Blog powered by Typepad

« Me thinkee Chinkies velly stoopid! | Main | Late Last Night at The White House »

Thursday, 10 August 2017

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Those dolts that think California would be a viable state are smoking too much el dopo. If they leave, the population will be the uber wealthy Hollywood/Silicon Valley- Silly Wood- types as well as millions of poor low skilled illegals and government workers.

A state run by "progressives" for progressives with progressive policies will fail quickly.

I haven't visited for over 25 years, but it makes you wonder how people could start with so many advantages and still muck it up so badly. Mediterranean climate, seaports with access to the Far East, and some very bright people. I'm sure the main reason is turning a blind eye - or even encouraging immigration. If you have prosperity, then everyone wants a share. That's healthy, but you have to know how to keep them out...

'Ginger Ninja'

I like that. Consider it appropriated.

Sounds like Blighty on its own in the 1970's - minus the shit weather.

And soon to be "Back to the Future".

SoD

It's funny how the folks who think California will make a cock-and-bollocks of it, tend to be the same ones who think that another debt-laden, lefty-authoritarian, statist-at-heart state will make a utopia of it.

Shoorly shome mishtake?

SoD

The secession movement is only the plaything of a small group of nutters including GB's own Nigel Farrage. The wealth disparity is nearly identical to the rest of the country's. Texas has at least as many undocumented residents as California. There are probably more pipes being passed around the NRO offices.

Another thing: California's budget woes date back to the passage of Proposition 13, which was arguably the US's original modern tax revolt. It is of course never mentioned by Victor Davis Hanson and probably never in the NRO:

"Proposition 13 declared property taxes were to be assessed their 1975 value and restricted annual increases of the tax to an inflation factor, not to exceed 2% per year. A reassessment of the property tax can only be made a) when the property ownership changes or b) there is construction done."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_13_(1978)

California has one big advantage over Texas - they have Maxine!

Bob, I would suggest that the real problem in Ca is that they did not adjust expenditure to match the lower revenue from Prop 13. Staying in the "sp end like a drunken sailor" mode under these circumstances always ends in tears.

Ah, Auntie Maxine! The reincarnation of 'Aunt Ester' from "Sanford and Son" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanford_and_Son

Timbo, that's the kernel of the argument. What's "spending like a drunken sailor" to some is investment or necessary spending for others. The state economy relies heavily on subsidies and outlays for water projects, agriculture and transportation as well as other physical and social infrastructure. And those are only the most expensive items. If people would all be happy to live like most in Appalachia, which is impoverished, California could probably get by with almost no expenditures. However, the people of Appalachia aren't happy, and that's where opiate abuse is highest. An old American saying is "It takes money to make money," and it's usually true. Right wing bashing of California is all about it's reputation for being part of the elitist "left coast".

By the way, California is on track to pass Britain's economy:

http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article161472333.html

The comments to this entry are closed.