How long until California goes under?

NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
[quote author="no_vaseline" date=1230429304]Oscar continues to be my favorite new IHB member for bringing solid, fact based posts.



Previous to Proposition 13, I'm not aware of the last deficit the state had, but it has been in deficit more years than not since 1977. I continue to contend that we need to readdress Prop 13. All the stuff the anti Howard Jarvis folks claimed would happen indeed came true. Property taxes are too low and the state is too heavily funded by the less stable income tax and sales tax cash flows.



And to those who say "Just do a line by line audit and cut out the waste", <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/10/08/recall.main/index.html">I'm still waiting for Arnold to make good on his #1 2003 campaign promise. I'm not waiting up.</a></blockquote>


The basic premise of Prop 13 is good. Your underlying value and taxes shouldn't be based on speculative bubbles.



Other than that, I'm fine we us being realistic and raising property taxes to 2%, the same as the requested rate for vehicles. Frankly, they should make property taxes 3% and slash the sales tax, but it won't happen.



We saw what happened last time they raised the car tax. People HATE property taxes. Why? People scream about taxing the rich, but they don't tax wealth, which is the assets, things like property.
 
[quote author="no_vaseline" date=1230429663][quote author="GoIllini" date=1230181270][quote author="freedomCM" date=1230170517]I remember we had a thread about this before, but am still curious:



For all of you who say that the state payroll is "bloated", tell us what/who exactly you would cut?</blockquote>


Water agencies... Here in Irvine, we get our water from Irvine Ranch Water District. IRWD is one of about 28 members of the Municipal Water District of Orange County. MWDOC is one of 24 members of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. MWDSC is one of the member agencies (others are located in the desert areas to the east of the Los Angeles basin) that allocates California's share of water from the Colorado River. Each of the other states in the river's basin has it's own set of agencies that administer its own share of water. Each agency identified above has it's own Board of Directors (5 to 42 members of each board, depending on which agency), General Manager, General Counsel, Board Secretary, Public Information Officer, lobbyists, and web site. Without reducing the quality of service, or laying off any worker who designs or constructs or maintains the water system, or sends out the bills, or answers the phone when you have a question -- can't we do without all the "Directors" and their minions? </blockquote>


Considering it is a local based group that isn't funded by the state (it's funded by assessment paid by the end users), I don't see how this will reduce 'bloating'.



My dad was a member of two water boards in two different irrigation districts. He was not paid.



Once again, another example of how the general public (armed with a pretty idea but 1/10 of the facts and a ballot) is a dangerous thing. The voters get exactly what they deserve every election.</blockquote>


If your dad was like the water board members I've seen in action, then he was serving in the position to serve his community with the best of intentions, and I mean no criticism of such persons as individuals. Board members do receive per diem compensation for their work, but such compensation is relatively small for each person. But why have so many, in such a complex structure, serving in policy-making and/or advisory positions? One local district (not IRWD) has five board members but only 11 employees providing water service! The point I was making is that this is an example of how California government is too complicated and expensive, and it should be relatively easy to cosolidate these numerous agencies into a lot fewer of them and simplify the management structure. The agencies do receive tax revenue in addition to revenue from water use (some agencies more taxes than others). In my book, that makes them part of the problem of governmental inefficiency that we need to address.
 
Because it serves more than one user, and decisions it makes often favor one party over another. It can get kind of heated.



I saw a fistfight break out at the last water board meeting I attended.



You will not be yanking local control of these water districts away from these users. Pepole have fought and died over this issue. Go google "western water fights" look for yourself.



A childhood buddy of mine litigates water issues. He has a never ending case of work in front of him. Your heart is in the right place, but this is no solution. And they don't cost the state jack squat.



We are whistling past the graveyard. The ID's are a pimple on an elephant's butt.



Prisions, schools, and MediCal. Nothing else is worth talking about.
 
[quote author="no_vaseline" date=1230531003]



Prisions, schools, and MediCal. Nothing else is worth talking about.</blockquote>


How about <strong>welfare.</strong> I knew of people who moved from Texas to California to receive the generous benefits here. There is so much fraud and abuse in this program. California is one of the few states that didn't adopt the Federal Welfare Reform and now we are all paying for it.
 
[quote author="waiting2buylater" date=1230534497][quote author="no_vaseline" date=1230531003]



Prisions, schools, and MediCal. Nothing else is worth talking about.</blockquote>


How about <strong>welfare.</strong> I knew of people who moved from Texas to California to receive the generous benefits here. There is so much fraud and abuse in this program. California is one of the few states that didn't adopt the Federal Welfare Reform and now we are all paying for it.</blockquote>


Prisons, Schools and MediCal.



Prisons - 10.2% of the General Fund.

Schools - 50.6% of the General Fund.

Medical (HHS) - 29.0% of the General Fund.



Total 89.8% of the budget. <a href="http://www.ebudget.ca.gov/pdf/BudgetSummary/FullBudgetSummary.pdf">See page 18 of the Governor's Budget Summary.</a>



HHS gets rolling about page 123. It employs 33,000 people and roughly 17% of the Cali population is elligible with a $2000 per elligible burn rate. That's $2000/year.



The fraud is in the MediCal program, roughly 5-10% was the last AG reported numbers. The Medi-Cal budget is roughly $35 Billion when other funds are included.



As for welfare, the welfare you are thinking of is likely Medi-Cal.
 
Damn! NSR beat me to it! Here's my post I couldn't get down:



[quote author="waiting2buylater" date=1230534497][quote author="no_vaseline" date=1230531003]



Prisions, schools, and MediCal. Nothing else is worth talking about.</blockquote>


How about <strong>welfare.</strong> </blockquote>


Stop being dillusional.



<img src="http://www.ebudget.ca.gov/BudgetSummary/images/FG-SUM-02C.gif" alt="" />



<a href="http://www.entrepreneur.com/tradejournals/article/109581636_2.html">http://www.entrepreneur.com/tradejournals/article/109581636_2.html</a>



<blockquote>From 1998-99 to 2002-03, expenditures grew by 46 percent, or 36.8 billion dollars. Almost half of that amount went to education, primarily K-12. Another 22 percent went to health and human services, primarily Medicaid and other social programs, such as Medicare. Transportation, business, and housing absorbed 8 percent of the expenditure increases. These along with Corrections (prison system) accounted for 75 percent of the increase. Some may say these increases were excessive, but going behind the number the increases seem to be justified. </blockquote>


Notice you don't see irrigation districts or welfare?



The budget is out of control because of schools (which are underperforming becasue they are underfunded), Medicaid and Medicare (health care reform that has been delayed and distorted since 1992), roads (getting worse all the time because the transpo fund is constantly raided), and prisions (which are underfunded and about to get stuck with a federal concent decree).



I've been singing this song for so long I can do it in my sleep with a fifth of scotch in my gut. Which poision do you want or do you want a cocktail?



- Cut Schools

- Toss out the indigent and the elderly and make the hospitals and those with insurance pick up the tab

- Stop doing roadwork (really violate the law)

- Release state prisioners (blasphemy!)



The rest of it doesn't matter. I've been watching a lot of House lately. Let me drop a House-ism.



You wake up. The wall paper is pealing, the teakettle is boiling, and the paint is bubbling off the walls. Which do you fix first?



Answer:



None of them. Your house is on fire.
 
[quote author="No_Such_Reality" date=1230549982]Unfortunately, the door to your house that is on fire is being blocked by the 800 pound gorilla of the State Public Worker's Unions.</blockquote>


That Gorilla is backstopped by the voters of the state of California who voted to get tough on crime, force manditory mininums on schools, and won't refuse care to the poor and indigant. Oh, and lowered the revenues to pay for all that crap (prop 13 and the Gray Davis recall).



<a href="http://articles.latimes.com/2008/dec/15/local/me-recall15">Oops! Dumping Gray didn't work.</a>



<blockquote>Five years ago, Donnette Shaffer was one of nearly 5 million Californians who did something unprecedented: she voted to fire Gray Davis, just months after he had been reelected governor.



Now she wonders why she bothered.



?I was thinking that we needed to do something before the ship totally sank,? the 35-year-old postal carrier said last week as she ended her shift at Yuba City?s downtown post office. A Republican, Shaffer voted to recall Democrat Davis and replace him with actor Arnold Schwarzenegger. For a time, she was pleased with the new GOP governor, who made vague but vivid promises to transform Sacramento and the way it operated.



?Now it just seems either the system got to him or he just gave up and has gone with it,? Shaffer said as evening fell on the northern Sacramento Valley. As for the recall, she said, ?I don?t think that it made a difference, because we?re still in the same boat we were in then, only worse.?</blockquote>


<a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-govern15-2008dec15,0,6363806.story">Or try this one. We're screwed.</a>



<blockquote>Reporting from Sacramento -- Gray Davis had just landed in Pennsylvania on a trip last June when he was struck by the differences between that state and the one whose voters drove him out of office early in his second term, blaming his leadership for state government failures that included deep debt and legislative paralysis.



Pennsylvania roads were clean. The state's budget was balanced. Lawmakers had socked enough away in a rainy-day fund to build what was then a decent surplus. Government seemed to run effectively.



"It's not like other people can't do this," the former governor said recently.



But California government is arguably more dysfunctional now than it was when Davis, a Democrat, got the boot. The budget deficit has grown so huge that a shutdown of government services looms. Partisan gridlock grips the Legislature, and lawmakers bicker as the state plunges into crisis.



"The recall absolutely hasn't helped at all," said Gary Jacobson, a professor of political science at UC San Diego.





The state's latest collision course with insolvency has renewed the question in the Capitol: Has California become ungovernable?

</blockquote>
 
Voters are gullible and driven by fear. The Unions have driven those home at every point.



The politicians have learned the same lesson. First things to threaten to cut are Schools, Fire and Police so the populace screams.



It's that whole cake and eat it too thing.
 
It's too bad California can't recall it's voters.



As tragic as the outcome of all this is certain to be in the future, I have to admit I am fascinated in watching it unfold. In fact, when you include the greed and dishonesty from the housing bubble, the gay-bashing majority, and the short-sighted, self-centered interests involved in every aspect of it's politics, California is becoming a cautionary tale.
 
"That Gorilla is backstopped by the voters of the state of California who voted to get tough on crime, force manditory mininums on schools, and won?t refuse care to the poor and indigant."



California didn't get tough on crime. California got DUMB on crime. The original three strikes legislation wasn't three strikes of any kind. It was altered from the three violent crimes which was in the early draft to three of any kind. There have been several attempts to modify this, but none have succeeded.



https://entrepreneur.com/tradejournals/article/160230292.html



"California versus New York: grappling with the prison dilemma.



by Peirce, Neal

Nation's Cities Weekly ? Feb 19, 2007 ? over taxed prison systems

New York's Eliot Spitzer, the tough ex-prosecutor turned governor, wants a commission to examine closing some of his state's dozens of prisons. Meanwhile, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is pressing for $11 billion in bonds to add 78,000 beds to California's already burgeoning and over-taxed system.



What's going on here?



Partly, it's what both men inherited. New York's prison population peaked at 71,000 inmates in 1999 but has dropped by 8,000 since. Major explanations: dropping crime levels (especially in New York City) and increased efforts to find alternative treatment for nonviolent offenders.



California's prison population, meanwhile, has continued to surge. It's now at 173,000 inmates, an $8 billion yearly bill. Overcrowding and threats of riots are so serious that a senior prison official last year warned of "an imminent and substantial threat to the public."



One ironic twist: Thirty years ago California's prison system was hailed as America's best, providing education and psychotherapy for offenders. New York, meanwhile, endured the tumultuous Attica prison riot of 1971 and enacted Gov. Nelson Rockefeller's infamous drug laws--widely copied in other states--that swelled prison populations by setting sentences up to life for possessing or selling even minuscule amounts of narcotics



So why the switch? In 1977, responding to a crime surge, California Gov. Jerry Brown did away with the "indeterminate" sentencing that gave both judges and parole boards flexibility in deciding when it was safe to release an offender. Rehabilitation and treatment were largely written out of the state prison code; punishment became the sole goal. California's Legislature passed more than 1,000 mandatory prison-sentence measures, topped by the 1994 enactment of the state's famed "three strikes law" decreeing 25-year-to-life terms for most two-time prior offenders.



New York in recent years has been trying reform. Indeed, as some of the more ferociously severe drug-offense penalties were repealed in 2004, then-Gov. George Pataki could proclaim: "The Rockefeller drug laws will be no more."



That's not to say that any reform is easy after decades of "lock-em-up" politics and a "war" on drugs that's helped drive America's incarceration rates to the highest in the world.



Plus, any governor faces formidable political obstacles trying to pare back America's vast prison-industrial complex. In California, it's the Correctional Peace Officers Association, an astounding 31,000 members strong. Commanding a multimillion-dollar campaign war chest, the union is a major factor in gubernatorial and legislative campaigns The three-strikes law is its full-employment act.



Former Gov. Gray Davis, whom Schwarzenegger ousted in the 2003 recall election, appeased the union unabashedly. It has more than 2,000 members earning over $100,000 a year: its contract-guaranteed pension benefits are today superior to those of the state university system.



On entering office, Schwarzenegger seemed intent on an independent course, championing rehabilitation and appointing a reform prison director. But when he began secret dealings with the union, his director quit in protest. Schwarzenegger still talks of measures to help prisoners straighten out their lives (mental-health counseling and life-skills training, for example).



But his latest budget cuts a voter-mandated drug-treatment program that studies have shown to be highly cost-effective. And his big emphasis now is on bricks and mortar to confine more prisoners--$11 billion for added state prison, county jail and juvenile beds.



In New York, Spitzer also confronts a politically powerful prison guard union, and more--local politicians defending a network of upstate prisons built in recent decades to help offset heavy manufacturing job losses. An example: State Sen. Elizabeth Little, whose Adirondacks district includes 12 prisons and prison camps "There are over 5,000 corrections officers living in my district," she told The New York Tunes "In most of these communities, the prisons are the biggest employer."



Left unsaid in Little's frank assessment: a society in which overwhelmingly white upstate New York communities rely economically on massive incarceration of a heavily black and Hispanic prison population.



Will Spitzer, like Schwarzenegger, eventually retreat from his lofty reform goals? New York state government cries out for systemic reform, and his massive (69 percent) election mandate provides a once-in-a-generation leadership opportunity. On ethics standards and issues like prisons, he's showing a willingness to face down legislators, even fellow Democrats,



It's a bold maneuver, all the more dramatic because Spitzer is specifically including a critical look at today's vast prison establishment and culture--the issue most American politicos fear to even discuss



Eventually, Spitzer will be obliged to make some compromises on legislation. Yet there's a parallel to Theodore Roosevelt. As William Cunningham, a veteran of two earlier New York administrations, told the Tunes: "Roosevelt came in saying he was going to be a reform governor. He immediately got into a fight with Senator Platt, the head of the Republicans, a powerful political boss in the state. History remembers Teddy Roosevelt. You have to be a knucklehead like me to remember Boss Platt."



Neal Peirce's e-mail address is nrp@citistates.com."
 
[quote author="No_Such_Reality" date=1230551951]Voters are gullible and driven by fear. The Unions have driven those home at every point.



The politicians have learned the same lesson. First things to threaten to cut are Schools, Fire and Police so the populace screams.



It's that whole cake and eat it too thing.</blockquote>


This is a time-honored way of getting more money out of taxpayers. Instead of cutting true pork, or a particular legislator's nonessential program in his district, something quite popular is put into the list of things to be cut. Library hours are a favorite. It's not like libraries are a large portion of the budget. However, that cut is designed to annoy parents with children who use libraries, and get them in favor of spending money for the other 20 items on the list.



My personal favorite cut is something I'm not sure whether it is specific to LA. At least in Los Angeles, paramedic calls get a fire department response, with a complete big red firefighting truck, usually in addition to at least one ambulance. Often there is a private ambulance, a fire department paramedic truck, and a full firefighting truck all responding to the same heart attack at a senior citizen's home.



I do not believe in spontaneous human combustion. If a paramedic call has nothing to do with a fire, don't send the firefighting truck. This must cost tens of millions of dollars annually. It's either making its way into our taxes or into insurance rates.



With this stupid misuse of firefighting personnel and equipment removed, we could have better wildfire control, and lower cost of operating the department.
 
"At least in Los Angeles, paramedic calls get a fire department response, with a complete big red firefighting truck, usually in addition to at least one ambulance. Often there is a private ambulance, a fire department paramedic truck, and a full firefighting truck..."



You forgot to include the lawyer behind the ambulance.
 
Back
Top