The collapse of California

[Texashiker]

Article talks about factors that have drug California to its knees.

http://pjmedia.com/victordavishanson/california-the-road-warrior-is-here/?singlepage=true

The article covers so much information, its going to take a little bit to sink in.

 

[fskimospy]

Article talks about factors that have drug California to its knees.

http://pjmedia.com/victordavishanson/california-the-road-warrior-is-here/?singlepage=true

The article covers so much information, its going to take a little bit to sink in.

That article was terrible and basically fact free.

 

[Texashiker]

That article was terrible and basically fact free.

What parts do you disagree with?

I rather enjoyed the article.

 

[fskimospy]

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.

 

[techs]

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.

 

[zsdersw]

The only "collapse of California" I'm aware of is geological.

 

[Texashiker]

Basically the entire thing.

So you disagree that providing services to millions of illegal immigrants causes a financial hardship on the state and taxpayers?

 

[fskimospy]

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]

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.

 

[gevorg]

A third of the nation’s welfare recipients are in California.

No way! D:

 

[Texashiker]

No way! D:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/01/25/us/20090126-welfare-table.html

Welfare recipients, 2008

California - 1,216,866
New York - 391,110
Texas - 115,690
Florida - 87,632

 

[OrByte]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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 (1992–93), a visiting professor of classics at Stanford University (1991–92), 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

 

[fskimospy]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

 

[OrByte]

Please do not try to confuse eskimospy with the facts, his head will probably explode.




Then california should not be having financial issues.

wow. Poor critical thinking skills on display here.

 

[chucky2]

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...

 

[berzerker60]

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.