Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I see a lot of doom and gloom on here about the future of our state.
This is not the first time that people have felt the need to flee the state or thought the California Dream was finished.
I retrieved some old articles from the 1990s and 1970s that Time Magazine carried about the "end" of the Golden State. They make for interesting reading.
There are lots of comments in these old articles that sound like the same thoughts and problems we hear today.
"Californians differ over when the dream fizzled. Those of a political bent say the end came last November, when the state bucked a Carter tide to vote for Hayakawa and Ford."
"Some argue that the peak came in '74, when gasoline shortages tarnished the freeways and exurbs anchoring California's lifestyle. Others insist that the curtain fell last year, when citizens realized the inevitability of an earthquake and the consequences of a drought."
"But everyone agrees that the California of the '60s a mystical land of abundance and affluence, vanished some time in the 70s."
And from the same article:
" ...most businessmen remain skittish because of a 1975 Dunn & Bradstreet Fantus report that ranked the state's business climate 47th among the 48 states surveyed. For the first time in two decades, industrial investors, put off by bureaucratic red tape and environmental lobbyists, are bypassing California to relocate in other Sunbelt states. Statewide per capita income is still above the national average, but it is declining, as are the populations of Los Angeles, Oakland and San Francisco."
But California didn't disappear or become undesirable then. Fourteen years later the state had gone through a boom and was now dealing with the subsequent bust.
"Boom-driven tax revenues more than covered former Governor George ("Just say no") Deukmejian's tightfisted, short-term budgets. Many Californians, meanwhile, assumed that because their state's diverse economy had thrived during earlier national economic downturns, it was somehow recession proof. But when the current recession struck last year -- later than in the rest of the country, though with equal force -- tax revenues plummeted. That led to a state deficit of $14 billion, the largest any state government has ever incurred." (emphasis added)
"The deficit laid bare the basic fiscal plight of a state that can no longer afford the services to which it has become accustomed. The new immigrants, many of them poor, put additional demands on schools and health and welfare systems. That happened just after the landmark ballot initiative of 1978, Proposition 13, which froze property taxes and launched the national tax revolt. At the same time the middle class, hit by recessions in the early '80s and the early '90s, was becoming less and less willing -- or able -- to pay for the expanded services."
Remember the above was not written today, but 17 years ago.
Each time problems seemed insurmountable but each time the state recovered and moved forward again.
Is this finally the end for the Golden State? We'll see in the coming years.
But maybe times like these are just a reminder that we cannot take the California Dream for granted in the good times. And I for one believe those good times will return to California again.
And I for one believe those good times will return to California again.
For your sake and the sakes of those who believe as you do, I hope you're right. Personally I don't believe it if for no other reason(s) than the political and societal changes that have taken place in the intervening years.
No doubt you will note that this appears to occur generationally -- about every 20 years. At my age I'm not willing to wait and ride it out when I think there's a more immediately enjoyable alternative.
I see a lot of doom and gloom on here about the future of our state.
This is not the first time that people have felt the need to flee the state or thought the California Dream was finished.
I retrieved some old articles from the 1990s and 1970s that Time Magazine carried about the "end" of the Golden State. They make for interesting reading.
There are lots of comments in these old articles that sound like the same thoughts and problems we hear today.
"Californians differ over when the dream fizzled. Those of a political bent say the end came last November, when the state bucked a Carter tide to vote for Hayakawa and Ford."
"Some argue that the peak came in '74, when gasoline shortages tarnished the freeways and exurbs anchoring California's lifestyle. Others insist that the curtain fell last year, when citizens realized the inevitability of an earthquake and the consequences of a drought."
"But everyone agrees that the California of the '60s a mystical land of abundance and affluence, vanished some time in the 70s."
And from the same article:
" ...most businessmen remain skittish because of a 1975 Dunn & Bradstreet Fantus report that ranked the state's business climate 47th among the 48 states surveyed. For the first time in two decades, industrial investors, put off by bureaucratic red tape and environmental lobbyists, are bypassing California to relocate in other Sunbelt states. Statewide per capita income is still above the national average, but it is declining, as are the populations of Los Angeles, Oakland and San Francisco."
But California didn't disappear or become undesirable then. Fourteen years later the state had gone through a boom and was now dealing with the subsequent bust.
"Boom-driven tax revenues more than covered former Governor George ("Just say no") Deukmejian's tightfisted, short-term budgets. Many Californians, meanwhile, assumed that because their state's diverse economy had thrived during earlier national economic downturns, it was somehow recession proof. But when the current recession struck last year -- later than in the rest of the country, though with equal force -- tax revenues plummeted. That led to a state deficit of $14 billion, the largest any state government has ever incurred." (emphasis added)
"The deficit laid bare the basic fiscal plight of a state that can no longer afford the services to which it has become accustomed. The new immigrants, many of them poor, put additional demands on schools and health and welfare systems. That happened just after the landmark ballot initiative of 1978, Proposition 13, which froze property taxes and launched the national tax revolt. At the same time the middle class, hit by recessions in the early '80s and the early '90s, was becoming less and less willing -- or able -- to pay for the expanded services."
Remember the above was not written today, but 17 years ago.
Each time problems seemed insurmountable but each time the state recovered and moved forward again.
Is this finally the end for the Golden State? We'll see in the coming years.
But maybe times like these are just a reminder that we cannot take the California Dream for granted in the good times. And I for one believe those good times will return to California again.
I think California will eventually recover, but there'll be a hard few years ahead. The only silver lining is that some meaningful reforms that have been needed for years, which will make the state functional again, have far more of a chance of finally being undertook. The darkest hour often is just before the dawn....
The long term trend is still in the wrong direction.
A constitutional convention will set the state in a long term RIGHT direction.
California's dysfunction has a great deal to do with how government is set up, and how CA's fiscal structure is set up. The current, failed CA fiscal structure is a combination of all the bad ideas from the right and the left without the good ideas of either one.
Each time problems seemed insurmountable but each time the state recovered and moved forward again.
The state did not "recover," neither did it "move forward."
People are amazingly adaptable and learn to cope with adversity. California never regained the superior livability it had up until the 1960's. But young people and immigrants who keep coming there simply accept the diminished status quo as the new reality. We feel the state swirling around the sides of the toilet bowl and we can see the dark throat of the commode outlet as the vortex pulls us towards it, but we shrug our shoulders and say, "that's life."
I do not want to see CA go by the wasteside, but to compare the 70 s(we lived there then) with today is like comparing apple with bananas or mangos. Ca is in the worst shape I have seen any state. They have nothing but problems..What the future holds, who knows, but those of you who think there is no place like Ca better re-think your views.
The state did not "recover," neither did it "move forward."
People are amazingly adaptable and learn to cope with adversity. California never regained the superior livability it had up until the 1960's. But young people and immigrants who keep coming there simply accept the diminished status quo as the new reality. We feel the state swirling around the sides of the toilet bowl and we can see the dark throat of the commode outlet as the vortex pulls us towards it, but we shrug our shoulders and say, "that's life."
Just about the best synopsis about CA I have ever read. Diminished status quo as reality is right on the money...The old vision of orange trees dripping with juice has been replaced with Mexican trucks on jam packed freeways spewing oil.
Last edited by trailtramp; 05-22-2009 at 07:54 PM..
Reason: additional thought
Journalists tend to be morons; memories of old-time residents fade or become "nostalgic"; grass is always greener in some mythical place; not everyone has the skill set or finances to live and work in high-cost regions
CA was relatively costly vs rest of US even in early '80s; in '70s, LA smog was a hell of a lot worse than today; and in '70s, CA aerospace engineers would be periodically unemployed and struggle to feed their families (they were often less well-paid and had far less job security than UAW workers in MI back then)...the generation of centimillionaire and billionaire engineers in CA only took hold in '80s and '90s....would argue in many ways CA is far more dynamic and powerful an economy and QOL than 25-40 yrs ago
Every few years pundits claim CA or NYC is dead; every few years pundits claim the financial or tech industry is dead and will never make money like in recent years, blah-blah
Nearly all pundits mysteriously have puny net worths
Would never bet against Silicon Valley or Manhattan's ability to keep attracting world's smartest guys who periodically figure out some new innovation to make a few bucks
And LA's Westside is a quintessentially favored playground for wealthy guys from all over US; doubt that will ever change either
Many low skill jobs and people really don't belong in high-cost, high-tax CA or NYC anyway; many well-run companies continually move such jobs to low-cost, modern places like suburban Dallas, where such workers can enjoy a higher std of living than in old, decaying suburbs (or distant exurbs in foreclosureland) of SF or LA (or NJ or NYC's outer boroughs or Rockland, etc)
I see a lot of doom and gloom on here about the future of our state.
This is not the first time that people have felt the need to flee the state or thought the California Dream was finished.
I retrieved some old articles from the 1990s and 1970s that Time Magazine carried about the "end" of the Golden State. They make for interesting reading.
There are lots of comments in these old articles that sound like the same thoughts and problems we hear today.
"Californians differ over when the dream fizzled. Those of a political bent say the end came last November, when the state bucked a Carter tide to vote for Hayakawa and Ford."
"Some argue that the peak came in '74, when gasoline shortages tarnished the freeways and exurbs anchoring California's lifestyle. Others insist that the curtain fell last year, when citizens realized the inevitability of an earthquake and the consequences of a drought."
"But everyone agrees that the California of the '60s a mystical land of abundance and affluence, vanished some time in the 70s."
And from the same article:
" ...most businessmen remain skittish because of a 1975 Dunn & Bradstreet Fantus report that ranked the state's business climate 47th among the 48 states surveyed. For the first time in two decades, industrial investors, put off by bureaucratic red tape and environmental lobbyists, are bypassing California to relocate in other Sunbelt states. Statewide per capita income is still above the national average, but it is declining, as are the populations of Los Angeles, Oakland and San Francisco."
But California didn't disappear or become undesirable then. Fourteen years later the state had gone through a boom and was now dealing with the subsequent bust.
"Boom-driven tax revenues more than covered former Governor George ("Just say no") Deukmejian's tightfisted, short-term budgets. Many Californians, meanwhile, assumed that because their state's diverse economy had thrived during earlier national economic downturns, it was somehow recession proof. But when the current recession struck last year -- later than in the rest of the country, though with equal force -- tax revenues plummeted. That led to a state deficit of $14 billion, the largest any state government has ever incurred." (emphasis added)
"The deficit laid bare the basic fiscal plight of a state that can no longer afford the services to which it has become accustomed. The new immigrants, many of them poor, put additional demands on schools and health and welfare systems. That happened just after the landmark ballot initiative of 1978, Proposition 13, which froze property taxes and launched the national tax revolt. At the same time the middle class, hit by recessions in the early '80s and the early '90s, was becoming less and less willing -- or able -- to pay for the expanded services."
Remember the above was not written today, but 17 years ago.
Each time problems seemed insurmountable but each time the state recovered and moved forward again.
Is this finally the end for the Golden State? We'll see in the coming years.
But maybe times like these are just a reminder that we cannot take the California Dream for granted in the good times. And I for one believe those good times will return to California again.
The state was being governed by adults back during those years who made the tough calls to get things moving again. Do you really think that batch of losers in Sacremento is up to the job this time? Plus the state has grown more disfunctional at each turn. Soon or later these doomsayers will be right.
Remember that the boy who cried wolf really did see a wolf the last time he cried out....
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
)...the generation of centimillionaire and billionaire engineers in CA only took hold in '80s and '90s....would argue in many ways CA is far more dynamic and powerful an economy and QOL than 25-40 yrs ago
