Just as Obama is George W. Bush but worse, Jerry Brown may be Arnold Schwarzenegger but worse.
Jerry Brown wants to ask the voters to extend Schwarzenegger's huge "temporary" tax increases for five years -- while still ignoring the state's biggest problem: out-of-control government employee pensions.
How did that work out for Schwarzenegger when he tried it? Remember Prop 1A, Schwarzenegger's temporary tax increase with no pension reform? It lost 65% - 35%. Or the similar San Diego Prop D, which increased sales taxes without pension reform? It lost 63% - 37% despite a campaign of terror by police and fire unions.
Don't even think of asking the voters for more taxes until you've seriously reformed California's outrageous public employee pensions.
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Body Count goes to Vegas! Ernest Scherer III was a Vegas loser who fancied himself a professional poker player. Doesn't that photo tell ...
UPDATE: Edited to remove the guy's name. I hope nobody harasses him or his employer. He was good-natured and his sign was innocuous a...
Maybe teaching racial division and hatred wasn't such a good idea after all
Doctor cycling in California run down, stabbed by driver screaming about ‘white privilege’ : A doctor cycling along the Pacific Coast Highwa...
If you're so great, why don't you become the governor then?
so let's recap. californians shot down arnold's prop 1A and SD's prop D by an almost 2-to-1 rate.
and then they went and elected/re-elected a straight-ticket slate of "tax 'em till they bleed" democrats. who, predictably, are ignoring the actual causes of the crisis and instead gunning to increase the size and power of their bureaucratic fiefdoms. along with - of course - raising everyone's taxes, again. then maybe going for the holy grail: "emergency" repeal of prop 13.
so...are californians just really really *stupid*? are is it that they live in some kind of fantasyland dreamworld of money trees and big rock candy mountains??
gotta be one or the other....
If I may respond to Anony 2, there are 3 kinds of people in California. 1. Reeaaallly rich people. Those are the .com'ers and money managers and movie types.
2. Hundreds of thousands if not millions of civil servants. These are the folks who are counting on income from the state. These are the ones that would rally, like in Illinois, to raise taxes so they can stay employed. These are the union scum who have pensions guaranteed by the state and expect to be able to retire at age 50 with full benefits. They are a huge segment of the population.
3. People like me, the shrinking middle class. And it's people like me who are being asked to cover the bill because group 1 can has the financial agility to avoid paying their share of taxes. The tax code is made for the mega rich to avoid paying. Group 2 lives off of the taxes and so that leaves me to be squeezed.
How do these folks get elected? Groups 1 and 2 need to maintain the status quo and their voting organization is far greater and more entrenched than group 3. Members of group 3 try, join Tea Parties and all, but then the mainstream media blames us for massacres and for some reason that resonates with groups 1 and 2.
California is doomed and thankfully I can't afford to own a home so it will be easy for me to leave when I can no longer afford to pay for someone else's retirement.
sorry, negocios, i don't buy it. (i'm anny #2.) oh, sure, there ARE lotsa zillionaires and civil servents in CA, i have no doubt. but nowhere in your post do you address the central contradiction: in re the votes on prop 1A and prop D, californians - evidently, even the rich guys and those "millions" (LOL) of civil servants - voted *against* having their taxes raised. group 3, that ever-shrinking middle class, won and won huge.
then, at election time, those same voters voted in a whole passel of.....halfwit democrats!!.... who - being democrats - are promptly setting about raising taxes and expanding gummint. so that time, group 3 LOST huge.
something does not compute...which brings me back to my original thesis. californians are either stupid, or crazy. can only choose 1 from either column 'A' or column 'B'. no substitutions arrowwed.
Religion is something I cannot explain nor justify. Those members of the church of the Democrats and the alter of the Republicans do stupid things. Therefore we are stupid with one caveat; those that get voted in seldom do what they promised to do to get voted in. See Arnold and Barrack. Worse the do things that the majority of the population overwhelmingly are against. So stupid yes, but until you break the duopoly of the 2 parties, this will never change.
Eventually I will leave and you'll only be left with groups 1 and 2.
Californians hate Republicans for a variety of reasons. Generally, I think it's social conservatism that turns people off. Many professionals I know in the Bay Area are fiscally conservative but would never vote for a Republican because of the social issues.
Then gays and Latinos vote solidly against Republicans for their own reasons, rightly or wrongly.
L.A. District Attorney Steve Cooley won re-election several times by a large margin because it's a non-partisan office and his party wasn't on the ballot. But when he ran for Attorney General, his Republican affiliation was listed on the ballot and he lost badly in his own county.
So California voters are overwhelmingly both anti-tax and anti-Republican.
"california voters are overwhelmingly both anti-tax and anti-republican". ah. there we go: an answer to the dilemma.
california voters can only be both stupid AND crazy. they hate taxes, and then they vote in the party that raises taxes. hmmm....wonder what the end stage of an entire huge state full of stupid, crazy people might look like when the gravy train starts shutting down? think they'll take it well?
i'd advise y'all to stock up on guns & ammo, but of course they're illegal in california. good luck. you'll need it...
Guns and ammo are not illegal in California Anon. Just curious, what state of righteousness do you hail from? I'm referring to physical state, not mental.
You keep going off on CA. state workers. One family working for CA. got a $1000 a mth. paycut out of their meager $40k yr. job. Plus they have not have a pay increase for the past 5 yrs. they now are also paying an additional $200 mth. into their retirement. My question is, you picked on the poorest of the groups why? Who are you working for that wants to deflect from their paychecks by picking on the poor state workers who by the way work 2 jobs, 7 days a week just to make ends meet. That is one full time job and every night after that full time day job with the state to working at night and every night & week ends to put food on the their tables. You have never spoken to any of these workers have you? The real question is why are you not going after the real money whoremongers for? Like city counsel members who get $400k a yr? or their enormous pensions of half a million a yr? Or the DWP workers who have consistently gotten enormous pay raises every single year and their pensions are so hugh as much as $600k yr. or the rest of the county workers, or how about the federal gov. workers who make on average $40k starting out, and that is for sweeping floors. I want to know who is paying your watch dogs to cause a ruckus on a group of poor people who have nothing, I know workers who have not had a vacation in 20 yrs. who is paying you to keep them from being exposed? You are not a watch group because if you were, you would have gone after the real bad guys, the ones with the money and big pensions, the federal governement and the county workers.
w.c. varones said that brown has done no pension reform, well ask a CA. state worker about that, because they got hit with a $200 a mth. increase in theirs and a $450 mth. paycut per person or like one family they actually got $1000 mth. paycut because both spouses worked for the state. How are you supposed to feed a family of 7 people on $40k a year? than most don't own homes so there is no tax write off for them, & they end up paying into taxes after they already pay $4000 a yr. into the IRS out of their pay checks. Then because they are forced to work two jobs, they end up paying in more to taxes. Most of their kids don't go to college because they are known as the working poor. they make too much for grants and too little to afford to send their kids to college. So this watch group is now going to have others watching you. Lets see what you are hiding? Lets see who is paying you to do this?
Why, exactly, would you have a family of seven people if you only make $40,000 a year?
You think it's your right to have as many kids as you want and the taxpayers have to pick up the tab no matter what kind of state job you have?
annony #2 here for negocios. "weapons and ammo aren't illegal in the state of ca", and "what state of righteousness do i hail from"?
an interesting question from the guy who earlier wrote of the "millions" of civil servants in that state. i would have thought you of all people would recognize puffery, defined as "harmless exaggeration" when you read it, but apparently not, huh?
ok, fine. guns and ammo AREN'T illegal in CA, just several makes and types that are legal everywhere else are. happy? that's why a lot of gun/ammo sites have a "not sold in california" disclaimer added to their boilerplate. do you think they WANT to refuse to do business with the nation's most populous, (once) richest state?
as for where i'm from, that's pretty much irrelevant. what IS relevant is i did a 3-year stretch in LA once, 3 very frustrating years. even then, in the early 2000's, when LA was a vast, ungovernable craphole, you could still see and feel echoes of the paradise it once was. i'd talk to the old-timers, and they were unanimous: from 1915 or so to 1965 or so, it WAS paradise. paradise made by men of vision, who got the water to LA, who built the freeways, who spent whatever it took and did all the work necessary to have the nation's finest school system.
and then the next generations, (that would be YOU, present-day californians) pissed it all away. no more dams allowed, EVAR. all of 1 new freeway built in metro LA in the last 30 or so years. you refused to guard your borders - except at the nevada state line, where they still bravely stand watch for illegal *fruit & vehetables*. you all stand around, helplessly wringing your hands as your schools degenerate into (very very expensive) anarchy. you proudly proclaim that "guns & ammo are still legal", not mentioning the exceptions making grossly illegal..... a)pistol grips on centerfire rifles b)folding/telescoping stocks on same c)no flash suppressors d)no forward pistol grips, either e)mag cap of more than 10 rds f)shorty rifles g).50 cals h) tracers i) hi-cap mags j)(essentially no CCW k)(essentially) no OPEN carry, either l)keeping a loaded weapon in your car, even if it's safe in the trunk....shall i go on?
my "state of righteousness" is merely one that recognizes that your fathers and grandfathers would scorn & despise you for allowing the paradise they so painstakingly built for you to be pissed away in a mere 2 generations. and..as has been pointed out here....it's going to get worse, ain't it? much, MUCH worse. nice going, fellas. you trashed the garden of eden, because you 'wanted to be nice' and 'not make waves'. because you mellowly refused to say "no" to anyone at any time. (except of course, for the "illegal produce brought into the state" thing.)
Well I'm certainly not capable of arguing with that. But I do think you underestimate the dangers of certain vehetables.
On key point is that I wrote civil servant which includes all employees paid for using taxes. This includes firefighters, police officers and scum BART employees.
After seeing who Arnold decided to boinky-doink with, I think civil servants in California are crying out for a better vision plan in their benefits package.
-Chuckles the Clown
Post a Comment