Posted: 8/9/2012 4:57 PM
Posted: 8/10/2012 4:32 PM
Posted: 8/15/2012 7:51 PM
Posted: 8/15/2012 9:42 PM
Posted: 8/16/2012 9:15 AM
doreking wrote: Californians have been keeping an eye on what's going on in Europe and apparently they like what they see.Also, I just wanted to point out, before the PC police come along, that lunacy may not be a politically preferred term. Insane and crazy are out as well. I think fiscally disabled is the correct term.
Posted: 8/16/2012 9:54 AM
Posted: 8/16/2012 4:30 PM
Posted: 8/16/2012 5:12 PM
Posted: 8/16/2012 6:53 PM
vebiltdervan wrote: California has had a Republican governor in office for 32 of the last 45 years, or 71% of the time. I don't know where you get your idea that the place has been a "liberal's wet dream". It's taken both political parties, not just one. And it's taken the popping of the biggest housing bubble anywhere in the country to bring the state to its economic knees. Prior to which, Enron -- led by rightwing shill Ken Lay -- raped the place, as documented in the film Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room. Don't kid yourself: plenty of republicans have participated in the despoiling of California.The title of this thread should have always just been "Lunacy", period.
Posted: 8/16/2012 7:39 PM
doreking wrote: ...Whoever's been running the show out there, they haven't exactly be implementing limited government and fiscally conservative policies.
Posted: 8/16/2012 7:42 PM
Posted: 8/16/2012 7:56 PM
fldore wrote: ...Like the Governator whose brilliant budget gimmick was to borrow tax revenue from local governments? Broke local governments no less. To suggest California isnt a liberal's wet dream is bordering on delusional. Some of the countries highest income taxes, sales taxes, corporate taxes, gas taxes, crushing regulation on business, immensely strong unions (teachers, prison guards, etc...), insanely high pensions and benefits for state retirees, carte blanche public services for illegals, etc... The antithesis of fiscal conservatism.
Posted: 8/16/2012 9:04 PM
vebiltdervan wrote:It may very well be the antithesis of fiscal conservatism, but everything in California was built by democrats & republicans (including Ronald Reagan) together. You are simply wrong to blame it entirely upon liberals.Republicans in governing practice for the last 40 plus years have not been fiscal conservatives, that is my point. If they had been, I'd probably be a republican (except for social value issues thing). But though republicans have TALKED fiscal responsibility all this time, they haven't walked the walk. Not the California GOP governors, not Richard Nixon, not Ronald Reagan, not George HW Bush, not George W Bush.Now all of a sudden, they mean what they say? Sorry, I'm not buying it. Not when the Ryan budget plan cuts Romney's tax rate to <1%, while raising taxes on poorer Americans, not while the Romney budget plan also call for tax cuts for the wealthy, and specifies zero details about where the money will be made up with spending cuts. They want us to trust them on this stuff. There are no grounds for trusting them, not based on experience.
Posted: 8/17/2012 12:55 PM
fldore wrote: ...I find it odd that you said you'd be a republican if they stayed true [Note: had EVER been true -- vebiltdervan] to fiscal conservatism, yet I take it you vote democrat where you know for a fact they wont...
Posted: 8/19/2012 6:44 PM
vebiltdervan wrote:.Based on real world experience, neither party is capable of governing with fiscal prudence, so despite the GOP's greater commitment to lip service along those lines, it's a wash. To date, I know for a fact that neither party will walk the walk.I've posted here numerous times now about what I see as the failure of Keynesian economic policy as conducted in this country: Keynesianism calls for governmental austerity during non-recessions. Instead, what Americans get during those times is a competition between the two parties to loot the public treasury (as predicted by some Athenian a few millenia back, as the reason why democracy could never be a stable form of government). The democratic party wants to loot the public treasury through spending; the republican party wants to loot it through tax cuts. The net result is no different whatsoever. Anyway, it's not like I haven't argued for fiscal prudence on this forum. But being a Keynesian, I just don't argue for it during recessionary times, like right now.As for my personal voting, since the economics to me is a wash between the two parties, that leaves things like foreign policy & domestic social issues as points of choice. And on those, my personal beliefs are far more in line with the democratic party.
Posted: 11/11/2012 4:30 PM
Posted: 11/12/2012 9:00 AM
Posted: 11/12/2012 4:08 PM
As a resident, this is a very ,very sore topic.
Yes, the residents voted a tax increase, both a sales (.25%) and high incomers (1-3%). Interviews on the street with the common man said they thought the tax was sticking it to the rich and hadn't recognized that they too would have to pay. In addition to an 10%(?) income tax, the sales tax is 9%. You'd think that would be enough money, by Nooooo!
The State Senate and State House are and have been as long as I can remember, both controlled by the Democrats. Most recognize the politicians as firmly in the back pockets of the Government Employee unions.
Our local politicians are also in the back pockets of these unions. The unions give the politicians money, get them elected and the employees get a nice raise. Results = some the highest salaries for Government Employees. Just google the average salary of a Newport Motorcycle Beach Policeman (+100K) or an Orange County Teacher (+80K). There was a proposition on the ballet to ban union contributions to political campaigns. It failed. Can you guess who gave the most money to defeat that bill?
I can rant about this forever, However, and forunately Obama was re-elected. He will not let California fail. My state is your problem and there's not a damn thing that anyone seems to be able to do about it. Oh, Oh, Oh, before I forget. The great leaders of this state passed a bill that said that if a city bankrupted, their obligations to their union government employees had still to be met. It's the private sector on this one that gets screwed. This is still working its way through the state courts. Thanks for listening
Last edited 11/12/2012 4:11 PM by WestCoastDore
Posted: 11/12/2012 5:36 PM
Posted: 11/14/2012 8:19 AM
Copyright © 2013
and Scout.com. All rights reserved. This website is an unofficial independent source of news and information, and is not affiliated with any school, team, or league.
MSN PrivacyLegalAdvertise on MSNAbout our adsRSS
© 2012 Microsoft|