Stockton Today - California Tomorrow? (Orange, Fortuna: unemployment benefits, bankrupt, schools)

[nullgeo]

Originally Posted by ZhugeLiang

ROTFLMFAO

California has had sky high debt for at least the past decade. Facts aren't negotiable or only convenient when they agree with your ideology. This is why most of your posts are laughably absurd, you're the leftist version of Don and Western Pilgrim. ITT, you've stooped to literally making things up. CA had truckloads of probelms well in advance of the housing bubble. The popping bubble merely sped up the inevitable.

Oh, and what does GDP have anything to do with managing a state budget? You're either running deficits or you're not. It's really simple. Neither GDP nor the housing bubble forced Sacramento to spend $1.50 for every $1.00 taken in. Please stop digging for things that aren't there.

Until the national crash, please tell me what wasn't getting paid in California ... and tell me who wasn't running deficits across the nation and in the developing and industrial world, for that matter ... expanding states and nations, like businesses, run deficits all the time ... governments have mostly always run deficits for many decades .. how do you think the bond market has existed since practically forever ... it's based on growth projections which are based on growth history and patterns.

What does GDP have to do with budgets? Are you serious?

[Curmudgeon]

Well, I'm sure this will help the problem.

State to override local pension votes? | UTSanDiego.com

Capitol Alert: Steinberg: Jerry Brown has pension concept but no proposal

State Senate leader predicts pension reform next month - latimes.com

Brown rejects Democratic pension plan | news10.net

Pension reform talks break down in Sacramento - Total Buzz - The Orange County Register : The Orange County Register

[Vascodagama]

Originally Posted by nullgeo

Until the national crash, please tell me what wasn't getting paid in California ... and tell me who wasn't running deficits across the nation and in the developing and industrial world, for that matter ... expanding states and nations, like businesses, run deficits all the time ... governments have mostly always run deficits for many decades .. how do you think the bond market has existed since practically forever ... it's based on growth projections which are based on growth history and patterns.

What does GDP have to do with budgets? Are you serious?

Do you really think people are going to believe your liberal propaganda.
Its called debt. California has not balanced a budget in decades ... they keep issuing more and more bonds and borrow to pay the bill's.



The $2.3 Trillion State and Local Government Debt Monster – California Pension Systems on Unsupportable Path with $500 Billion Projected Shortfall. CalPERS, CalSTRS, and UCRS.

[ZhugeLiang]

Originally Posted by nullgeo

Until the national crash, please tell me what wasn't getting paid in California ... and tell me who wasn't running deficits across the nation and in the developing and industrial world, for that matter ... expanding states and nations, like businesses, run deficits all the time ... governments have mostly always run deficits for many decades .. how do you think the bond market has existed since practically forever ... it's based on growth projections which are based on growth history and patterns.

What does GDP have to do with budgets? Are you serious?

Oh right, we were just issuing more bonds, so everything was cool. Let's pay for a space station with bonds too since everything is getting "paid." Think of the jobs it'll create! It's free money after all!

Whatever you do, please don't stop posting. I haven't laughed this hard in quite some time.

[nullgeo]

Originally Posted by Don9

Do you really think people are going to believe your liberal propaganda.
Its called debt. California has not balanced a budget in decades ... they keep issuing more and more bonds and borrow to pay the bill's.



The $2.3 Trillion State and Local Government Debt Monster – California Pension Systems on Unsupportable Path with $500 Billion Projected Shortfall. CalPERS, CalSTRS, and UCRS.

Originally Posted by ZhugeLiang

Oh right, we were just issuing more bonds, so everything was cool. Let's pay for a space station with bonds too since everything is getting "paid." Think of the jobs it'll create! It's free money after all!

Whatever you do, please don't stop posting. I haven't laughed this hard in quite some time.

Here's the thing ... both of you keep saying that California was financing itself by borrowing against the future. And I agree. Never said any different. Nor have I ever suggested that is good (or bad) policy. There are parts of financing the future by borrowing that are each: some a good idea and some a poor idea.

Yet you both continue to accuse me of supporting the behaviors. Which I never have. You are arguing with -- I don't know -- invisible foes of your imagination.

What I have repeatedly pointed out is that California, in this regard, is little to no different than most state and national governments in the country / world. Any state or nation that is resource rich (and some that aren't) and experiencing continuous growth will borrow to finance the development of its future according to the projections of its growth -- based on experience and data. California has been an explosively growing state for -- well, forever in its history ... but remarkably so since the 60's. What it has done to try and keep apace and looking to the future may or may not have been always the best choices ... but it has not been any different than the federal government or other larger and smaller governments.

And that behavior, some advisable and some not, did not take down the economy. The economy was brought down by viciously fraudulent behaviors of national and international financiers who created mysteriously complex, devious financial schemes, and lobbied and hoodwinked a variety of national politicians and federal finance oversight officials -- built it all up to a fever pitch -- milked the schemes for incalculable sums of cash -- and waltzed away when the cards fell, exposing the gullibility and weaknesses of everyone who used credit extensively -- including governments.

Had this behavior been seen for what it was -- as it should have been seen by oversight officials -- the levels of borrowing and bonding would not have been undertaken ... no analysis would have justified the borrowing levels. The borrowing did not exist apart from the financial markets' experience -- which was falsely founded.

But you two, like many others here, insist that California is somehow uniquely flawed in this regard ... It's not. Perhaps you think California citizens and politicians are genetically different and inferior to other homo sapiens -- even though all evidence points to great achievements by Californians to match those of any other people anywhere in the world. And it is better positioned in the long run to recover than most other places.

By all means continue to rant that I have said otherwise ... that I somehow endorse the policies ... speaking of being invested in ideologies.

[nullgeo]

Originally Posted by ZhugeLiang

Oh right, we were just issuing more bonds, so everything was cool. Let's pay for a space station with bonds too since everything is getting "paid." Think of the jobs it'll create! It's free money after all!

By the way, little liang, your sarcasm is lost in the reality that what you ridicule is exactly one of the prime ways that faltering economies are stimulated: financing infrastructure projects to create jobs is exactly what is most recommended by the best economists in the world. Space station? Yeah, probably not ... but other infrastructure development yes. And bond financing is how it is done to restart the economic engine so that industry revives and feeds the basis for paying down the overlarge deficits.

Cutting expenses in time of crisis is a relatively small part of the solution. True fat must go ... but other expenditures keep the economy from starving and killing the future recovery.

Now, back to little liang's lessons on why ridiculing Paul Krugman and Christine Lagarde and a vast majority of other economists is a good idea ... and how we should defer to the wisdom of little liang to lead us out of our collective stupidities.

[ZhugeLiang]

Originally Posted by nullgeo

By the way, little liang, your sarcasm is lost in the reality that what you ridicule is exactly one of the prime ways that faltering economies are stimulated: financing infrastructure projects to create jobs is exactly what is most recommended by the best economists in the world.

I stopped reading there.

You are dangerously detached from reality my friend. We've been doing that for three and a half years. We had the stimulus packages, the green tech subsides, how's that all worked out? Billions lost and the jobs that went with them. The government doesn't create wealth, the private sector does. You don't need a masters in economics from Harvard to work that out.

Once in awhile I try to give you another chance, but you clearly don't know what you're talking about. If you're going to engage me in debate, at least make an effort. So far you've stitched a clown suit for yourself.

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by nullgeo

By the way, little liang, your sarcasm is lost in the reality that what you ridicule is exactly one of the prime ways that faltering economies are stimulated: financing infrastructure projects to create jobs is exactly what is most recommended by the best economists in the world. .

It worked in the Bay Area. Both the Golden Gate and Bay Bridges were started and completed during the depression. Many jobs were created helping this area come out of the depression before most other areas.

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by ZhugeLiang

I stopped reading there.

You are dangerously detached from reality my friend. We've been doing that for three and a half years. We had the stimulus packages, the green tech subsides, how's that all worked out? Billions lost and the jobs that went with them. The government doesn't create wealth, the private sector does. You don't need a masters in economics from Harvard to work that out.

Once in awhile I try to give you another chance, but you clearly don't know what you're talking about. If you're going to engage me in debate, at least make an effort. So far you've stitched a clown suit for yourself.

Those bailouts were not used to create jobs are really weren't meant to. They were simply to keep the largest corporations from tanking. Too big to fail I believe was the catch phrase.

[CarawayDJ]

Originally Posted by Gentoo

Those bailouts were not used to create jobs are really weren't meant to. They were simply to keep the largest corporations from tanking. Too big to fail I believe was the catch phrase.

The bailouts and the stimulus are two separate things.