The Guardian: CA's crisis just a more extreme form of America's crisis (Crescent City: how much, house)

[majoun]

British political journalist Timothy Garton Ash expounds on California's dysfunctionality and its roots in The Guardian, and accurately diagnoses its ills:

"....Californians have been living with the delusion that they could be taxed like libertarians and subsidised like socialists.....(California) created a bureaucratic nightmare of multiple, overlapping and conflicting agencies and competencies. California has been the state where no agency ever dies, and truly a golden dream for special-interest groups. Until, that is, the gold ran out."

He also states that in some ways California was a victim of its own successes which allowed the festering problems it faces to be ignored for as long as they were:

"California's deepest problem is that it has been so superabundantly endowed with both natural and human resources.... so fortunate in the inflow of brilliant innovators, dynamic entrepreneurs and industrious workers from Hitler's Germany, rainy Britain, Vietnam, India, China, Mexico and everywhere else, who have moved here, wooed by its matchless charms and opportunities. A poorer place could not have sustained such an idiotic system for so long...."

He, like I, sees a new Constitution as the only thing that can fix California, and that if California is doomed ultimately the whole US is doomed....

California's golden dream has turned sour. Only a great reform can revive it | Timothy Garton Ash | Comment is free | The Guardian

Thoughts? Most of us know this stuff already (with the exception of the tidbit that California has the 3rd longest constitution in the world, which emphasizes my belief that the best political documents in the world are the least amended and least unwieldy), but it's interesting to me that a Brit could understand why California is in such sad shape much more than many Californians do, and is far more aware of our crisis and its causes than our State Legislature is.

[jbunniii]

From the article:

"the energy-guzzling way it meets its water needs takes a staggering 19% of the state's now expensive electricity"

We guzzle energy to deliver water, while much of the rest of the world guzzles even more energy to stay alive in the winter. Somehow the latter is always ignored by those who criticize the former.

As for Californians being "taxed like libertarians and subsidised like socialists," let's just say that almost anyone to the right of Karl Marx would disagree with BOTH of those premises.

California's government would be absolutely swimming in cash if it didn't squander so much of OUR money supporting millions of retired state employees.

I do agree that ballot initiatives lead to highly imperfect budgeting laws, but always remember that those initiatives were passed in reaction to even more egregious fiscal practice on the part of the legislature.

Most Californians don't vote, and many of those who do barely read the initiatives on which they are voting. Does anyone think it is prudent to approve a new state constitution by this process?

The Guardian seems to think so, comparing it uncritically with "a gleaming new mountain bike," whereas anyone with an ounce of sense will recognize without even examining the document that it will be packed with goodies demanded by special interests and lobbyists, at the expense of everyone else, and that people will decide whether or not to vote for it based on 15-second commercials and idiotic bumper-sticker slogans.

Ballot initiatives are different from government by the legislature in only one important way: we can only blame ourselves for the outcome. Both yield corrupt government; but only ballot initiatives give us both corrupt and ignorant government.

[Hengist]

Sounds like he could be describing his own country, as well as California.

All the major parties here are promising cuts in government spending, at some time in the future.

[steel7]

As long as the publc unions (state, teachers, prison guards) own the legislature the problem will never be fixed. 3000 people a week leave ca & i dont blame them one bit.

[mysticaltyger]

Originally Posted by majoun

British political journalist Timothy Garton Ash expounds on California's dysfunctionality and its roots in The Guardian, and accurately diagnoses its ills:

"....Californians have been living with the delusion that they could be taxed like libertarians and subsidised like socialists..

This quote is not accurate. CA is not the highest taxed state but it's consistently up there in the top 10.

I believe the other quotes in your post are accurate.

I find the British press in general are much more thorough and objective in their analyses than anything you read in the US press. Just read any edition of The
Economist magazine.

[ExNooYawk]

Originally Posted by eagle7

As long as the publc unions (state, teachers, prison guards) own the legislature the problem will never be fixed. 3000 people a week leave ca & i dont blame them one bit.

Eagle, we lived in California for six years before retiring to Oregon and there is merit in what you say. F'rinstance, when we drive into the state of CA from Oregon (or Nevada, etc.) we are met with a checkpoint. We are stopped politely by a ranger, asked if we have any produce, are thanked and wished a nice day as we proceed.

One checkpoint on the 101 into Brookings from Crescent City had no fewer than four rangers. Two were in an office and two were checking vehicles.

Is this really necessary? How much does this cost? Does it result in more money for the state in the form of fewer losses for farmers via insects/plant diseases?

Seems like a waste of money to me. Yet another example of it.

[bayarea-girl]

jbuniiiii, I agree with a lot of your points. Spending is way out of control and people are in denial IMHO. Hope people don't turn this into those that don't like what is going on in CA to be anti-California and need to leave type of thread.

IMHO, once CA starts making a turnaround then that is when you will see the economy really recovery.

[BayAreaHillbilly]

The Guardian is a Fabian Socialist piece of rubbish, and therefore I'm not surprised they claim we have low taxes. The other thing that is missed is the utter ballast of excessive regulation.

[CATaxesSuck]

Originally Posted by mysticaltyger

This quote is not accurate. CA is not the highest taxed state but it's consistently up there in the top 10.

I believe the other quotes in your post are accurate.

I find the British press in general are much more thorough and objective in their analyses than anything you read in the US press. Just read any edition of The
Economist magazine.

(1) There's a big difference between Guardian and Economist. One is quite liberal, and the other moderately conservative. The analysis in Economist is generally excellent, in my opinion, but not so with the other -- but that's my opinion. One of my favorite sources of analysis is actually on this side of the Atlantic, namely reason.com.

(2) On average, CA residents are not the highest taxed. But that's the average family -- who bought a house 10 years ago at a relatively cheap price, and are protected by prop. 13. A newcomer to the state will need to make a lot of money to afford a house here, especially in the Bay Area. Then they will be hit with high income taxes. For such a person the tax rate on each additional dollar earned will be 9.55%.

(3) People often compare US to Europe, saying that US taxes are so low. The top federal rate is 35% versus 52% in Europe. But the US is a federal system, so people pay both federal and state income taxes. In addition, there are social security, medicare, and FUTA taxes. I've calculated the worst case tax to be 60.85%. After the Bush tax cuts expire, that number will rise to about 65%.

[steel7]

Originally Posted by ExNooYawk

Eagle, we lived in California for six years before retiring to Oregon and there is merit in what you say. F'rinstance, when we drive into the state of CA from Oregon (or Nevada, etc.) we are met with a checkpoint. We are stopped politely by a ranger, asked if we have any produce, are thanked and wished a nice day as we proceed.

One checkpoint on the 101 into Brookings from Crescent City had no fewer than four rangers. Two were in an office and two were checking vehicles.

Is this really necessary? How much does this cost? Does it result in more money for the state in the form of fewer losses for farmers via insects/plant diseases?

Seems like a waste of money to me. Yet another example of it.

Why should out of state fruit be inspected or discarded in ca ? I can understand out of country. It just seems ca sure wastes alot of money. I dont see how they are going to fix the major mess were in. I do know for a fact though that more & more people then ever before are being ticketed by the cops for anything they can get you on. They know most people dont contest the ticket & most dont win. The courts & cops are untrustworthy. A neighbor of mine got a $25.00 fix it ticket for a burned out license plate bulb. The bulb was $1.00 & i put it in for her within a few mins. The JERK cop could of given her a break. Im losing respect for cops now as are alot of other people. Rateacop.com is a good site. I rated the idiot who ticketed me for tinted windows & cost me $70.00 in tint & the thieving fine. I really despise the ca legislature & i hope they all burn in hell & god NOT have mercy on their greedy, loser souls. So it is written & so it shall be done. Can i get a witness ?