California Metro Area Job Growth/Loss from May 2000 to May 2010

[MtnSurfer]

Well, you obviously went way out on tangent discussing Monterey and other areas in CA with your little rant. So then back on point what exactly are your brilliant plans for CA anyway? Are you suggesting we need to increase onshore and offshore drilling in every county throughout the state, similar to what Bakersfield did? Should we start drilling in our national parks too, clear cutting the forests, drilling in our oceans, in the Monterey Bay, along the Big Sur coastline, our reserves, and other national treasures just for the short term bucks we can get and jobs this will create? Gee, I'm surprised you thought of this original idea all on your own. I wonder why no one has ever thought of that before? Maybe if Sarah Palin moved to CA she could start the new Drill Baby Drill program with you right here. Man, that would be the life wouldn't it? Then we'd all being livin' high on the hog like Texan fat cats with an oil well in every backyard it could be found. Who cares what it does to the environment, fish and wildlife? And who needs those silly restrictions and land conservation laws anyway? And what's with all these reserves? Oil and money are all that really matter. That's quite a dream you have for our state's future. I wonder how many geniuses will agree to this plan?

BTW - the unemployment numbers I posted above for each city (Monterey 5%, Sacramento 14%, Bakersfield 11%) are latest for May 2010 from the State Employment Development Department. The county numbers are higher. Though Monterey is still the lowest at 11% with Kern County in which Bakersfield resides being the highest at 15.7%.

Derek

[AwayAndBackToSac]

Originally Posted by MtnSurfer

Well, you obviously went way out on tangent discussing Monterey and other areas in CA with your little rant. So then back on point what exactly are your brilliant plans for CA anyway? Are you suggesting we need to increase onshore and offshore drilling in every county throughout the state, similar to what Bakersfield did? Should we start drilling in our national parks too, clear cutting the forests, drilling in our oceans, in the Monterey Bay, along the Big Sur coastline, our reserves, and other national treasures just for the short term bucks we can get and jobs this will create? Gee, I'm surprised you thought of this original idea all on your own. I wonder why no one has ever thought of that before? Maybe if Sarah Palin moved to CA she could start the new Drill Baby Drill program with you right here. Man, that would be the life wouldn't it? Then we'd all being livin' high on the hog like Texan fat cats with an oil well in every backyard it could be found. Who cares what it does to the environment, fish and wildlife? ? And who needs those silly restrictions and land conservation laws anywayAnd what's with all these reserves? Oil and money are all that really matter. That's quite a dream you have for our state's future. I wonder how many geniuses will agree to this plan?

BTW - the unemployment numbers I posted above for each city (Monterey 5%, Sacramento 14%, Bakersfield 11%) are latest for May 2010 from the State Employment Development Department. The county numbers are higher. Though Monterey is still the lowest at 11% with Kern County in which Bakersfield resides being the highest at 15.7%.

Derek

Derek,

Defensive aren't we? Emotional, yes?
Actually, the numbers are:
US Bureau of Labor and Statistics:
April 2010: Monterey County, CA 12.7%
April 2010: Kern County, CA 16.5%
April 2010: Sacramento County, CA 12.5%

And Placer County, where I am is 11.5%.

And the highest is Imperial County at 27.9%




I might add that Sarah Palin's state of Alaska is 8.5%


Makes ya think, doesn't Derek?


My point was, and continues to be, that we need to focus as a nation on PRODUCTION and harvesting NATURAL RESOURCES. We will not continue to be able to have the wonderful natural preserves you seem so strangely emotionally protective of, if we are not internationally competitive... ...and thus able to afford those wonderful natural preserves.

[MtnSurfer]

Originally Posted by AwayAndBackToSac

Derek,

...

I might add that Sarah Palin's state of Alaska is 8.5%

Makes ya think, doesn't Derek?

Well yes, of course. But California is no Alaska. Alaska has a population of only ~700K while CA has one of ~ 40 million. Alaska covers some 650K sqaure miles while California covers only 160K. Other industries are very limited. They are quite different places in many ways. So one cannot assume that because something works in Alaska its going to work in every other state the same way.

And how about the current Gulf Coast spill? Hopefully that makes ya stop and think a little. Simply drilling for more oil is not necessarily the magic bullet for all economic woes. The Gulf states are realizing the evironmental and economic impact associated with this false assumption. Things aren't always as simple as they may appear on the surface. Sometimes complex problems take an array of solutions to solve them.

My point was, and continues to be, that we need to focus as a nation on PRODUCTION and harvesting NATURAL RESOURCES. We will not continue to be able to have the wonderful natural preserves you seem so strangely emotionally protective of, if we are not internationally competitive... ...and thus able to afford those wonderful natural preserves.

Again there is nothing wrong with drilling for oil Responsibly. But you cannot turn a blind or lazy eye to the environment in the process. With the focus simply on harvesting resources without consideration of the Environmental Impact, the results prove to be disasterous in more ways than one. So when you imply all areas, both land and sea, should be exploited equally to their fullest, without consideration of the environment then Yes I have a problem with that. Of course you are entitled to your opinion. What you are not entitled to is free reign of this state's land which is a precious resource in itself. That will never change.

Derek

[AwayAndBackToSac]

[quote=MtnSurfer;14891063]Well yes, of course. But California is no Alaska. Alaska has a population of only ~700K while CA has one of ~ 40 million. Alaska covers some 650K sqaure miles while California covers only 160K. Other industries are very limited. They are quite different places in many ways. So one cannot assume that because something works in Alaska its going to work in every other state the same way.



...let me get this straight. Your line of argument is that if there is a limited diversity of business/industry, then there is less unemployment?

Um, no. Alaska is a better business environment. It has nothing to do with population size, or land mass...

Again, California has lost phenomenal numbers of corporations, mid and small sized business, because we have lost understanding of who and what actually drives an economy. The lower San Joaquin Valley has done well, because they have continued to tap natural resources (the land, for oil and productive agriculture), something the more ethereal vacation towns may not remember...




And how about the current Gulf Coast spill? Hopefully that makes ya stop and think a little. Simply drilling for more oil is not necessarily the magic bullet for all economic woes. The Gulf states are realizing the evironmental and economic impact associated with this false assumption. Things aren't always as simple as they may appear on the surface. Sometimes complex problems take an array of solutions to solve them.

Again there is nothing wrong with drilling for oil Responsibly. But you cannot turn a blind or lazy eye to the environment in the process. With the focus simply on harvesting resources without consideration of the Environmental Impact, the results prove to be disasterous in more ways than one. So when you imply all areas, both land and sea, should be exploited equally to their fullest, without consideration of the environment then Yes I have a problem with that. Of course you are entitled to your opinion. What you are not entitled to is free reign of this state's land which is a precious resource in itself. That will never change.


Oh Derek, most of the damage to the economy of the Gulf Coast states is due to the wildly exaggerated amount of oil coming ashore, the subsequent lack of tourism and banned fishing (an area of which a large part has yet to get any oil). Heck, I have lived on the gulf cost for many years, and I can't enumerate the vast number of times I cleaned up tar balls. It is a common occurrence. Just look up the reported natural oil leakage values. I think you'll be amazed. Give the gulf a few years it will be fine.

Regardless, the sad truth is that no matter how protective people who espouse the "Religion of Nature" are, when your politician needs to buy off votes (usually social services, or to repay a large contributor) your precious preserve land ("church") will be sold... or just gutted.

Back on point though, California will need more oil derricks, more productive agriculture (both of which are in Bakersfield), and will have to repeal environmental law's, or manufacturing/businesses will not return. It will happen, because taxes can increase only so much...