Yeah I don't know much about California. I mean sure I've lived here since 77' and you are in Hong Kong, but what the hell would I know.
First Wilson asked for taxes but also MADE THE CUTS. The cuts were huge. Davis wanted no cuts, and still ended up borrowing 10 billion dollars via illegal bonds which now could end up being tossed out via court.
Davis also lied about the deficit to get elected. Instead of focusing on some little detail and declaring it the same. You should look at the broader picture. Davis was recalled by much more than Republicans. He broke the public trust. It wasn't whether the public had to endure what percentage of cuts versus tax increases. It was that the deficit was 8 billion before the election. This was really an accounting gimmick created in part by lying about the budget even the prior year. Then after the election the gimmicks gave way to the true deficit.
Scharzenegger was elected by more votes than Davis earned in the regular election because of the huge turn out of voters of all types. He even got more votes than Davis with McClintock taking away a large block (including mine) of Republican votes.
It isn't a tax cut vs. increase issue. It is a public trust issue which Davis violated multiple times.
Nick
Exactly. CA, one of the most liberal states in the nation, voted Republican to the tune of 61%. That's astounding.
Once again, the Democratic party cannot even figure what's wrong. In 2000, it was Bush "stealing" the election...even though he ran against and incumbent VP witht he best economy in 50 years. In 2002, it was post-9/11 patriotism and Bush's (GASP) despicable campaigning for his own party. In 2003's recall, it was actually anger at Bush that caused the recall of the incumbent. To quote Terry McCauiffe "If Arnold wins it doesn't look good for George Bush".
The above thinking is exactly the problem. I used to think statements out of McCauliffe, Daschle, Pelosi et al were just typical politics. Now I'm starting to think they actually believe what they say. The Democratic party is so fundamentally screwed up right now it's almost sad. Republicans control the White House, Senate, and House, as well as the majority of governorships and even a majority of state legislatures. The Democratic party has serious problems and apparently has no idea how to fix them.
I guess you guys can dismiss my comments because I'm a Republican. That's fine. But keep in mind, I'm a republican for a reason. If a Democrat came out for limited government, strong national defense, lower taxes/tax reform, etc, I might take another look.
For anything to change, the Democratic party is going to have to figure out and change what's wrong. That's what the Republicans did after their devastating loss of the Presidency in 1992. What the Dems are doing now however is singular: Attacking Bush. That in itself is not going to carry the ball.
You've lived there since 77 . . . then that makes youu an immigrant . . . . I was raised in Ca . . . in the same neighborhood that Eugene lives in
I left in 92 and can say 'Goodby to all that!"
I still go back at least once a year as all my family is there . .
I even went door to door when Prop 13 was being voted on, handing out pro-Prop 13 literature . . . yeah, I know California
The issue with that Proposition is that it creates an environment that is dependant for revenue soley on the state of the economy in general . . . it is too fragile
The rent-control like aspect of Prop-13 is pretty good as you point out with your example, however there is still too much loopehole for the mega-wealthy land-lords (don't flatter yourself, I'm not talking about you)
and yes the Gray Davis car tax was a fiasco as far as I can tell . . . but that doesn't mean that he was responsible for the defecit . . . if so then the Liberals would be justified in blaming the existence of the Federal deficit on Bush in the same manner
Oh yeah and what heppened to that absolutely absurd notion that the blackouts were Davis's fault and not the fault of the price gauging Corps including Enron . . . as has been subsequently PROVEN to be the case in investigations!?!?!
oh yeah, and SDW, Ca is NOT one of the most 'Liberal' states . . . parts of California are very Liberal and parts are very Conservative . . . it is one of the most extremely polarized states in the country, where each allignment identifies with their position entirely . . . and entirely too much as far as I am concerned
You've lived there since 77 . . . then that makes youu an immigrant . . . . I was raised in Ca . . . in the same neighborhood that Eugene lives in
I left in 92 and can say 'Goodby to all that!"
I still go back at least once a year as all my family is there . .
I even went door to door when Prop 13 was being voted on, handing out pro-Prop 13 literature . . . yeah, I know California
The issue with that Proposition is that it creates an environment that is dependant for revenue soley on the state of the economy in general . . . it is too fragile
The rent-control like aspect of Prop-13 is pretty good as you point out with your example, however there is still too much loopehole for the mega-wealthy land-lords (don't flatter yourself, I'm not talking about you)
and yes the Gray Davis car tax was a fiasco as far as I can tell . . . but that doesn't mean that he was responsible for the defecit . . . if so then the Liberals would be justified in blaming the existence of the Federal deficit on Bush in the same manner
Oh yeah and what heppened to that absolutely absurd notion that the blackouts were Davis's fault and not the fault of the price gauging Corps including Enron . . . as has been subsequently PROVEN to be the case in investigations!?!?!
oh yeah, and SDW, Ca is NOT one of the most 'Liberal' states . . . parts of California are very Liberal and parts are very Conservative . . . it is one of the most extremely polarized states in the country, where each allignment identifies with their position entirely . . . and entirely too much as far as I am concerned
Would it make you feel better that I was born in California in 1970. Lived there until 1973. Moved to Indiana for 4 years until 1977, then moved back to California and lived here every since.
As for leaving in 1992, well it seems you are just another example of white flight.
Prop 13 didn't create a narrow revenue source. Extremely progressive income taxation has done that. When you get more and more money from fewer and fewer people, you subject yourself to fluctuations such as we have encountered. The issue is the same at the federal level which obviously doesn't deal with property tax revenue issues like a state yet has suffered the same types of deficit problems.
The fix for this though is flat taxation or at least an easing off of the progressiveness. However that would never fly so the deficits are going to appear in the bad times and go away in the good.
Also just so we are clear, I have soundly declared that Bush has been spending too much at the federal level. I have remarked that we need some deficit hawks in Washington and that I am disappointed with the Republicans for not demanding spending cuts to go with the tax cuts.
As for the blackouts, Davis had energy company officials sitting on HIS governmental panels to negotiate with.. the energy companies. You are right that there are companies that likely tried to manipulate the price. However he took contributions from those companies and then let the officials from the companies sit on both sides of the negotiations on the power contracts.
So which is worse knowing that a business might try to screw you over or taking money to help them screw over the entire population of the state? I say the latter.
Comments
Originally posted by trumptman
Yeah I don't know much about California. I mean sure I've lived here since 77' and you are in Hong Kong, but what the hell would I know.
First Wilson asked for taxes but also MADE THE CUTS. The cuts were huge. Davis wanted no cuts, and still ended up borrowing 10 billion dollars via illegal bonds which now could end up being tossed out via court.
Davis also lied about the deficit to get elected. Instead of focusing on some little detail and declaring it the same. You should look at the broader picture. Davis was recalled by much more than Republicans. He broke the public trust. It wasn't whether the public had to endure what percentage of cuts versus tax increases. It was that the deficit was 8 billion before the election. This was really an accounting gimmick created in part by lying about the budget even the prior year. Then after the election the gimmicks gave way to the true deficit.
Scharzenegger was elected by more votes than Davis earned in the regular election because of the huge turn out of voters of all types. He even got more votes than Davis with McClintock taking away a large block (including mine) of Republican votes.
It isn't a tax cut vs. increase issue. It is a public trust issue which Davis violated multiple times.
Nick
Exactly. CA, one of the most liberal states in the nation, voted Republican to the tune of 61%. That's astounding.
Once again, the Democratic party cannot even figure what's wrong. In 2000, it was Bush "stealing" the election...even though he ran against and incumbent VP witht he best economy in 50 years. In 2002, it was post-9/11 patriotism and Bush's (GASP) despicable campaigning for his own party. In 2003's recall, it was actually anger at Bush that caused the recall of the incumbent. To quote Terry McCauiffe "If Arnold wins it doesn't look good for George Bush".
The above thinking is exactly the problem. I used to think statements out of McCauliffe, Daschle, Pelosi et al were just typical politics. Now I'm starting to think they actually believe what they say. The Democratic party is so fundamentally screwed up right now it's almost sad. Republicans control the White House, Senate, and House, as well as the majority of governorships and even a majority of state legislatures. The Democratic party has serious problems and apparently has no idea how to fix them.
I guess you guys can dismiss my comments because I'm a Republican. That's fine. But keep in mind, I'm a republican for a reason. If a Democrat came out for limited government, strong national defense, lower taxes/tax reform, etc, I might take another look.
For anything to change, the Democratic party is going to have to figure out and change what's wrong. That's what the Republicans did after their devastating loss of the Presidency in 1992. What the Dems are doing now however is singular: Attacking Bush. That in itself is not going to carry the ball.
I left in 92 and can say 'Goodby to all that!"
I still go back at least once a year as all my family is there . .
I even went door to door when Prop 13 was being voted on, handing out pro-Prop 13 literature . . . yeah, I know California
The issue with that Proposition is that it creates an environment that is dependant for revenue soley on the state of the economy in general . . . it is too fragile
The rent-control like aspect of Prop-13 is pretty good as you point out with your example, however there is still too much loopehole for the mega-wealthy land-lords (don't flatter yourself, I'm not talking about you)
and yes the Gray Davis car tax was a fiasco as far as I can tell . . . but that doesn't mean that he was responsible for the defecit . . . if so then the Liberals would be justified in blaming the existence of the Federal deficit on Bush in the same manner
Oh yeah and what heppened to that absolutely absurd notion that the blackouts were Davis's fault and not the fault of the price gauging Corps including Enron . . . as has been subsequently PROVEN to be the case in investigations!?!?!
oh yeah, and SDW, Ca is NOT one of the most 'Liberal' states . . . parts of California are very Liberal and parts are very Conservative . . . it is one of the most extremely polarized states in the country, where each allignment identifies with their position entirely . . . and entirely too much as far as I am concerned
Originally posted by pfflam
You've lived there since 77 . . . then that makes youu an immigrant . . . . I was raised in Ca . . . in the same neighborhood that Eugene lives in
I left in 92 and can say 'Goodby to all that!"
I still go back at least once a year as all my family is there . .
I even went door to door when Prop 13 was being voted on, handing out pro-Prop 13 literature . . . yeah, I know California
The issue with that Proposition is that it creates an environment that is dependant for revenue soley on the state of the economy in general . . . it is too fragile
The rent-control like aspect of Prop-13 is pretty good as you point out with your example, however there is still too much loopehole for the mega-wealthy land-lords (don't flatter yourself, I'm not talking about you)
and yes the Gray Davis car tax was a fiasco as far as I can tell . . . but that doesn't mean that he was responsible for the defecit . . . if so then the Liberals would be justified in blaming the existence of the Federal deficit on Bush in the same manner
Oh yeah and what heppened to that absolutely absurd notion that the blackouts were Davis's fault and not the fault of the price gauging Corps including Enron . . . as has been subsequently PROVEN to be the case in investigations!?!?!
oh yeah, and SDW, Ca is NOT one of the most 'Liberal' states . . . parts of California are very Liberal and parts are very Conservative . . . it is one of the most extremely polarized states in the country, where each allignment identifies with their position entirely . . . and entirely too much as far as I am concerned
Would it make you feel better that I was born in California in 1970. Lived there until 1973. Moved to Indiana for 4 years until 1977, then moved back to California and lived here every since.
As for leaving in 1992, well it seems you are just another example of white flight.
Prop 13 didn't create a narrow revenue source. Extremely progressive income taxation has done that. When you get more and more money from fewer and fewer people, you subject yourself to fluctuations such as we have encountered. The issue is the same at the federal level which obviously doesn't deal with property tax revenue issues like a state yet has suffered the same types of deficit problems.
The fix for this though is flat taxation or at least an easing off of the progressiveness. However that would never fly so the deficits are going to appear in the bad times and go away in the good.
Also just so we are clear, I have soundly declared that Bush has been spending too much at the federal level. I have remarked that we need some deficit hawks in Washington and that I am disappointed with the Republicans for not demanding spending cuts to go with the tax cuts.
As for the blackouts, Davis had energy company officials sitting on HIS governmental panels to negotiate with.. the energy companies. You are right that there are companies that likely tried to manipulate the price. However he took contributions from those companies and then let the officials from the companies sit on both sides of the negotiations on the power contracts.
So which is worse knowing that a business might try to screw you over or taking money to help them screw over the entire population of the state? I say the latter.
Nick
Originally posted by SDW2001
Republicans control the White House, Senate, and House, as well as the majority of governorships and even a majority of state legislatures.
True, and look how the the federal and state governments are doing.
If a Democrat came out for limited government, strong national defense, lower taxes/tax reform, etc, I might take another look.
Another look at what???...at how poorly these policies are serving Americans???.