California's budget still sucking wind (house, buying, tax)

[yeahthatguy]

Originally Posted by ZhugeLiang

A Barbara Boxer apologist, and I thought your posts couldn't be anymore ridiculous. Ideology doesn't play into it, Boxer is such a mark who's constantly getting fitted for a clown suit by her colleagues. It's called ineptitude. She has no leadership skill or influence whatsoever which is a considerable accomplishment given her time in Washington.



LMAO, no. "Conservative agenda," where do you come up with this nonsense? Sure, all six or so Republicans in Sacramento, yeah they're definitely the problem with all the massive influence they wield. Most of California's problems are self-inflicted. This isn't debatable.

Don't forget about this gem ...

So, it becomes down right hilarious that user_id goes around screaming about the federal govt. and donating when most of its liberal handout policies come from the biggest liberal handout hoons of them all : California representatives/senators.. The irony is downright laughable.

[tijlover]

Time to put up For Sale signs on the Channel Islands, Catalina and San Clemente islands, sold to the highest bidders. Problem solved!!!

[user_id]

Originally Posted by yeahthatguy

For every (quote/unquote) dollar California donates, it takes 4 more from the broader U.S through its largely offshored manuf'ing that allows its corporations to bleed margins the size of grand canyon out of products that it produces for pennies overseas and sells for dollars in the U.S. You want to talk 'fair' ? How about the federal govt. actually did its job and regulated this concept of 'free trade' and tarrif'd the snot out of the junk that these California companies keep importing into the U.S while destroying the broader economy here.

This isn't even remotely true, California has one of the largest manufacturing sectors in the US. Indeed, Los Angeles is one of the primary manufacturing hubs in the United States. The companies largely responsible for importing junk are not headquartered in California.

Not that there is anything wrong with importing goods....to begin with.

[user_id]

Originally Posted by ZhugeLiang

LMAO, no. "Conservative agenda," where do you come up with this nonsense? Sure, all six or so Republicans in Sacramento, yeah they're definitely the problem with all the massive influence they wield.

Except of course that my comments were about the federal government....of course you knew that as you were talking about Boxer. But hey, ignore the real issues. I'm not the one that is going to suffer.

[hoffdano]

Originally Posted by user_id

Yes, as usual, since the fallout from the housing bubble California has frequently been one of the first to come out with bad news only to be followed by other states that have tried to hide it under the rug.

You're calling it "PR", but California is one of the few states that is being open about new taxes....something few states are going to be able to avoid in the future. Many others are hiding things under the rug and hoping they never have to talk about the T word...

Regardless, the real problem here is the federal flow of dollars. California is a donor state, yet its economic is in pain. So then, we have a situation where California is sending welfare to other states (largely conservative states) while its economy is doing poorly....and then we have to hear glib remarks about the failure of liberal policies.

But hey, its not too late to let Texas and the South form their own countries right?

You have any examples of states "hiding" tax increases planned? Most tax increases require voter approval. So it is hard to hide. Nickel and dime stuff like raising fees still gets publicized.

Federal spending within states is not an easy thing to analyze. States with large military bases get more money. States with higher per capita income pay higher taxes. A lot of federal spending is related to social programs.

California's congressional delegation is generally viewed as influential - Pelosi, Boxer, Feinstein, etc. But perhaps that is a myth and it is simply that they suck.

[user_id]

Originally Posted by hoffdano

You have any examples of states "hiding" tax increases planned? Most tax increases require voter approval. So it is hard to hide.

That isn't what I said, I said that they hide their budgetary issues. As for taxes, its not there are secret plans to increase taxes, rather the opposite. The politicians are usually in denial about the need for more tax revenue...

Whether or not Boxer, etc are influential or not doesn't change the fact that they are vastly out-numbered. California just gets two senators and those two senators have to compete against a bunch of hillbilly senators from states that are fraction the size of California...

[SportyandMisty]

Originally Posted by bradleyyo

If our unemplyment is high, you can blame bankers, who won't give loans, even after WE bailed them out. You can blame greedy corporate CEOs who refuse to give jobs, because we have a Democratic president. Now, you want to hire one of those disgusting, greedy CEOs to be president. Corporations own and run this country and are turning our struggeling middle class into slaves, by paying low wages or simply hiring part time workers. Your enemies are not in The White House...your enemies are in boardrooms across this country and every country. Workers need to wake up.

This is an example of an argument for which the phrase "Gobsmackingly Incoherent" was invented.

[hoffdano]

Originally Posted by user_id

That isn't what I said, I said that they hide their budgetary issues. As for taxes, its not there are secret plans to increase taxes, rather the opposite. The politicians are usually in denial about the need for more tax revenue...

Whether or not Boxer, etc are influential or not doesn't change the fact that they are vastly out-numbered. California just gets two senators and those two senators have to compete against a bunch of hillbilly senators from states that are fraction the size of California...

You do realize that there are two houses of Congress? And Pelosi was the speaker until the last election?

Many of the states that give less than they take are blue states. They are not all redneck states. And some of the spending is completely due to a preponderance of federal employees, such as in Maryland and Virginia.

What do you propose the feds do? Give Jerry Brown some big checks? Invest in more companies like Solyndra? Build roads? High speed rail?

It would probably be logistically easier for California to find a way to extract $16B from Apple, Oracle, and Google. We know those companies are very good at diverting income to places with lower income taxes. So California might need a new tax or two. A search engine tax. A new un-exercised stock option tax for CEOs. Just take the money from Apple. They have billions and billions in cash.

[SportyandMisty]

It is useful to contrast New Jersey's budget hole with California's. McGurn: Jerry Brown vs. Chris Christie - WSJ.com

[EscapeCalifornia]

Originally Posted by hoffdano

It would probably be logistically easier for California to find a way to extract $16B from Apple, Oracle, and Google. We know those companies are very good at diverting income to places with lower income taxes. So California might need a new tax or two. A search engine tax. A new un-exercised stock option tax for CEOs. Just take the money from Apple. They have billions and billions in cash.

You know if it was an "evil" oil company sitting in $100B in cash, Jerry would find a way to tax it.