Question about the Governator...

[Oakland Uptown]

All those mad, be mad at yourself, you voted for him. I don't know why anybody obsesses over the stupid two party system. People don't vote for the better candidate, they vote on party lines. The whole system is a joke and needs to be overhauled.

It's not like he could have turned CA's situation around. No matter who is in there the problems would remain the same.

[smokingGun]

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

Something you need to understand about cuts in government programs. There are only so many that can be touched. If they're federally mandated then the state has to keep hands-off and there are very few programs that don't receive federal programs. It limits what any governor can do in CA. So, too, do the programs placed in law by the initiative process. Many, if not most, federally assisted/mandated programs and initiative-based programs require a specified level of maintenance of effort. In many cases Arnold has the right idea but lacks the authority.

+1 Exactly right. I don't think any candidate would sanction big cuts to discretionary spending like police, fire or education. So really there's very little leeway unless we find other sources of revenue like expanded gaming.

[mysticaltyger]

Originally Posted by wburg

That's a problem--millions of people come to California to visit our state parks and historic sites, and Arnold wants to close 220 of them! Despite the fact that this would save less than 1% of the budget gap (I think on the order of $150 million in a $25 billion deficit) and would be disastrous to communities throughout California whose restaurants, hotels, gift shops and other businesses will be direly short of tourists if the parks aren't open to visit! Parks operations generate $2.35 in tax revenue per dollar spent (due to people spending money on food, hotels, trinkets, T-shirts, gasoline, parking, etc.) so by cutting out that $150 million he's actually going to shrink REVENUE by more than $200 million!

Ok, but here's the thing. This is what a large number of people will say about EVERY cut that's proposed. Oh, no, don't cut this, it will hurt our state's economy!!! etc. Oh, don't cut education or health care!!! Well, education & health care are 80% of the state's budget, so that doesn't leave much scope for cutting elsewhere.

It's time for the voters of California to get real. There's no pain free way out of this mess. And it's time we stop trying to shift all the pain to "the other guy" while exempting ourselves.

[mysticaltyger]

Originally Posted by MisterDuke

Yes, this country would be much more efficient if it was run by business people... like the people at GM, AIG, Bear Stearns, Wachovia, Enron...

If we had allowed the free enterprise system to work, they would have gone out of business. Unfortunately, socialism has now become the norm, for big businesses and individuals alike. Don't be surprised if we end up in the same situation as countries like Greece, Argentina, etc.

[californio sur]

Originally Posted by Oakland Uptown

All those mad, be mad at yourself, you voted for him. I don't know why anybody obsesses over the stupid two party system. People don't vote for the better candidate, they vote on party lines. The whole system is a joke and needs to be overhauled.

It's not like he could have turned CA's situation around. No matter who is in there the problems would remain the same.

I disagree. Schwarzenegger rec'd a big chunk of Democratic votes. People voted for the man not the party with Arnold. That's why Arnold has acted in a non-partisan manner as governor.

[Oakland Uptown]

Originally Posted by californio sur

I disagree. Schwarzenegger rec'd a big chunk of Democratic votes. People voted for the man not the party with Arnold. That's why Arnold has acted in a non-partisan manner as governor.

In this case you're right. Arnold was the rare exception based on the fact many thought it was funny that "The Terminator" was running.