Prepare to get the shaft from the State of California

NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
[quote author="waiting2buylater" date=1234930217]



If you're saying it's not a union problem or a systematic problem then you're just denying the obvious. </blockquote>


The problem is the unfunded mandate created during the 1980's "Get tough on Crime" spree. My uncle was head DA of a California county during this period. I very vividly remember what the political climate was like that brought this out of control prison issue. Lots of folks who were against expansion of the prisions on the grounds that it creates a future liability against the taxpayers were shouted down as "soft on crime". There is a further cost to the communities who get stuck with these prisons - and we haven't even talked about that.



I'm not excluding the union. I'm stating that if you get the prison population count down 60,000 a lot of these problems go away.





<blockquote>Some of what you're saying above might be true but going to the tax payers first is just obscene. The broken system should be fixed first.



We're not going anywhere with this conversation and I have stated my piece so it's time for me to move on onto something else more productive. </blockquote>


We are having a circular argument where:



1. I point out a problem

2. You blame the unions

3. I point out the problem is more complicated than the symptom of issues with the Unions

4. You blame the unions

5. I ask for specific areas where there are cost overruns you can cut back

6. You blame the unions

7. I point out that the consent decree that is forcing the hand of the state

8. You quit because I won't toss the unions under the bus for a systematic problem.



You don't want to fix the complex problem. You just want to find somebody easy to hate. Either way, we are dead in the water.



<blockquote>Last week, Mr. Schwarzenegger and the four legislative leaders concurred on a series of bills that included $15.1 billion in budget cuts, $14.4 billion in tax increases and $11.4 billion in borrowing, much of it subject to voter approval. </blockquote>


<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/17/us/17cali.html?_r=3&hp;">http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/17/us/17cali.html?_r=3&hp;</a>



This is Krugman's comments this morning:



<blockquote>Everyone should be paying attention to the political/fiscal catastrophe now unfolding in California. Years of neglect, followed by economic disaster ? and with all reasonable responses blocked by a fanatical, irrational minority.



This could be America next.</blockquote>


<a href="http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/17/apocalypse-now/">http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/17/apocalypse-now/</a>



IMO the budget is still jacked. They have a 45 billion dollar hole they are trying to fix. Seems to me we should have 22.5B in tax increases and 22.5 B in spending reductions, but that is unrealistic given Prop 98 constraints and other voter driven spending bills like my high speed choo choo. But like waiting wrote, I'm sure it's the fault of the Dems and the Unions.
 
Not to nitpick, but isn't $10,000 about the equivalent of what an individual pays when combined with their company match? In other words, the person pays about $2000 and the company sponsored plan costs the company $8000 to provide the benefit?
 
[quote author="No_Such_Reality" date=1234956235]Not to nitpick, but isn't $10,000 about the equivalent of what an individual pays when combined with their company match? In other words, the person pays about $2000 and the company sponsored plan costs the company $8000 to provide the benefit?</blockquote>


To insure an entire family on a good PPO, the total annual plan cost would probably be be $10-12K. To insure an individual on the same decent PPO, annual plan cost would probably be $4-5K per year. HMO-equivalnet or worse, definitely less than $4K "cost" per year per individual.



I have traditionally purchased high-end PPO plans for my employees and the monthly cost to the carrier has been around $1,200 for the last few years.
 
So the cost to add a geriatric population, high incidence of drug abuse, psych-problems and high incidence of on going violence injuries basically doubles the cost of a single PPO.



Does that pass the sniff test? I suspect so.
 
[quote author="No_Such_Reality" date=1234960542]Does that pass the sniff test?</blockquote>


No. Aren't you paying attention? It's obviously the fault of pinko liberal Democrats, RINO sellout Republicans, Prison Union shills, and those overpaid school administrators, and the waste and fraud in the MediCal system.



Stop interjecting common sense into this argument when there are so many scapegoarts around!
 
[quote author="no_vaseline" date=1234936246]This is Krugman's comments this morning:



<blockquote>Everyone should be paying attention to the political/fiscal catastrophe now unfolding in California. Years of neglect, followed by economic disaster ? and with all reasonable responses blocked by a fanatical, irrational minority.



This could be America next.</blockquote>


<a href="http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/17/apocalypse-now/">http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/17/apocalypse-now/</a>



IMO the budget is still jacked. They have a 45 billion dollar hole they are trying to fix. Seems to me we should have 22.5B in tax increases and 22.5 B in spending reductions, but that is unrealistic given Prop 98 constraints and other voter driven spending bills like my high speed choo choo. But like waiting wrote, I'm sure it's the fault of the Dems and the Unions.</blockquote>
Krugman is wrong. All reasonable responses are being blocked by a fanatical, irrational idea that government is the solution. That idea, when put into practice, demands equal results regardless of the circumstances and leads people to think that those results are just around the corner <em>if we only had more money!</em> Combine that dynamic with a vain population that also believes in a variant of that idea (you can simply vote utopia into existence with a ballot measure) and you have a 30-year glide path into insolvency.



With the exception of the last President, you'd look awfully silly trying to argue that Republicans look for ways to <strong>increase government spending</strong>. Are they overly attached to low taxes? Yes... and that contributes to the problem. But you, and Krugman, seem perfectly content to excuse government largesse and focus on instead on the role that conservative values play in the government budget issues.
 
Serious question. If California defaults and becomes insolvent what's the real impact?





Our problems are systemic, raising revenues merely kicks the can do the road to declare bankruptcy in 5 years? ten?
 
[quote author="No_Such_Reality" date=1234963397]Serious question. If California defaults and becomes insolvent what's the real impact?





Our problems are systemic, raising revenues merely kicks the can do the road to declare bankruptcy in 5 years? ten?</blockquote>
It is not legally possible for any State in the Union to declare bankruptcy. The only option is default and closure of state agencies.
 
[quote author="Oscar" date=1234963087]With the exception of the last President, you'd look awfully silly trying to argue that Republicans look for ways to <strong>increase government spending</strong>. Are they overly attached to low taxes? Yes... and that contributes to the problem. But you, and Krugman, seem perfectly content to excuse government largesse and focus on instead on the role that conservative values play in the government budget issues.</blockquote>


Nope. I just want them to balance it. 14 billion in taxes and 15 billion in cuts looks pretty Solomonesque to me - except the hole is 12 billion bigger than that.



<a href="http://www.childbiblestory.org/child-bible-story/solomon-a-wise-king/">http://www.childbiblestory.org/child-bible-story/solomon-a-wise-king/</a>



The alternate budget last year from the CA GOPers was a fistfull of cuts to schools, disabled, and elderly. And a pinch of borrowing.



One small problem with the 2008 GOP budget - after you put it into action, you still had a deficit. Further, it was 1.4 billion larger than the cuts the Dems proposed. The total deficit was less than the amount of cuts proposed in the new budget.



<a href="http://articles.latimes.com/2008/aug/31/local/me-legis31">http://articles.latimes.com/2008/aug/31/local/me-legis31</a>
 
So even cuts and even tax hikes, no borrowing allowed... how are you gonna make that happen? Where are you going to cut, which taxes get raised? What is *your* solution to the problem?
 
[quote author="Oscar" date=1234969696]So even cuts and even tax hikes, no borrowing allowed... how are you gonna make that happen? Where are you going to cut, which taxes get raised? What is *your* solution to the problem?</blockquote>


Taxes? Property owners. Prop 13 got us into this mess. It has to go. Repeal Prop 13 and homestead taxes when you get to age 60 like they do in Georgia so we aren?t forcing little old ladies on fixed incomes out of their homes.



Cuts? I got no kids, I pay for schools I don't use, and I can't see a good reason for paying for thier upkeep. Making the dream of college more dream than reality is fine by me. We could do drug diversion programs to get a bunch of people out of jail and off the state's nickel. It'll be a problem 30 years down the line, but just like the folks who've benifited from Prop 13 for three decades, I don't care. It's somebody elses problem.



But that requires us to get rid of the initiative process. Repeal term limits ? this GOP experiment has failed miserablly. Expect legislators to act like legislators and, you know, legislate ? not run for your next office because they are forced out. That way we can blame them, because it WILL be their fault, and voting will make a difference again. We have to place limits (like, STOP EM) on the voting sheeples abiltiy to jam bad spending projects down the throats of taxpayers via the initative process.



In it's current state, California is ungovernable. Skek mentioned tearing the whole mess down and starting over. He may get his wish, and may wish he hadn?t asked for it. Oddly, I feel like I'm living through Fight Club again. I wonder if this was what Howard Jarvis had in mind thirty odd years ago.
 
I?m really draconian on the whole issue of kids. If you want to have kids, fine ? just don?t expect me to pay for them. Don?t go on welfare, and don?t expect my tax dollars to go to pay for their education. I didn?t create them, I don?t get the joy of having them, you shouldn?t ride on my checkbook to finance their upbringing. We should cut all tax breaks for children (earned income credit), and force parents to pay for schools.



GOPers love to talk about wealth redistribution. Thanks to Prop 98, 40% of the state budget goes to subsidizing kids. Kids are a tax on singles, childless couples (straight and gay) and the elderly. The luxury of public schools was great when we had the budget, but we don?t have it anymore, so we should stop transfer costing their existence onto those who had NOTHING to do with their fabrication. We enforce child support, and this is no different.



At least with illegal immigrants I get a crew to pick crops, do dishes and cook in restraunts, and mow my lawn. With kids I get a huge sponge of my hard earned resources, <em>and they aren?t even mine.</em>
 
[quote author="no_vaseline" date=1234973859]Taxes? Property owners. Prop 13 got us into this mess. It has to go. Repeal Prop 13 and homestead taxes when you get to age 60 like they do in Georgia so we aren?t forcing little old ladies on fixed incomes out of their homes.



Cuts? I got no kids, I pay for schools I don't use, and I can't see a good reason for paying for thier upkeep. Making the dream of college more dream than reality is fine by me. We could do drug diversion programs to get a bunch of people out of jail and off the state's nickel. It'll be a problem 30 years down the line, but just like the folks who've benifited from Prop 13 for three decades, I don't care. It's somebody elses problem.



But that requires us to get rid of the initiative process. Repeal term limits ? this GOP experiment has failed miserablly. Expect legislators to act like legislators and, you know, legislate ? not run for your next office because they are forced out. That way we can blame them, because it WILL be their fault, and voting will make a difference again. We have to place limits (like, STOP EM) on the voting sheeples abiltiy to jam bad spending projects down the throats of taxpayers via the initative process.



In it's current state, California is ungovernable. Skek mentioned tearing the whole mess down and starting over. He may get his wish, and may wish he hadn?t asked for it. Oddly, I feel like I'm living through Fight Club again. I wonder if this was what Howard Jarvis had in mind thirty odd years ago.</blockquote>
Killing Prop 13, Prop 98, and term limits will just get you bogged down in the courts while the bank accounts run to empty on inertia alone. Still no budget, no immediate resolution, Epic Fail. This isn't the time for strategery, we need a tactical approach before the State defaults on bond payments and starts bouncing checks to all those prison vendors.



Pop quiz, hotshot. There's a bomb in your budget. Once the deficit reaches $14 billion a year, the bomb is armed. If you miss one bond payment, the government blows up. What do you do? What do you do?
 
[quote author="no_vaseline" date=1234975160]I?m really draconian on the whole issue of kids. If you want to have kids, fine ? just don?t expect me to pay for them. Don?t go on welfare, and don?t expect my tax dollars to go to pay for their education. I didn?t create them, I don?t get the joy of having them, you shouldn?t ride on my checkbook to finance their upbringing. We should cut all tax breaks for children (earned income credit), and force parents to pay for schools.



GOPers love to talk about wealth redistribution. Thanks to Prop 98, 40% of the state budget goes to subsidizing kids. Kids are a tax on singles, childless couples (straight and gay) and the elderly. The luxury of public schools was great when we had the budget, but we don?t have it anymore, so we should stop transfer costing their existence onto those who had NOTHING to do with their fabrication. We enforce child support, and this is no different.



At least with illegal immigrants I get a crew to pick crops, do dishes and cook in restraunts, and mow my lawn. With kids I get a huge sponge of my hard earned resources, <em>and they aren?t even mine.</em></blockquote>


And while we are at it... screw all those sick people, too! I didn't get you sick, I didn't make your life choices for you, and I sure as hell didn't force you to eat like a pig, drink like a fish, or smoke like a chimney so don't head off to the emergency room and expect to get treatment on my dime! No insurance? Too bad! Sell your assets or settle your affairs. Either way, you are removed from the gene pool and we as a race can move on without you.



Welfare? No way. You need work? Go hang out with the illegal immigrants, they seem to find a way to make ends meet and STILL send money back home. Compared to them, you're a slacker. Is your fancy degree worthless right now? Swallow your pride and find a damn job. Dig a ditch, clean a toilet, spin on a pole... just quit leeching off my hard earned income.



Social contract? Tits or GTFO.
 
<em>thrice to pay huge salaries to mostly degenerate uneducated prison guards who earn more than most teachers and scientists with Master?s and Doctoral degrees. </em>



WTF tmare? Superiority complex much? I don't have a college degree and I bet I make more than you and your doctorate...... am I a degenerate too ?
 
[quote author="Trooper" date=1234985176]<em>thrice to pay huge salaries to mostly degenerate uneducated prison guards who earn more than most teachers and scientists with Master?s and Doctoral degrees. </em>



WTF tmare? Superiority complex much? I don't have a college degree and I bet I make more than you and your doctorate...... am I a degenerate too ?</blockquote>


Me thinks they are upset that it is more profitable to guard criminals than to educate their spawn.
 
[quote author="Oscar" date=1234975682]

Pop quiz, hotshot. There's a bomb in your budget. Once the deficit reaches $14 billion a year, the bomb is armed. If you miss one bond payment, the government blows up. What do you do? What do you do?</blockquote>


There are only two options. Radically raise taxes or prepare for fail.



That's an easy question Oscar.



[quote author="Oscar" date=1234977145]

And while we are at it... screw all those sick people, too!</blockquote>


Not everyone has kids, but everyone needs health care. If you bust MediCAL you break all the health care providors and hosiptials.



[quote author="Trooper" date=1234985176]<em>thrice to pay huge salaries to mostly degenerate uneducated prison guards who earn more than most teachers and scientists with Master?s and Doctoral degrees. </em>



WTF tmare? Superiority complex much? I don't have a college degree and I bet I make more than you and your doctorate...... am I a degenerate too ?</blockquote>


I'm not going to speak for t, but I suspect she's frustrated at the level of overtime those dolts who work as prison guards get. Overpaid babysitters might be a better description, they certainly aren't law enforcement. I know several prison guards, but my buddy the tower guard takes the cake. He sits on the minimum security side of the fence, loaded up with the first two rounds wood, then rubber, then live ammo. In 16 years there he's never discharged a single round. His counterpart on the maximum security side has all live ammo, and shoots every day!







I wouldn't go do that job for thier salary, then again, I certainly wouldn't do yours either. I'd turn into one of those 'bad cops'.



Did ya know I spent eight years in Corcoran? Not as a con, I lived in the city!
 
[quote author="no_vaseline" date=1235003490][quote author="Oscar" date=1234975682]

Pop quiz, hotshot. There's a bomb in your budget. Once the deficit reaches $14 billion a year, the bomb is armed. If you miss one bond payment, the government blows up. What do you do? What do you do?</blockquote>


There are only two options. Radically raise taxes or prepare for fail.



That's an easy question Oscar.



[quote author="Oscar" date=1234977145]

And while we are at it... screw all those sick people, too!</blockquote>


Not everyone has kids, but everyone needs health care. If you bust MediCAL you break all the health care providors and hosiptials.</blockquote>


And if you break the public school system, you don't have any more doctors, nurses, drugs, etc. Goose and gander and all that.
 
[quote author="Oscar" date=1234986643][quote author="Trooper" date=1234985176]<em>thrice to pay huge salaries to mostly degenerate uneducated prison guards who earn more than most teachers and scientists with Master?s and Doctoral degrees. </em>



WTF tmare? Superiority complex much? I don't have a college degree and I bet I make more than you and your doctorate...... am I a degenerate too ?</blockquote>


Me thinks they are upset that it is more profitable to guard criminals than to educate their spawn.</blockquote>


In no way was I referring to you, Troop. I have met a few of these prison guards we are discussing (actually dated one many years ago). Overwhelming from my observation, either the job has gone to their head or they already had their own superiority complex when they entered. I'm sorry, I know there are always exceptions but in my experience I have seen extremes in the law enforcement field, the really good guys and the really bad guys. I sometimes question the motivation of some people in law enforcement, I think the motivation gets to the heart of the matter, (are you there to help or to feel in charge?). Believe me, I know you make more than I do with my Master's Degree and 20 years experience, your pension is also much better too. Yes, I know you guys risk your lives and I'm not necessarily saying you should have a pay cut or benefit cut, but something is a bit out of whack here with our priorities. I apologize if I offended you (or if I still am offending you with my views).
 
[quote author="Oscar" date=1235004028][quote author="no_vaseline" date=1235003490][quote author="Oscar" date=1234975682]

Pop quiz, hotshot. There's a bomb in your budget. Once the deficit reaches $14 billion a year, the bomb is armed. If you miss one bond payment, the government blows up. What do you do? What do you do?</blockquote>


There are only two options. Radically raise taxes or prepare for fail.



That's an easy question Oscar.



[quote author="Oscar" date=1234977145]

And while we are at it... screw all those sick people, too!</blockquote>


Not everyone has kids, but everyone needs health care. If you bust MediCAL you break all the health care providors and hosiptials.</blockquote>


And if you break the public school system, you don't have any more doctors, nurses, drugs, etc. Goose and gander and all that.</blockquote>


Tax people with kids. Make them pay for thier fair share. Unburden those without kids. But your point is taken, and in that case, prepare for fail.



Plus, I don't have to worry about a shortage of doctors or nurses for at least a generation. Kind of like Prop 13. Give me my tax break NOW, screw the consequences!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top