet. Those pork-barrel projects in the middle of nowhere are being financed by $ from our state.

The reason this happens may be explained in two words: the Senate. Yes, the Senate, the old-boys club where each state has the equal representation of two Senators per. The institution where a Ted Stevens or a Robert Byrd can bring the pork home for their states like the Fed is funding a non-stop BBQ, and most of it paid for by CA, NJ and NY, whose Senators don't seem to quite have that magic touch when it comes to redistributing the wealth as do their even-older colleagues. Or maybe it's that the 24 Senators from those 12 shafted states will never be able to get the 76 Senators from the 38 states who are getting better than a 1 to 1 return to treat them fairly. After all, everybody knows what you call a Senator who brings home less pork for his state than he did before: ousted at the next election.

And I must say that I'm getting awfully tired of hearing how CA is a mess and that we should tax ourselves more and we are the cause of our own problems when we are getting the shaft on the distribution of Fed $ that comes out of our pockets in the first place.

Here's my solution: the 10% threshold. This means that no state can get more than 110% back in Fed taxes than it pays in, and no state can get less than 90% back of the taxes it pays to the Feds. For CA, that would mean that we would have at least $30-Billion a year more in our coffers year to year. With $ like that, we'd run surpluses every year to probably infinity. For states like NM, well, they'd have to learn how to live 110% within their means.

I think that's reasonable.

[Betsy Ross]

35. Nicely put.. Thanks. n/t

[WCGreen]

37. One question....

How much money comes back in SS and SSI payments? That money gets injected into the states economy. For instance, how many people who worked all their life in Michigan or Indiana or Ohio moved out west after they retired.

States such in the great climate areas are enjoying that windfall.

Not denying the money sent and given back through incomes tax. But if you really want the true value of the money flow from DC, you have to consider all money transfers...

[CaliforniaPeggy]

38. I suspect that most retirees went to Florida.

Our cost of living is too high for them, I think.

But I honestly don't know...

Good questions, all...

:hi:

[YvonneCa]

73. I agree. It's very...

...expensive to live here.

[stopbush]

39. How is that an issue?

Yes, the money paid to retirees is injected back into state economies, but there are negative offsets to having large retirement communities living in your midst. For one thing, retirees are notorious for voting against school levy and bond initiatives. They figured they paid for their kids to go to school and they'll be damned if they'll pay more taxes to send yet another generation through school. There are other offsets, like the added services a community must pay for to handle the ills and troubles that are a normal part of life for us as we age. Sounds to me like a windfall that no one in their right mind would want.

I don't know if you could call it a windfall by any means. And in the case of CA, I would hardly think that any windfall we receive from people retiring here amounts to the $48-B we're not getting back from DC every year.

One more thing - with the cost of living soaring in states like CA, I wonder if we're still a mecca for retirees who worked their whole lives in OH or MI. Unless they were really well off, I don't know that the average worker in the midwest states would have earned the kind of money they would need to pick up and move to a high COL state like CA. I think that may have been true in the past when things were on a more even keel, but the inflation in home prices and everything else in the sun states would seem to me to have made such a prospect less doable for many people from the midwest.

[WCGreen]

41. I just wanted to point that out that nothing is as easy as it seems...

I think School Levy's all across the country have been damaged by the fifty year battle against public scholls waged by the right wing.

All I am saying is that the SSI and SS payments are measurable and should be factored in.

Just the accountant in me...

[stopbush]

43. I agree that nothing is as easy as it seems,

but I would think that a certain amount of "ease" could be found in CA's annual overpayment of $48-B to the Feds. If even 25% worth of ease could be found, it would close our $12-B budget gap (I tend to believe the Chapman economists on this, not Ah-nold).

And, certainly the easy explanations for CA's problems are too easy by half.

[WCGreen]

52. I wonder if it includes all the military bases?

[JVS]

58. Do you not understand the way state and federal governments take in revenue?

This is not a system where the federal government collects tribute from the state government. All levels of government collect tax directly from the economic entities within their jurisdiction. If CA wants more money from its citizens it needs to tax them and not pretend that it has claim on federal taxes simply because they are federal taxes collected from US citizens living in CA.

To use a metaphor, California's economy is like a river, and state, local and national governments are three kids with buckets trying to fill up large jugs with water. They don't form a bucket brigade, but rather each kid uses his own bucket to fill his own jug.

[stopbush]

68. Uh, yes I do.

The state does the same thing as the Feds, and residents of CA would rightfully be up in arms if state tax money was directed primarily at places like Eureka and Placerville, rather than urban centers SF & LA where most of it is collected.

[YvonneCa]

75. Not to get personal, but my neighbors and I pay...

...$6,000 per year in property taxes alone. You?


It is false that California does not tax people living here.

[JVS]

77. Nobody said CA doesn't tax people living there. But CA's revenue collection methods are not enough.

And this is not the fault of how the federal government chooses to expend the money that it has collected. The US government could put some more military bases in the state and improve the ratio of tax dollars send to D.C. to tax dollars sent to CA and it would only make a small dent in CA's budget deficit because government spending is not a direct transfer into the state treasury, but rather is just bringing people into the area to pay income, property, and possibly sales taxes. If CA wants to have a solvent government they should tax more. It seems that they don't want to, or if they want to they are hamstrung by bad law, and now they're going to eat the shit sandwich that is having no state services.

[YvonneCa]

78. This makes no sense. Are you saying they need to tax people...

...more, or businesses more, or what? Are you referring to Prop. 13 when you say they are 'hamstrung by bad law'?

BTW, the Dems in the Ca legislature can't get Repubs(including Arnold) to go along with higher taxes to support services. That's the problem...they won't compromise.

And...just for the record...MANY people here (maybe not you) have said CA doesn't tax people enough.

[JVS]

80. CA doesn't tax people enough. Or if you disagree, then they spend too much.

They can either tax more or spend less (or a combination). It isn't the federal government's fault that California doesn't have the stomach to actually pay for the programs that it establishes. Besides even if every cent of federal taxes collected in CA were spent in CA, CA would still be up shit creek unless that money were being spent in the form of direct funding to the state government, which isn't how things work. The flow of money to or from the federal government is from the economy of any given region and not to or from a state treasury.

[YvonneCa]

86. Thank you for the clarification. I personally think......

...California does tax enough, so we don't agree on that. Even so, I'd be willing to have taxes raised to fix the imbalance. Dems have proposed this, but Arnold and his group won't do it.

And I get how taxes work. ;)

[mainer]

138. California's state income tax looks pretty hefty to me

I don't live there, but I see that their top rate is 10.3% (http://swz.salary.com/salarywizard/layouthtmls/swzl_statetaxrate_CA.html). That strikes me as pretty high. To throw in increased property taxes as well would really make it rough living there.

As for military bases being good for a state -- is that true? Considering all the empty land that bases take up, land that could otherwise be bringing in taxes if they were privately owned, it seems to me that a military base would be a net loser for a state.

[JVS]

147. Not as big as their huge ass bills.

If they want it, they need to pay for it.

Military bases being good for the state depends on the local area. Often a military base puts a lot of money into the local economy compared to what it would otherwise have (see Ft. Sill). Of course California is a rich state and plopping a fort into wine country would probably have a negative net effect on the economy. Prisons work the same way. I've even seen places in the midwest organizing "Save our Prison" campaigns because they don't want to lose the jobs. This is one of the major reasons the hinterlands (often red states) are the places where the government spends it's money. If one congressional district in the boonies will love you for bringing a prison into the area and another more affluent district is being NIMBY, then which congressman is going to try to bring home that bacon?

[YvonneCa]

186. But the federal government has been...

...closing and consolidating military bases. (BRAC)

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/brac.htm

[mainer]

155. $6,000 a year in property taxes doesn't sound like a bargain to me

In fact, it sounds pretty much in line with a lot of other communities outside California. So if Prop. 13 is repealed, what can Californians expect as a mill rate? With your state income taxes being on the high side, I don't see how Californians could deal with even higher taxes.

[YvonneCa]

184. Most of us can't deal with higher ...

...taxes. But we are likely to get them, anyway. JMHO. Personally, I think there is just such a HUGE misperception about California...in general...promoted by some who have never lived here.

One, is the myth that repealing Prop. 13 fixes everything...it won't.

Two, is that living in a $500,000 house (or $600,000 house or $800,000 house) means a person is living in a mansion, has overspent, and ought to pay...in taxes, oor punishment, or whatever. That's just not true of most families here. Usually a $500,000 house is AVERAGE...3 BD, 2 Bath, 1600 sq.ft. home...often over 30+ years old. That is overpriced, IMO, but normal.

Three is the myth that we chose this and deserve whatever happens. We chose this as much as we chose Bush for eight years. ;)

And then there is the whole idea that we all drive around with surfboards on our cars and hang out at the beach all the time... :7

[1]

59. wait. this is the classic "its my money" argument, right?

[YvonneCa]

74. No. It's just one honest rebuttal to folks...

...who offer up what they believe are solutions, that don't conform to reality in California. JMHO.

[YvonneCa]

72. EXCELLENT. Great solution...

...and explanation of the problem. I, too, get very tired of those who bash California while ignorant of the facts.

[mike_c]

110. +1....

Thank you.

[ContinentalOp]

119. I've mentioned this before and people HATE to hear it.

In 2005 we got back $0.78 for every dollar we paid in federal taxes while Texas for example got $0.94. That $0.16 difference multiplied by the $289 billion we paid in '05 would have amounted to an extra $46 BILLION in that year alone. And we've been screwed like this for decades.

Under Reagan we got over a dollar back per Federal tax dollar paid. During Clinton we averaged in the $0.90s. But from 1999-2005 it dropped from $0.87 - $0.78.

If we received Federal aid at the same rate as Texas over the past 8 years, and paid say $200 billion a year in federal taxes, that would have been $256 billion extra for our state.

Then factor in the $30 billion Enron stole from us. Do the math. Oh but I forgot, it's all Californians' fault.

[inna]

125. i personally LOVE to hear it, but....

could you please, please provide a link/source for this claim so i can bring it up in a discussion and it doesn't get discounted as some empty internet rumor?? thanks in advance!

[ContinentalOp]

131. Here are the numbers

http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/22685.html

People have attacked this source before because I guess it's some right wing anti-tax site but I'm assuming the numbers are fine and I don't know of another site that puts it in this easy to read format.

The math above is all mine and could quite likely be all wrong.

[inna]

205. thank you so much! bookmarked. :) nt

[mainer]

140. The Enron factor! Texas should pay California!

For cheating them big-time.

[blue_onyx]

143. I've seen you post this argument

several times regarding California's budget problem. One issue is that many states are "donor" states. Michigan, according to the source you posted, has always given more than it received. We're having budget problems here too. We have been having budget problems for 8 years and have been some how able to make it work. We could use more money too. Should we go back and reimburse all states for the extra money the sent to the federal government?

[ContinentalOp]

148. I think ALL states that are in trouble deserve to get a federal loan.

These are STATES we're talking about! Not corporations. I would much rather have had the federal government pay off every mortgage in Detroit free and clear than give one red cent to GM.

So no, you can't go back and return all of that lost money, but it's something to take into consideration when discussing possible Federal aid. It's simply not true or fair to say that this is all California's fault or that Michigan's problems are all Michigan's fault, as though we didn't have an administration that spent 8 years trying to destroy every blue state.

Was Katrina the fault of people living in New Orleans? They should have raised their own taxes to fix their own levies?

[blue_onyx]

160. I think Obama already said no to loans

so I don't see it happening. As far as not wanting to give GM assistance...that would've made things worse for all states, including California. People were so against providing government funding to GM but then starting getting upset when dealers and plants were closed. This is odd...what did people think would happen if GM when under? If GM liquidated, all dealers and plants would've closed, effecting every state. With the lost tax revenue from dealers and plants, the states would be in even more trouble. The auto troubles have already hurt the entire country:

"The automakers have historically played a big part in ending recessions. Car companies, in the past, would increase production and add workers to satisfy pent-up consumer demand after a downturn. But now, the industry’s troubles may be prolonging the misery.

“If not for the problems in the auto industry, this recession would have been much milder,” said Ben Herzon, an economist at Macroeconomic Advisors, in St. Louis."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/10/business/economy/10michigan.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hpw


Not helping GM would've made things worse. Helping individual states likely won't happen. As I point out in other comments is this thread, the problem will get fixed. Sometimes things need to reach a crisis level before people are willing to come to a solution.

[ContinentalOp]

170. Well we'll have to agree to disagree on the approach.

I would much rather let GM fail and give direct assistance to all of the people who were effected, than do what we did and "bail out" GM and still have them go bankrupt and eliminate jobs.

[Ikonoklast]

167. No, it looks like the senators and reps Cal sends to DC aren't doing their job.

Like it or not, part of the reason they get elected is to 'bring home the bacon', and that ain't happening.

Why get mad at other states whose elected officials do a better job of it?

I'd be on my district's rep and two senators to get their asses in gear.

[ContinentalOp]

169. LOL, sure except for the fact that we're proportionally underrepresented in congress -nt-

[Ikonoklast]

180. Not according to the Constitution.

That argument holds no water.

You have just as many representatives in Congress as your population says you need.

The amount of Senators was fixed for a reason. Sorry one of yours is too busy trying to become a billionaire off taxpayers to worry about anyone else but herself.

Should states that have tightened their belts, cut their budgets, and receive less money from the Feds have to bail out California?

[ContinentalOp]

196. How is what you just said not THE classic Republican philosophy?

Should individuals who have tightened their belts and cut their budgets have to bail out other individuals who weren't as responsible for their personal finances? I think most DUers would say yes (even though that's a divisive way to put it). That's kind of the cornerstone of social programs, progressive taxation, and the entire Democratic way of thinking, is it not? Aren't you just advocating a quintessentially conservative point of view?

And just because our under-representation is enshrined in the constitution doesn't change the FACT that we're underrepresented. You honestly don't see the difference between a large, complex and diverse state like California having only two Senators while a smaller, less diverse, wealthier state with no serious problems also gets two Senators who can devote their energy full time to unnecessary pork projects?

[stopbush]

208. So, if the 38 freeloader states somehow arranged it so CA got 0% back on the $ we send the Feds

that would be OK with you, right?

Ever stop to think that CA's Senators and Reps CAN'T bring home the bacon because they're aren't enough of them to battle the senators & reps from the 38 freeloading states? That would be R and D senators and reps alike from the 38 freeloader states. Face it, we're outnumbered. We have the location, the people and the resources to generate a hell of a lot of wealth, but unfortunately, that wealth heads off to the lazy- ass people in the lazy-ass freeloading states who can't be bothered to attract industries and people to their states who make the kind of money Californians make.

Tell you what: why don't YOU get on YOUR senator and rep asses and encourage them to do something constructive in your state so you don't have to keep accepting welfare from CA? Perhaps you'd feel better about yourselves if you made even a desperate stab at becoming self sustaining. maybe your state could even become one of the donor states and send your Fed taxes to CA.

I don't know where you live, but maybe you should check one of the links provided elsewhere in this thread to see just how big a freeloader you and the rest of the people are in your state before criticizing CA.

:rant:

[galileoreloaded]

153. Heck, just quit sending any money to the Feds. Keep it all!!

Thats how civil wars start.

How about you Californians just sit down and stroke a check and quit complaining already....


:evilgrin:

[stopbush]

154. I'm going to assume that you live in one of the 38 FREELOADER states

that's sucking at the Fed teat.

:evilgrin:

[mainer]

162. How about Alaska and Texas start taxing their own citizens for a change?

Those "freeloader" states don't even have state income taxes. They just suck off the federal teat. I think California has a right to complain. Not only do Californians pay federal taxes (which they don't even get back) they ALSO pay state income taxes.

I agree with the plaint of Californians that they've been getting a raw deal from the feds, and shouldn't have to pay for freeloading red states that don't have state income taxes.

[Mz Pip]

157. You nailed it

Here's a commentary that pretty much summarizes what you said, though with far more sarcasm.

http://www.fuckthesouth.com/

Mz Pip

[mudplanet]

193. Everyone should read Fuck the South!!!!!!

[tabbycat31]

164. If CA gets a 1-1 return from the federal government

then the rest of the "donor states' should too. My state's (NJ) budget passed today without much of a fight, and we get back 61 cents for every dollar we send to DC.

Sarah Palin and others should give back some of the federal $$ they receive.

[ContinentalOp]

172. I don't think every state should get back a 1-1 return.

But I think things like this should be taken into consideration when thinking about potential federal assistance to the states. I think it's disgusting that people here say this is all California's fault without looking at the bigger picture of what's been systematically done to our state by out-of-state right-wing interests.

[stopbush]

182. Agreed. I used to live in Oceanport, and even back then, NJ got

shafted worse than any other state on Fed $.

[CrispyQ]

183. I don't know much about taxes

& the transfer of money from state to fed to state, but what you propose seems to make good sense. The link that ContinentalOp provided, below, is eye-opening! (Post #131)

[dana_b]

218. yes!

that makes too much sense. they won't even propose it.

[pleah]

34. Way to go, Awnawld!

What a putts.

[1]

40. no. not really.

you have to fix this, california. you know what to do.

when you do, then yay!

the longer you put it off?

boo!

[opihimoimoi]

44. Incompetent fools and cronies...they are everywhere, usually in the GOP Camp...5 to 1 ratio

[Blackhatjack]

45. The Party of NO (Repubs) Will Push Calif Into Disaster Before They Vote To Raise Taxes...

I believe that this is part of their misguided strategy for regaining popularity and power. Try to make Calif's economy crash so they can blame the Democrats thinking that will result in their resurgency of popularity at the polls.

Repubs have lots of experience at being a unified obstructionist party, and I have no doubt they won't change their spots any time soon.

[blue_onyx]

84. The GOP will give in

A similar thing happen in Michigan in 2007. Our government went into shut down for a few hours (in the middle of the night) before the Republicans finally approved a tax increase. They needed it to be an emergency so they could justify the vote to their anti-tax supporters. "We had no choice but to increase taxes. The Democrats forced us."

[HowHasItComeToThis]

96. I PUT NOTHING PAST THE FOUL REPUBS

Darrell Issa

[Joe the Liberal]

47. Republicans CANNOT run shit.....

except straight into the ground.

[HowHasItComeToThis]

97. BINGO and BRAVO

[fascisthunter]

142. they prove everyday why the GOP should never be in power

[hunter]

48. Woohoo! From the wings of the nation we become the cement swimming boots.

The Republicans tossed us in the river not realizing we are all tied together.

Way to go, you morons. How long you gonna be able to call your empty box stores and office blocks "assets?"

[Joe the Liberal]

50. They know and they still don't care.....

Why? because they have the means to leave the country at any time. Go on a little vacation until things start to improve in the US and then they'll be back to fuck things up all over again. So no they are not tied to us.

[HowHasItComeToThis]

98. TRUE

[omega minimo]

53. Are they trying to implement the police state in CA first?

[Webster Green]

54. Most of the State Parks are due to be shut down.

That is really fucked up!

Our repuke governor is a useless piece of shit. :mad:

[and-justice-for-all]

56. What the hell happened to California..?

Oh, duh, Repukes.

[1]

57. no. a lot of folks that liked the ideas, but weren't willing to pay...

[ContinentalOp]

117. Defending Republicans and bashing Californians again are you? -nt-

[jeanpalmer]

60. If things get bad enough

at the state level, people will start looking at that monstrosity in DC that they're sending 20% of their money to, and will ask "is it worth it?" And the answer for many will be no. Do we need to send $660 million to Gaza, $555 million to Israel, $310 million to Egypt, $300 million to Jordan, and $420 million to Mexico as Congress just voted to do? What about $889 million to the United Nations for "peacekeeping" missions? Or the $1 billion sent overseas to smaller countries to address the global financial crisis. Nearly $8 billion will be spent to address a "potential pandemic flu." Eight billion dollars! And $108 billion to the IMF. And of course the hundreds of billions wasted on crooked banks that are no longer needed. And $154 billion wasted on wars. But no money for the states. This is the definiton of stupidity and craziness.

[1]

62. what the fuck does any of your rant have to do with the fact california cannot govern itself???

[bertman]

94. Thanks for the list, jean. I found it interesting--and relevant in a dominoes falling kind

of a way.

You're right that the pockets of the poor are about empty and they are going to be asking some hard questions of their generous Senators and Reps who are trying to keep us popular all over the world by giving away huge sums of money that might help them and their families.

[Autumn]

168. It's past time for all Americans

to start asking that question. Great post.

[Pushed To The Left]

61. One of the best things we could do here in California is to get rid of the 2/3 budget rule!

California has it backwards: It only takes 50% plus 1 to amend the Constitution and take rights away from people, yet it takes a 2/3 vote in the legislature just to pass a damn budget! If we reversed that, possibly via constitutional convention, California would be in much better shape.

[Blackhatjack]

64. What the public does not yet get about California's plight, but will soon ....

... Is once the state's credit goes in the dumper, it won't easily be rehabilitated for many years to come.

That means, the money California needs to borrow to operate will come at loan shark prices, if at all.

California has lots of natural resources that need to be protected for generations to come, but the 'vultures' are already circling in hopes of picking them off for pennies on the dollar.

And as the economic death spiral intensifies, the businesses and corporations will move from California and take jobs with them. The very entities which would make up the tax base needed to pull the state out of this economic crisis if responsible progressive tax increases were imposed.

So it is not as simple as passing a responsible budget now and all things go 'back to normal.'

The new 'normal' won't be one that most Californians recognize.

[Yavin4]

76. California Needs To Raise Its Property Taxes, esp. on Wealthy Properties

and your crisis will be resolved.

[YvonneCa]

79. Arnold won't do that. n/t

[JVS]

81. Well then CA is fucked.

Better luck next time

[YvonneCa]

88. Just out of curiosity, what did you think about...

...Enron? ...the recall of Gray Davis?

[JVS]

93. Enron was criminal. Davis' recall was stupid, but he seems to have lost the public's confidence

Maybe he should have resigned

[YvonneCa]

105. Davis wanted to raise taxes to...

...fix the budget after the mess caused by Enron. Arnold came in, calling him a 'tax-and-spend liberal' and benefitted from the recall, spearheaded by Rep. Darrell Issa (R).

Enron left state finances in shambles, because FERC...thanks Cheney...refused to help California.

These factors carry, IMHO, at least equal weight with Prop.13 and 'so-called'low taxes.

[Hannah Bell]

133. he wanted to go after enron too, if i recall right. to get some of the funds back.

but arnie put the kibosh on that. if memory serves.

[YvonneCa]

146. You are right. n/t

[KakistocracyHater]

91. override him, it's an extreme emergency so pass a 1-time use law

& do it

[YvonneCa]

104. ??? n/t

[KakistocracyHater]

200. pry the Governor out, not unlike the NY Governor

by a 1-off 'law' if necessary? The good guy version of Bush w Gore?
??????????????n/t?????

[rvablue]

139. Sorry, but you can't blame that one on Arnold. The California electorate took care of that

a long time ago by passing Prop. 13.

The only entities who can recitify that mess are the CA voters or 2/3 of the legislature.

[taught_me_patience]

87. Please provide evidence that this will SOLVE the problem

Otherwise, you're talking out of your ass like most DUer's who know nothing about California.

[Yavin4]

95. It's Called Arithmetic

If you owe money, then you must raise revenue to pay off the money that you owe.

CA's prop 13 law artificially holds property values low which is a major contributing factor to your state's inability to pay its bills.

Also, read post #85 above. If you live in an 800,000 home, you should pay more than $400 a year in property taxes. That is just criminal.

[taught_me_patience]

102. We have a $20B shortfall

Please provide evidence that your theory will provide $20B to the state coffers. We all know that repealing prop 13 will increase revenue.

[rvablue]

141. It's you that doesn't understand squat about Prop. 13 and it's disastorous effect on

CA's fiscal health.

Just because you reside in the state doesn't make you an expert.

Go check out Peter Schrag's "Paradise Lost" at the library and get back to us.

Also, go take a little visit over to your municipal tax accessors and do a little research. Look up the commerical and rental properties in your area that were purchased in the late 70's or early 80's and take a gander what tax rate they're paying....it'll blow your mind and open your eyes.

[namecallerholic]

99. And who will be blamed? "Liberal Democrats controlling the legislature" or their "Republican Gov"?

Excuse me, their "moderate to liberal-leaning Republican Governor" as Fox News will refer to him.

Who is really to blame? The Energy pirates who Schwarzenegger and the Bush Energy Department let off the hook?

Too far back. The public can't remember it and won't accept it even if you tell them. Memories are too short and looking back requires too much mental work.

Democrats will be blamed and the public will largely believe it.

I can hear the Republicans now "this is what happens when you give the Democrats complete control of the legislative agenda." Schwarzenegger will be "not conservative enough."

Democrats in DC will bow to the Republicans, as usual, because they don't have any confidence in the public to accept the truth once the media turns on them if they try to tell it.

[HowHasItComeToThis]

100. WHY ARE THESE PEOPLE SO FOUL ??????????

[pinto]

212. Most here in CA realize it's the 2/3 needed to raise taxes, Republican stonewalling

(without 2 or 3 Republican votes *any* increase in revenue is blocked and all Republicans have signed their dumb ass "No New Tax" pledge)and the eventual effects of Prop 13 coming home to roost.

[Kablooie]

107. They've been predicting this for years now but nothing ever really changes.

It's always been right around the corner.

[defendandprotect]

111. Obama needs to restore taxes on the elite -- NOW -- !!!

and start bailing out states rather than capitalism!!!

[Odin2005]

114. California's mess is at it's core political, the stupid mob rules the state.

The stupid mob that recalled a good governor and put in Ahhhnold. The Stupid mob that voted for Prop-13 and Prop-H8 and the "2/3 vote needed to raise taxes" rule.

You Californians made your mess, NOW LIE IN IT.

[closeupready]

173. While I sympathize with the good people and liberals in CA, I agree that they made their bed.

Sorry, folks, but I agree. This is what you get ultimately with mob rule.

[Odin2005]

175. Yep, interests with deep pockets whiping up the mob into voting for stupid BS!

[Ladyhawk]

211. So, it's OK with you that I'm losing my health care and might die because of it?

Nice.

[closeupready]

214. No, I'm not, but ...

why don't you pay for your own health care? 'because I can't afford it.' well, why doesn't the state of California? 'because they refuse to.'

And I'm the bad guy here?

[mudplanet]

120. Can the federal govt create taxes to bail out Calif

that affect only the people in California? That is, can it create a tax on business or property (probably the most feasible) only in California, and use those monies to aid California? I'm unclear on the history of the problem, but from the little I've read it's the proposition system in that state that has created this mess in that it made it politically impossible for the State to increase its revenues.

[ContinentalOp]

174. Uh, sure. It's called a LOAN.

Give us the money and we pay it back with interest. Why is this so hard for people here to support? :shrug:

[TLM]

127. The sky is not falling...

Here's the problem... the republicans control the state gov regarding any tax hike. And property developers control the republicans.

The developers want to hold on to millions and billions worth of property, yet pay taxes on it based on rates from 30 years ago. It works like this... developer buys up a lot of shitty property somewhere worth next to nothing. Then they give some massive donations to the right people (republicans) and presto suddenly theres a big development in that area... new freeway off ramps... stores like walmart... etc. And now all that property is worth a TON... yet still only taxed on the value when it was bought.

We have endless amounts of COMMERCIAL real estate... all we have to do is tax it.

You have to remember that a lot of folks in CA have been somewhat insulated from the economic disaster that has torn through the midwest and rust belt. When the rest of the nation has been hurting really bad, CA has always been the oasis in the west. From the gold rush to the dust bowl to hurricane Katrina... people come here when all else fails somewhere else. Because CA rides out most of of hard times pretty well.

Things will flip quickly when no new taxes means no job, no police, no fire...etc. for many of these rabid right wing assholes who live in the central inland part of the state. If I'm not mistaken it was that area that gave birth to the freepers' website. Central cali is to CA what the deep south is to the US. They're why prop 8 passed.


The funny thing is... this all could very likely result in the legalization and taxation of pot. There's serious talk of this in state government, because the medical use accessibility has pretty much been established statewide. The last few conservative counties got shot down by the courts and obama has called off the feds. There's a bill pending... Arnold has even said it is worth considering.

Think about it....what an easy way to sell a tax to the republicans... call it a hippy tax, a tax on those damn hippies and their weed. Conservative estimates put the tax revenue in the billions.

[Hannah Bell]

134. "It works like this...

developer buys up a lot of shitty property somewhere worth next to nothing. Then they give some massive donations to the right people (republicans) and presto suddenly theres a big development in that area... new freeway off ramps... stores like walmart... etc. And now all that property is worth a TON... yet still only taxed on the value when it was bought."


Thanks... & truth be told, those folks were the hidden hand of prop 13.

[Vinca]

135. So is the problem that the Republicans are being bought off or

have they created an opportunity to do away with government? After all, chucking welfare, Medicaid, etc. is a Republican's wet dream. I wonder if they'll fund ambulances to pick up the bodies.

[ContinentalOp]

177. The potential upside here is those people in the red areas of CA might be hit the hardest...

and with any luck maybe a whole bunch of them will leave the state.

[Politicalboi]

130. Before Bush

Ca 5th largest economy in the WORLD. A few weeks ago 8th. A few days ago I heard 7th and thought WTF? How did that happen? They canceled my unemployment, but is that what it took? LOL! Luckily I got an extension just the other day, but I haven't heard our rating lately. Enron had a lot to do with Ca demise.

[kjackson227]

156. Dang! Had no idea this was about to happen.

[mainer]

158. Okay, now I'm appalled by California taxes

I just checked the income/property tax rates of various states. California's highest income tax bracket is 10.3% -- I think it's the highest in the country. And their property tax mill rate is 1% of the property's value. Folks, these are not under-taxed people. These are very highly taxed people.

http://www.retirementliving.com/RLstate1.html

Compare it to Alaska, which has NO income tax. Plus, many communities in Alaska don't even have a property tax. Texas has no state income tax either. WHY are Alaska and Texas getting a net influx of federal tax dollars when they don't even bother to tax their own residents?

If I were in California, I'd be screaming at the unfairness of it all.

[ContinentalOp]

178. Thank you. Also some of the highest sales tax at over 10% in some areas.

Although if you look at property taxes as a percentage of the current appraised value of the property, ours is one of the lowest, thanks to the housing bubble. But if you look at it as a raw number, the actual median dollar amount paid in property taxes is pretty average here. http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Taxes/Advice/PropertyTaxesWhereDoesYourStateRank.aspx

[YvonneCa]

187. I am...

...screaming. Can't you hear me? :7

[varelse]

198. This Californian is too busy fuming about the ignorance of it all

:-(

[Blackhatjack]

159. El Monte, California considers bankruptcy ... LINK

And as the State of California fails to deal with the impending financial disaster, cities like EL MONTE are being forced into filing bankruptcy. Makes you wonder why more people and businesses have not picked up and left.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3944773
http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/news/ci_12711953

EL MONTE – The city council will consider Tuesday whether to initiate Chapter 9 bankruptcy proceedings for El Monte, according to the council's agenda.

. . .

El Monte has faced serious financial troubles since last year, when plunging sales tax revenues and rising employee benefit and retirement costs caused a budget deficit that hasn't gone away since, despite layoffs and cutbacks.

Most recently, it faced a $12 million deficit for the fiscal year that starts Wednesday. To cut $10 million, the city manager laid off 100 employees and recommended other cutbacks, including the closure of one of the city's four fire stations.

. . .

Despite these cutbacks, the city still faces a $2 million deficit. And a state takeaway of property tax and gas tax revenues – proposed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to address the state's own budget crisis – would bump the deficit to $4 million, according to the resolution.

[Better Believe It]

176. So who is going to organize these mass protests, what organizations?

The Democratic Party?

Moveon?

Labor organizations?

Civil Rights and minority groups?

Others?

All of the above?

I hope it happens and if I lived in California would definitely participate and encourage others to join the protests.

[ContinentalOp]

179. Nothing is going to happen. Obama will let us fail.

He doesn't need our campaign contributions anymore. Nobody really needs to pander to us politically so we have essentially no voice in Washington. And the rest of the nation hates us so "fuck California, let them fail" will be a VERY popular sentiment. It seems to be the prevailing thought even here on DU.

[Blackhatjack]

181. Everyone knows that if California's economy implodes it will affect us all...

You cannot allow an economy the size of California to default and declare bankruptcy, and think it won't affect the rest of us.

California, and its citizens' are indeed important.

And I don't hear anyone reputable saying 'let them fail.'

[YvonneCa]

188. Thank you. Hopemonger that I am...

... :7 I believe in our leadership in Washington to figure this out. But it is a HUGE problem.

[Blackhatjack]

190. I believe Calif is different from other states and their problems, including my own state of NC...

California is one of many states, but no other state will have the impact on the US as a whole like California will if it defaults.

I think the Obama Administration is trying to push state government officials to take the hard steps needed to address this crisis by not yet offering any hope of a government styled bailout.

But it would be foolish to think standing by and watching Calif default would be the right thing to do.

I predict that ultimately there will be an offer of a cash infusion into Calif with some significant 'strings attached' that spell out what the state must do to qualify for disbursement of the money.

Then the ball will be in California's court, with Repub Legislative Members placed squarely on the spot....

[YvonneCa]

191. That's what I think, too. I just wish...

...they'd hurry up and get it done, already. :7 Being in limbo is awful.

[Blackhatjack]

195. Our state of NC has a 4bil $ Deficit to cover, but we aren't in California's class yet...

WE are looking at some horrendous cuts in social services, essential services, and large layoffs.

Particularly we have a huge number of school teachers who will not know if they have a job until just before school starts.

We know what you mean about waiting in limbo....

[ContinentalOp]

199. Obama should come up with a plan that helps all states equally.

With any strings that are attached also to be applied equally. I don't think it will work to get too specific. As much as I would like to see prop 13 overhauled I don't think it's the federal government's place to have any influence over that.

I don't understand why inexpensive Federal loans can't simply be given to any states that need them but then admittedly I don't understand all of the details behind state economies, the Fed, state's credit ratings, etc.

[YvonneCa]

202. LA cut 5000 teachers, and...

...they still don't know if it will be enough. My (former) district cut about a hundred...it's very small. LA said (at a board meeting) that they were looking to do the cuts now, rather than over the next two years. Some disticts in SD County spared people this year, but anticipate more cuts in the next two years.

What's funny (but not really funny ) is all the talk about teacher shortages. Yet teachers (the expensive ones with benefits) are being cut or pushed out of the system.

[ContinentalOp]

197. I hope you're right -nt-

[OwnedByFerrets]

192. California is the canary in the coalmine.

[blue_onyx]

201. Actually Michigan was the canary for the past 8 years

but we're not California so nobody cared.

[YvonneCa]

203. It's one heck of a big...

...CANARY. :7

[Hugabear]

206. This is what happens when you put a steroid-using, woman-chasing has-been actor in charge

His biggest accomplishment prior to being installed (I refuse to say he was elected)? Uttering the phrase "I'll be back" in a sci-fi movie.

[lonestarnot]

207. AZ is in close competition. Snort.

:rofl: Pugs are still trying to sail the boat. :rofl:

[Ladyhawk]

209. I've already lost much-needed health care.

Mental health has been cut to the quick and I get the feeling those trying to take up the slack are going to burn out.

I don't even want to think about what's happening / what's going to happen. It's all very distressing.

[lies and propaganda]

215. BAILOUT CALIFORNIA!

6th largest economy in the world
we have 12 freaking percent of this countries populace.


Where is our bailout?

[closeupready]

216. Where's MY bailout? I could use some extra cash right now.

Things have been tight.

[dysfunctional press]

217. FUCK california. as long as prop 13 is on the books, they should get NO 'bailout'.

there is PLENTY of money and wealth in that state to clean up their own fucking messes.

[earth mom]

219. WTF?!!!! Obama is NOT going to help?!

:wtf: