California entitlements about to go bye bye.

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Zombie Acorn, May 14, 2010.

  1. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #1
    Not really surprised that it has came to this, one of the worst entitlement states in the country. I am sure a ton of their money is funneling out through paying for illegals education/health care/etc. As long as we don't bail them out I am a-okay with it though, I do find it a bit funny that they are facing record unemployment and also boycotting one of their close state partners at the same time. :)

    http://www.sacbee.com/2010/05/14/2751461/schwarzenegger-budget-would-eliminate.html

     
  2. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #2
    Old people are such a drain on society! They think they're entitled to their golden years! :rolleyes:
     
  3. Zombie Acorn thread starter macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #3
    If it bankrupts our entire system then the system probably doesn't work so hot. Of course someone has to be the heartless bastard to tell them the money has ran out. Reality is coming.
     
  4. dmr727 macrumors G3

    dmr727

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2007
    Location:
    Southern California
    #4
    Legalize the Mary Jane and tax the hell out of it.
     
  5. macfan881 macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2006
  6. jav6454 macrumors P6

    jav6454

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Location:
    1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
    #6
    Exactly... check street prices, sell lower and tax it out until it matches street price.
     
  7. GoCubsGo macrumors Nehalem

    GoCubsGo

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    #7
    I think you missed the point. Sell it for street price and then tax it.
     
  8. Dmac77 macrumors 68020

    Dmac77

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    Location:
    Michigan
    #8
    Then people will just buy off the street. Because it will be more expensive to buy legal pot.
     
  9. Macky-Mac macrumors 68030

    Macky-Mac

    Joined:
    May 18, 2004
    #9
    of course the other option would be to actually pay for these programs if we want them. That would mean paying more in taxes of course and there's the problem; people want their favored programs (including california's radical republicans) but they don't want to pay for them.
     
  10. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #10
    Exactly! I want to pay for state parks. I want to pay for welfare. I want to pay for old folks home care.

    TAX ME!

    Since Proposition 13 the guiding political principal in California has been cut taxes and cut government. Thirty years later we have a government that doesn't work, services cut to the bone and bigger deficits than ever!

    Anybody see a problem here?

    TAX ME DAMMIT!
     
  11. Zombie Acorn thread starter macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #11
    Send your money into the government.
     
  12. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #12
    Into the government?

    That sounds nasty. :eek:
     
  13. LethalWolfe macrumors G3

    LethalWolfe

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2002
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #13
    And this is what happens when you let the inmates run the asylum. As much as I like the idea behind CA's Prop system it ultimately comes up short, IMO, because people are stupid and easy to manipulate (generally speaking).


    Lethal
     
  14. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #14
    I don't think it's because people are stupid. They're being asked to make decisions that require more knowledge and foresight than is reasonable to expect.

    For decades we've been voting for bond measures that cost millions or billions of dollars and the average joe is expected to know whether the state can afford them and the long term costs and benefits.

    The best use of propositions is to address broad political decisions like gay marriage, off-shore drilling or legalizing marijuana. But when you start to mess with the states budget, that process can lead to a heap o'trouble.
     
  15. TuffLuffJimmy macrumors G3

    TuffLuffJimmy

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #15
    What would be the point? I'd still buy it off the street if the street was cheaper.
     
  16. pooky macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2003
    #16
    Which would be great, except California already has the highest (I think) tax burden of any state. You pay a huge premium for living there. It would be worth it if the money were used efficiently, but instead the idiots in charge just piss it away.
     
  17. CalBoy macrumors 604

    CalBoy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    #17
    Funny you should mention that, because in actuality, California is losing money by being a state. For the last 25 years or so, the state has consistently given more to the Federal government via taxes than it has received in Federal spending. Even for the few years in the 1980s when California wasn't losing money to Washington, the ratio was at most 1.10/1. In comparison, the state has been getting only 80 cents or less per dollar paid in Federal taxes for many years. By crunching some fairly conservative numbers, one can see that California pays over $24 billion to the Federal government that it will never get back. That amount alone can wipe out the entire deficit and leave us more than enough to establish a rainy day fund, refund education, and repair some long forsaken infrastructure.

    Meanwhile, Kansas has been consistently getting at least 10% more from Washington than it pays in taxes for two decades.

    It's just the irony that gets to me sometimes, that's all.

    Well that law is absurd on its face. To think that a state has the power to suspend the 4th Amendment is incredulous. Arizona is probably far more likely to need California than vice versa.


    In general, California's budget woes are a mixture of an absurd 2/3 majority requirement for budgets, a business loophole in Prop 13 that lets them get away with paying very little in property taxes, and a long series of constitutional amendments that have both barred the use of certain taxation methods (or capped them at unsustainable levels) and made spending commitments without a realistic idea of how to pay for them. So, if there is anything to blame here, it's direct democracy.
     
  18. Macky-Mac macrumors 68030

    Macky-Mac

    Joined:
    May 18, 2004
    #18
    so the rest of the country is subsidizing Kansas? :eek:
     
  19. Zombie Acorn thread starter macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #19
    Next time you eat anything with wheat or corn in it let me know.
     
  20. Zombie Acorn thread starter macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #20
    They are subsidizing your food.
     
  21. CalBoy macrumors 604

    CalBoy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    #21
    Kansas and many other states, including Alaska, Kentucky, and New Mexico to name a few. The top two states are typically Virginia and Maryland, but this has more to do with the location of Federal agencies and offices than it does uneven distributions.

    Many other states though, have a very nice deal right now. California alone probably funds about 15-20% of the largess these states enjoy.
     
  22. freebooter macrumors 65816

    freebooter

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Location:
    Daegu, South Korea
    #22
    The Governator should apply for a job at Goldman Sachs. He could balance the budget with the bonus money alone...seriously.
     
  23. CalBoy macrumors 604

    CalBoy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    #23
    California actually grows a respectable amount of its own wheat (enough for about 75-80% of our consumption), and we also grow a very healthy amount of corn.

    California is also the largest source of agricultural products in the nation. We grow virtually everything here, and our exports stretch across the globe. If you can think of a fruit or vegetable, there is a very high chance that California exports it.
     
  24. Zombie Acorn thread starter macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #24
    And im sure its subsidized, we grow more than we use and the rest of the country is better off for it.

    Maybe you should sell some more of that to get out of debt.
     
  25. CalBoy macrumors 604

    CalBoy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    #25
    You don't understand how subsidies work, do you?

    Subsidies are paid out primarily to prevent farmers from growing excess crop. In essence, we're paying Kansas farmers to sit on their land and do nothing so that wheat and corn prices won't plummet. If we didn't pay Kansas farmers anything to sit on their land, they'd grow more wheat, prices would drop, and we'd all have more money in our pockets because we wouldn't be paying for the privilege of overpriced wheat.

    Don't get me wrong-subsidies are still relevant because the threat of a collapsed agriculture market is very real, but arguing that the state is doing great work by taking these subsidies is absurd.

    Because the state owns the crops...:confused::confused::confused:

    I'd prefer it if we could stop paying a 20% premium for Federal services.
     

Share This Page