• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

The collapse of California

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
72,598
23,709
136
What parts do you disagree with?

I rather enjoyed the article.
Basically the entire thing. Regardless of my feelings on it however it's not even really possible to rebut the article as it uses basically no facts. It's just some grumpy professor from a middling university.

EDIT: And the professor is a classics and military history professor? He has no expertise whatsoever in what he's talking about, which explains the lack of actual facts in his article.
 
Last edited:

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,563
3
0
Here's the only fact you need to sink in.
California is paying HUGE sums of money every year to the failed states that practice low taxes, low regulation.
If California only got back from the Federal Government what it paid in there would be no deficit and California would be doing great.

So any article about California's problems should start:

California is being crushed by the enormous amount of money it is paying to keep low tax, low wage, low benefits states from collapsing.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
72,598
23,709
136
So you disagree that providing services to millions of illegal immigrants causes a financial hardship on the state and taxpayers?
No, I'm saying that his piece is factually unsupported and draws broad conclusions from no apparent evidence. It's just really poorly written, but then again it is Pajamas Media we're talking about here.
 

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,563
3
0
So you disagree that providing services to millions of illegal immigrants causes a financial hardship on the state and taxpayers?
No where near the burden of propping up the failed American States that practice low wage, low benefit, low regulation economic policies.
 

OrByte

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2000
9,299
137
106
read the article

I dont think the authors profession/education/knowledge/experience leads him to drawn any of the article's conclusions

Rather, he is just ranting on the state of civil decay he sees around him

fair enough.

But I don't see the State of California "collapsing" as a result of any of his main points.

I think he might be suffering from some sort of mental anguish that survivalist/prepper/Armageddoners suffer from on occasion.

it is 2012 after all... :)
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
the author is stating his observations.

He broke the article into multiple sections; attack each section with facts to prove otherwise.

Opinion vs opinion is not going to do anything except piss oneself off.

facts at least can be twisted and fun to manipulate.
 

rudder

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
19,434
84
91
Here's the only fact you need to sink in.
California is paying HUGE sums of money every year to the failed states that practice low taxes, low regulation.
If California only got back from the Federal Government what it paid in there would be no deficit and California would be doing great.

So any article about California's problems should start:

California is being crushed by the enormous amount of money it is paying to keep low tax, low wage, low benefits states from collapsing.
First off California doesn't pay jack shit to the federal government. Companies like Apple, facebook, and other high revenue companies along with wealthy CEOs pay a lot of money to the federal government. These companies and wealthy people happen to be located in California.

Because I am sure the way the state legislature works the budget and other laws has no effect on California's budgetary woes.
 

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,038
36
86
Here's the only fact you need to sink in.
California is paying HUGE sums of money every year to the failed states that practice low taxes, low regulation.
If California only got back from the Federal Government what it paid in there would be no deficit and California would be doing great.

So any article about California's problems should start:

California is being crushed by the enormous amount of money it is paying to keep low tax, low wage, low benefits states from collapsing.
Wish you libs would get your message straight. I thought the 1% was supposed to pay more? Isn't CA in the 1% of income for the States? Make up your minds...
 

OrByte

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2000
9,299
137
106
the author is stating his observations.

He broke the article into multiple sections; attack each section with facts to prove otherwise.

Opinion vs opinion is not going to do anything except piss oneself off.

facts at least can be twisted and fun to manipulate.
are you saying to attack his opinion with facts?

So when he talks about dead fighting dogs in the alley behind his house, am I supposed to attack that with a fact based approach on how dog fights are not a sign of the "collapse of California?"
 

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
Basically the entire thing. Regardless of my feelings on it however it's not even really possible to rebut the article as it uses basically no facts. It's just some grumpy professor from a middling university.

EDIT: And the professor is a classics and military history professor? He has no expertise whatsoever in what he's talking about, which explains the lack of actual facts in his article.
Actually, Victor Davis Hanson is one of the nation's, if not the world's leading historians, especially in the field of military history. He writings on both ancient and modern history are some of the best reading you might ever do.

Victor Davis Hanson is the Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution.

Hanson was a National Endowment for the Humanities fellow at the Center for Advanced Studies in the Behavioral Sciences, Stanford, California (1992&#8211;93), a visiting professor of classics at Stanford University (1991&#8211;92), and alumnus of the year of the University of California, Santa Cruz (2002). and Fellow in California Studies at the Claremont Institute, hence his commentary on California.

Hanson was awarded the National Humanities Medal in 2007, the Claremont Institute's Statesmanship Award at its annual Churchill Dinner, and the $250,000 Bradley prize from the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation in 2008.

His books and the Web published Private Papers are always extraordinarily insightful and well researched.

Hanson is a registered member of the Democratic Party, but don't hold that against him.

As always, there is a Wiki that provides a brief overview of who he is -

Victor Davis Hanson
 
Last edited:

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
72,598
23,709
136
Wish you libs would get your message straight. I thought the 1% was supposed to pay more? Isn't CA in the 1% of income for the States? Make up your minds...
Wish you would get your facts straight. California is not in the top 1% of income for states. Not only would that be hard to do as since there are 50 states the number one state would still be the top 2%, but outside of that California ranks 9th in median income, making it the 82nd percentile.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
72,598
23,709
136
Actually, Victor Davis Hanson is one of the nation's, if not the world's leading historians, especially in the field of military history. He writings on both ancient and modern history are some of the best reading you might ever do.

Hanson is currently a Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution and Fellow in California Studies at the Claremont Institute, hence his commentary on California.

Hanson was awarded the National Humanities Medal in 2007, the Claremont Institute's Statesmanship Award at its annual Churchill Dinner, and the $250,000 Bradley prize from the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation in 2008.

His books and the Web published Private Papers are always extraordinarily insightful and well researched.

Hanson is a registered member of the Democratic Party, but don't hold that against him.

As always, there is a Wiki that provides a brief overview of who he is -

Victor Davis Hanson
Oh good, PJABBER's back. We didn't miss you.

Nothing in my post made any judgment on what his accomplishments might be in the field of military history. I simply questioned that as being relevant credentials to analyze California's economy.
 

Texashiker

Lifer
Dec 18, 2010
18,811
192
106
Actually, Victor Davis Hanson is one of the nation's, if not the world's leading historians, especially in the field of military history. He writings on both ancient and modern history are some of the best reading you might ever do.
Please do not try to confuse eskimospy with the facts, his head will probably explode.


Wish you would get your facts straight. California is not in the top 1% of income for states. Not only would that be hard to do as since there are 50 states the number one state would still be the top 2%, but outside of that California ranks 9th in median income, making it the 82nd percentile.
Then california should not be having financial issues.
 

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,563
3
0
First off California doesn't pay jack shit to the federal government. Companies like Apple, facebook, and other high revenue companies along with wealthy CEOs pay a lot of money to the federal government. These companies and wealthy people happen to be located in California.

Because I am sure the way the state legislature works the budget and other laws has no effect on California's budgetary woes.
Wrong. Amazingly wrong, btw.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
72,598
23,709
136
Please do not try to confuse eskimospy with the facts, his head will probably explode.
I'm the one asking for facts, this article doesn't supply them. You should know better than to read pajamas media. Furthermore, perhaps you can explain how his work in military history gives him relevant expertise to analyze California's economy and budget?

Then california should not be having financial issues.
That's silliness. State budgets are more complicated than simple median income extrapolation. As we've talked about before though, direct democracy has taken a heavy toll on California's budget with things like prop 13.
 

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,038
36
86
Wish you would get your facts straight. California is not in the top 1% of income for states. Not only would that be hard to do as since there are 50 states the number one state would still be the top 2%, but outside of that California ranks 9th in median income, making it the 82nd percentile.
I just went by this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_tax_revenue_by_state

They look the top to me. No need to split out to median to make your argument, techs didn't, so I didn't either. He's treating the entirety of CA as an individual, I can't help that. As such, that "individual" looks to me (unless they've slipped down since 2007, quite possible), to be "the 1%". Following lib "logic", that means they need to pay more. Heck, pay more than even they're paying now.

Since we're targeting the 1% - or, 2% as you point out - and we're treating states as individuals, then you'd jack up the state income tax since it's the state that needs to pay more.

So, start paying CA! Jack up those state tax rates so you "rich" 2%'ers can "pay your fair share" to the rest of the poor states!

Haha, love it... :D
 

berzerker60

Golden Member
Jul 18, 2012
1,233
1
0
Honestly I'm actually pretty optimistic about California in a 15-20 year time frame, once the recent election reforms have some time to start showing results. The top-two primaries and anti-gerrymandering provisions both seem like really excellent ideas to me, far more democratic than what we've had before even if it does cost the state some in the short term by getting rid of congresspeople with seniority.

The federal tax burden really isn't a top issue in California's political disfunction. The warping of the tax code through the freezing of real estate taxes and required super-majority to raise any tax has much much more responsibility (not saying we need higher net taxes, they're already quite high nominally, but they're applied in a really destructive manner), as does the uncooperative extreme state congressmen from gerrymandered districts that ensured Democratic control but not super-majority control. That's why I'm so hopeful that once we start getting some moderates into power we can see compromises that cut appropriate services while raising taxes in rational ways, rather than a hodgepodge of temporary measures.
 
Last edited:

ASK THE COMMUNITY