CA Doesn't have money to keep up social programs, but does for EV charging stations

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by JoeG4, Jul 8, 2010.

  1. JoeG4 macrumors 68030

    JoeG4

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2002
    Location:
    Bay Area, Ca.
    #1
    http://blogs.edmunds.com/greencarad...-plus-ev-charging-stations-in-california.html

    I dunno why, but this kinda stuff really gets on my tits. Yea, it's only 3.4mil, and that's not a lot for government spending, but @#*% man! Even the EV owners don't need this crap.

    Kinda reminds me of my bankrupt town's 4 EV charging parking spaces downtown that I've only seen a car parked in once the 10+ years they've been there.

    I'm just sick of government people using their position to get their construction company rich.
     
  2. bruinsrme macrumors 601

    bruinsrme

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2008
    #2
    I would rather see money spent on projects that may prove to be more viable than free handouts, also known as welfare or social programs.
     
  3. JoeG4 thread starter macrumors 68030

    JoeG4

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2002
    Location:
    Bay Area, Ca.
    #3
    They're installing 1600 outlets at $2125 a pop (essentially), it's actually a pretty good deal even considering they're just fancy 240v wall outlets with an extension cord.

    And I wasn't even talking about welfare anyway, I was thinking of other stuff.
     
  4. bruinsrme macrumors 601

    bruinsrme

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2008
    #4
    What type of programs were you referring to?
    It's good to see such an investment but the funding has to come from somewhere.
    An investment by CA now couldnlead to more federal dollars later.
    Also if the stations prove themselves; practically and financially it may benefit the state to test now for the later benefits.
    Until it's tested the results would remain unknown and the state as a whole would be missing out.
     
  5. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #5
    I'm not familiar with the California Energy Commission. Where does it funding come from, the state's general fund, or gas tax, or?

    Ever since Proposition 13, populist actions have helped destroy the state's funding mechanisms. We need a new state constitution, we need to stop gerrymandering and we need a new governor.
     
  6. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #6
    This is an example of positive government spending. I don't know what the OP is so upset about. This is the kind of thing government should be doing.
     
  7. fivepoint macrumors 65816

    fivepoint

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2007
    Location:
    IOWA
    #7
    The dysfunctional liberal California legislature wouldn't know what 'spending within your means' was if it bit them directly on the butt.

    [​IMG]


    Sadly, they'll continue to mismanage their money, spend themselves into oblivion, and prop up broken social programs until their State goes completely bankrupt and the rest of the nation (with Obama's insistence that it's necessary) will be forced to bail them out.

    [​IMG]


    The sad, sad truth though is that California could have fixed all of the problems themselves... they had the revenue, they had the resources, they had the assets and the economy to get through any economic down turn... if only they were intelligent enough, brave enough, to understand the difference between necessity and frivolous spending. Between paying the bills and creating a welfare state. Between common sense environmentalism and ridiculously damaging anti-business regulations and crippling tax rates that encourage the wealthy to take their businesses and funds elsewhere.

    [​IMG]
     
  8. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #8
    The actual issue in California is that they have too much democracy, but that would damage your partisan point.
     
  9. rhsgolfer33 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2006
    #9
    Seriously. Allowing voters to vote on both spending and tax increases is dangerous. Inevitably the spending is approved and the tax increase is shot down.
     
  10. JoeG4 thread starter macrumors 68030

    JoeG4

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2002
    Location:
    Bay Area, Ca.
    #10
    Actually, one of the biggest problems in California is that we spend sooo much of our money on right-wing states that whine about our social services programs, that we end up with not enough to cover them.

    California is one of the highest taxing states in the US, and for every $1 California puts into the federal government, they get back $0.79 in federal funding.

    [​IMG]

    The majority of our ridiculous sums of money isn't going to Caltrans or the fat lazy DMV employees, or the college kids swimming in money. No, it's going to farm subsidies in fricken Kentucky!
     
  11. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #11
    Aren't you confusing state taxes and federal taxes?
     
  12. fivepoint macrumors 65816

    fivepoint

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2007
    Location:
    IOWA
    #12

    Well then I guess that would be your own fault since you and your party make a point out of supporting the redistribution of wealth. Interestingly enough, it's the principled conservatives from those 'right-wing states' who want you to keep more of your own hard-earned money.
     
  13. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #13
    I think the Feds should give that a try. $1 in == $1 out for the red states.

    I think the North East US and California are crying out for some more spending on them.
     
  14. fivepoint macrumors 65816

    fivepoint

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2007
    Location:
    IOWA
    #14
    Sure! How would you like to implement? Fair Tax or Flat Tax?
     
  15. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #15
    I was thinking of the "we'll cut spending to the red states but keep taxes working the same" until it evens out.

    It would be a great help to the deficit.
     
  16. Tilpots macrumors 601

    Tilpots

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2006
    Location:
    Carolina Beach, NC
    #16
    How's that working out for Texas?
     
  17. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #17
    I thought Texas was doing quite well. I might be wrong though.
     
  18. fivepoint macrumors 65816

    fivepoint

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2007
    Location:
    IOWA
    #18
    Hmmm... interesting, although you don't seem to be thinking about the obvious implication of what you're saying. Perhaps we should abolish the Federal income tax so the money can be redistributed exclusively within the individual states as they see fit?

    And, I mean... if your goal is to simply allow people/states with the money to keep more of their money, why continually support progressive redistribution of wealth at every corner?
     
  19. Tilpots macrumors 601

    Tilpots

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2006
    Location:
    Carolina Beach, NC
    #19

    Nope. They've got about an $18 Billion shortfall predicted and they're as principally conservative as it gets.


    Big Texas Deficit Puts Governor in Tight Spot
     
  20. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #20
    IF I remember correctly, thats two years worth of deficit. Texas is 9 billion in the hole this year and next. Thats what I took from the thread on it anyway, and its been a while.
     
  21. Tilpots macrumors 601

    Tilpots

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2006
    Location:
    Carolina Beach, NC
    #21
    Yeah, and since they're not big into social programs and the like anyway, it's gonna be impossible to find places to cut.
     
  22. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #22
    Fine by me - though of course to keep services going the states would have to have higher income tax of their own probably.

    I'd guess that would be up to individual states.
     
  23. fivepoint macrumors 65816

    fivepoint

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2007
    Location:
    IOWA
    #23
    Now we're talking! Never thought you and I would agree on the destruction of the Federal Income Tax and on returning more power to the states! Now, that's what I call PROGRESS! Too bad you're from the UK so your vote doesn't count. ;)
     
  24. mcrain macrumors 68000

    mcrain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Location:
    Illinois
    #24
    You do realize that the largest redistribution of wealth occured as a result of Republican policies? Don't you? Wealth redistribution where money flowed to the wealthy happened at a greater rate than ever in our history thanks to people like you who voted for the three Sheriffs of Stupidham (Reagan, Bush, and Bush Jr.)

    You're a progressive! LOL, too funny.

    I'll tell you what, after you have studied tax law and tax policy for about 10+ years, then we'll talk. Until then, here's a pacifier for your ideas. Feel free to allow them to continue sucking.
     
  25. ucfgrad93 macrumors P6

    ucfgrad93

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Colorado
    #25
    Wow, fivepoint, the almighty mcrain doesn't want anyone who hasn't studied tax law and tax policy for 10+ years to talk.

    Tell you what mcrain when everyone else that contributes to these conversations are also told by you to shut up, then maybe we will too.
     

Share This Page