Texas Budget Deficit Rivals Californias

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by mactastic, Jun 4, 2010.

  1. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #1
    Well lookey here... All this time we've been told that California was having such deep fiscal problems because we're a "free lunch" state, with unsustainable spending levels and irresponsible liberal "tax n spenders" in charge.

    At the same time we've been told that Texas is a model of the low-service state, that it's lack of an income tax has provided a sustainable and attractive way to bring business to the state, that the fiscal conservatives in charge have been fiscally conservative.

    And now we find out that Texas has closed to within a billion or so of California's deficit level, despite all the awesome fiscal conservative-ness emanating from the state:
    We also find out that Texas only managed to balance their current budget by using stimulus funds from the *gasp* jackbooted thugs at the federal government -- who probably came down and put a gun to Rick Perry's head and forced him to accept their help.

    So the question is, how can such a fiscally conservative state wind up in exactly the same predicament as California? Isn't fiscal conservatism supposed to prevent these kinds of budget deficits?
     
  2. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #2
    Texas is a lesson in conservatism taken to extremes. Texas isn't the only "conservative" state that is going to suffer but it certainly is the biggest. The only obvious answer is to raise taxes. It's long past time for Texas to have an income tax. It'll be fascinating to see how it plays out. 20% is a big number.

    Of course Mr Perry seems to think that personal belt tightening is beneath him along with all the other conservative elites.
     
  3. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
  4. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #4
    So...

    California (population 36,961,664) is $20bn in the red. That's roughly $541 per head.
    Texas (population 24,782,302) is $18bn in the red. That's roughly $726 per head.

    Hmmm...yeah, if only all the states were run as well as Texas.
     
  5. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #5
    I guess Perry picked the wrong year to secede. :D
     
  6. mactastic thread starter macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #6
    Indeed, I don't recall seeing any of the conservatives who hammered Al Gore for hypocrisy in hyping the green lifestyle yet not abiding by it be intellectually consistent enough to hammer Rick Perry for hyping fiscal conservatism then renting a luxury mansion on the taxpayer dime.

    Funny, that.
     
  7. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #7
    I thought Texas was living high off of all the oil money.
     
  8. Shivetya macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    #8

    I was under the impression that the 18bn hole was spread across two years as Texas uses a biennial budget scheme



    It would be interesting to see a list of all states and how they fare.
     
  9. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #9

    New York is $9 billion in the red.
     
  10. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #10
    Hmm. How interesting that a "librool" state like NY has half the debt of Texas. Hmm.

    Wonder where 'rat is? Hmm.
     
  11. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #11
    You are correct about that.

    Texas is really only 9 billion per year in the red.

    Basically if you took California budget and compared it to Texas's CA would be 40 billion in the red.

    As for states in the red I expect to see a lot of them the next few years as tax collections are dropping very quickly as so many people have lost their jobs or loss a good chunk of their income so they pulled back.

    You have people like my parents who put plans on hold because a bonus my Dad was expecting to get got put on hold until they money is saved up for it. Bonus was going to pay for something they wanted not needed.



    As for my problem with California is they can not balance their budget in economic good years. Much less bad years. Texas and many other states at least had a balance budget during the good years and put money away in a rainy day fund.
     
  12. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #12
    New York debt and Texas debt are the same.

    Remember Texas debt is spread over 2 years. 18 billion/2 = 9 billion. New York is on a single year budge cycle.

    As for Perry or as my girl friend like to call him Governor "Good hair" we want him gone. We really want him gone. I am for Bill White winning the Governor spot. Bill White did a lot of great things for Houston while he was mayor and he would be a great person to run the states. Perry has been in office far to long. I would like to point out that Texas Governor position is what is known as a weak governor because they do not make the budget. They can line item veto it but can not make it. Compared to other states with strong governors who is the one who makes the budget then the states congress approves or disapproves it.
     
  13. mactastic thread starter macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #13
    Link or retraction please.

    And bear in mind that is illegal for California (or any other state) to run a budget deficit.
     
  14. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #14
    I will have to dig for it. But the fact that I was starting to read crap about California in 2002-2005 in random articles at college and they became the prim example of the problem with "free lunch state" way back when raises a lot of red flags for me.

    http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/documents/st_STATEBUDGET100414_20100414.html

    I pulled from that it shows revenue changes from 2008-2009 year for then 2009-2010 projected change and California has a -0.8% change and huge budget problems. Texas is at -15%. 15% loss of income you expect some real budget problems. New York which is a small state that Texas as a budget problem that is the same size as Texas and it loss 2% of its income.

    As for something I found http://www.cbp.org/pdfs/2006/060110_govbudget.pdf
    that is for 2006. Budget problems in 2006. That was a good year and they were running a short fall of 6 billion. Not going well for the state.
    source is here http://www.cbp.org/publications/pub_statebudget.html

    Either way you have said yourself the way California is run it has fundamental problems. It is very easy for the people to vote to spend more money but the same people have to vote to raise taxes and they will not do that. The same group that want more free stuff (the people) do not want to pay for it. It is a lot of things that just need to be fixed.
     
  15. mactastic thread starter macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #15
    There are fundamental problems. But you completely mis-identified the problem, and are now trying to pass that lack of knowledge off as an "either way" kind of thing.

    California, like all other states, has always balanced it's budgets. To suggest otherwise either means you are willfully lying, or that you do not understand the state budget process.
     
  16. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #16
    Maybe not as well as everyone but the fact that year in and year out I keep hearing in the news California budget problem dating back to early 2000 and I live no where even near that state says a lot.

    For me the number that really matters in budget short fall is percentage of the budget has the short fall. California is at around 50%. Texas is at 20%.

    Now Texas as a few choices it can do. It can gamble that revenue will increase and pull from the rainy day fund or it can cut programs. I personally go with cutting programs. The rainy day fund is used for when revenue is unexpectly short fall. I think Texas had to use it to fund some thing when everything went crashing down in 2007 that hurt 2008 years since that budget was based on things not going south but the rainy day fund was there to cover it.

    I have huge problems when I see 50% budget short falls.
     
  17. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #17
    Did you just compare a 2 year budget deficit in a state without a state income tax to a 1 year budget deficit in a state with one?

    Its highly likely all states are going to be running on fumes, California just happens to take the cake.

    This thread = epic fail.
     
  18. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #18
    Add in another example of piss poor journalism and why they care so little for the truth
    I have no problem mactastic not catching it because most states run on a 1 year cycle and he lives in one of those states. But I would expect WSJ and major media outlets to point out that fact and correct the numbers in a better comparison. Texas Budget deficient is 9 billion when compared to CA.
     
  19. mactastic thread starter macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #19
    There is a fight over the budget every year because of the stupid and anti-democratic super-majority requirement. There have even been years where the budget has been late due to the partisan fighting.

    But it has never been unbalanced. You need to retract that assertion unless you've got some magic proof that no one else has ever seen.

    Where do you get the 50% figure? Last I saw, our annual budget was right around $100 billion. We face a $20 billion shortfall. That's just about a 20% hole in the budget, same as Texas.

    Which programs would you suggest they cut to make up $20 billion? If the state isn't providing any free lunches, I'm guessing there aren't much in the way of social services to slash. So where do you suggest Texas start in their cutting process?

    Of course you do. But I'm still not sure where you see them.
     
  20. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #20
    From your own article.
    http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/documents/st_STATEBUDGET100414_20100414.html

    Go look down at the table and put your mouse over each state. CA has a project revenue INCREASE of 0.1%. Texas has a decrease of over 15%

    So again which one looks more understandable. CA had to do some pretty deep cuts. Texas is doing some pretty big ones and many of them I do not agree with how they are doing it but that is another story and I do not like how Texas is heavy funded on sales tax.
     
  21. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #21
    California is having troubles cutting from what I heard without running into problems with losing federal money. I saw Swartzenager (sp?) bitching about the courts messing up their budget cuts.
     
  22. mactastic thread starter macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #22
    California has a $20 billion deficit on roughly $100 billion in spending. I'm not sure how the WSJ spins that into a deficit equal to 50% of the budget amount. It's just not correct.
     
  23. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #23
    The WSJ is showing California budget gap at 54 billion. Thats how, I believe those numbers were for a 2 year period before cuts that California made.
     
  24. Shivetya macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    #24
    California is the same as too many other states; no make that governments.

    What we consider a balanced budget is not what a politician considers a balanced budget. They can borrow to oblivion and still call it balanced.

    That is the real crime, they change the meaning of words to meet their requirements.
     
  25. mactastic thread starter macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #25
    Isn't a balanced budget one in which revenue matches expenditures? What other definition is there? :confused:
     

Share This Page