Article

2009-05-21 Home Front: Politix

The Decline and Fall of the California Republic

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Bobby 2009-05-21 06:28|| || Front Page|| [4 views ] Top

#1 Actuallay Arnold is going to cut all those agencies as promised just not like he wanted in the first place. The Democrats in the state house have been very quiet since it was predicted that they were not getting a credit increase. Many programs condidered sacred are now on the chopping block. BTW we have over 450 commissions, boards, and agencies populated with ex-politicans. The could eliminate 1/3 of them and no one would know the difference. Bottom line there is lots of fat to carve off and nobody has the political clout to stop it. Maybe there is hope for California? P.S. Jerry Brown is the front-runner in the Gov race, with the mayors of SF and LA delutional about their chances. DiFi? Maybe. The ex CEO of Ebay is the only candidate for the GOP so far, although Tom may have a slim chance. (Tom predicted this meltdown a decade ago)

Posted by Cyber Sarge 2009-05-21 08:47|| 2009-05-21 08:47|| Front Page Top

#2 At the same time, public employee unions acquired unprecedented power to coerce public employee membership, automatically direct public employee earnings into union political coffers and strike against the public.

Yep. If you're a public employee (CSEA, as was in my case) you have two options.

Join the union and have the state pay your dues ($9.21/month in my case two years ago); the money is added to your salary,(and removed as a 'voluntary deduction') or,

Don't join the union. You don't get the money that's 'voluntarily deducted', and you get to face some very intense... sales-pitches.. for the rest of your career.

Posted by Pappy 2009-05-21 09:15|| 2009-05-21 09:15|| Front Page Top

#3 P.S. Jerry Brown is the front-runner in the Gov race, with the mayors of SF and LA delutional about their chances. DiFi? Maybe. The ex CEO of Ebay is the only candidate for the GOP so far, although Tom may have a slim chance. (Tom predicted this meltdown a decade ago)

Funny thing, though, when given a chance to vote the issues, they don't vote for Jerry's positions, or DiFi's positions on the issues; they'd have both voted for all the tax increaces on the ballot. They don't vote for the positions of that girly-man Republican who is in the governor's office. Or that smooth-talking alleged sooper-genius they voted for for President.

Earlier this week, they went out and voted to match the positions of well, Sarah Palin. You know, that redneck that "everyone knows" is a dumbass retard who thinks dinosaurs died off because there wasn't room on the ark.

The public debate of politics in CA is a triumph of the use of branding and conformity to vote for politicians whose positions considered in isolation they don't support and to vote against the politicians whose positions, when considered in isolation, they do support.

Posted by Thing From Snowy Mountain 2009-05-21 09:42|| 2009-05-21 09:42|| Front Page Top

#4 Sell the golf course and other luxuries, deport and keep out the illegals, stop paying for their education and healthcare. Tell the unions to choose: job cuts or salary cuts. And if they go on strike, they are FIRED nd non-union replacements will be hired at lower cost (Reagan vs PATCO). Roll back the "green" crap that is costing them money and causing businesses to leave.

Time to make the hard calls - and that means CUT SPENDING, and chop the unions off at the knees.

But that would take guts, and there is a severe shortage of those in CA, starting with the Gov and legislators.

CA is toast. Bankruptcy now.

Posted by OldSpook 2009-05-21 10:36|| 2009-05-21 10:36|| Front Page Top

#5 I just hope this vote wasn't a fluke and that California is still a trendsetter and this kind of voting with your wallet will influence all the other blue states that are thinking of taxing and spending their way out of debt. It sort of reminds me of the old "throw the bums" out movement of the late 80's early 90's.

Posted by Jack is Back!">Jack is Back! 2009-05-21 11:10|| 2009-05-21 11:10|| Front Page Top

#6 I came up with a scheme years ago that would eliminate most of California's deficit. Simply convert most non-violent crimes to fines--big ones. Fines that cannot be appealed to a judge, only to a State administrator.

If you cannot pay the fine, the fine remains on the books until it can be paid. But if you commit a second offense with an outstanding fine, you go to jail.

For example, there are a lot of first time, non accident DUIs, tens of thousands of them, every year. If instead of arrest, you are sent home and your car is towed unless a friend can drive it, and you are given a fine of $20,000.

There are a LOT of people in California who would pay that much to not have a DUI on their record. And it is for first time offenders only.

But it could cover the gamut. If you are not licensed to do so, and you are caught with marijuana, you better have a $100 bill on you to pay your fine. If you do, then have a nice day. You get a receipt. Smoking tobacco in a prohibited place, another $100.

Jaywalking, $20. Underage drinking $200. Possession of false ID, $500. Giving false information to a police officer, $500. Failure to register vehicle, $500. Suspended license, $1000. Shoplifting, $1000. Simple assault, $1000. Check fraud, $1000 + amount of check. Vandalism, $1000 + amount of damage.

The list goes on and on. And I might add that it is a progressive tax, while at the same time, it discourages repeat offenders.

Posted by Anonymoose 2009-05-21 11:22|| 2009-05-21 11:22|| Front Page Top

#7 Yes, ever watch a time clock in a factory where workers pay is docked even if you clock in 30 seconds late? The workers are lined up to clock back in ten to fifteen minutes early to avoid a fine. Hitting people's wallets works.

Posted by GirlThursday 2009-05-21 11:45|| 2009-05-21 11:45|| Front Page Top

#8 Save California -- when you leave, take someone with you!

(a bumper sticker on the car of a friend i had in college... back in the Reagan/GHWB years)

Posted by Querent 2009-05-21 12:59|| 2009-05-21 12:59|| Front Page Top

#9 Before the 1970s, California policy aimed at accommodating growth and encouraging prosperity. These priorities changed radically beginning with the "era of limits" announced by Gov. Jerry Brown. Conventional public works were branded "growth inducing," and it became state policy to discourage construction of highways, dams, power plants and housing.

Actually, the housing market and the population continued to grow and grow and grow. In 1970 the population was about 20 million. Today it's over 36 million. McClintock should know that. C'mon now. How many states, realistically, could accommodate that kind of growth?

Along with that growth came radical changes in the demographics as immigrants, illegal and otherwise, from all over the world flooded into the state. Back in the 70's it was a solid red state but the change in demographics changed us to blue. Those of use who supported guys like Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and Pete Wilson were drowned out. Tom McClintock is a holdover from that era but he doesn't seem to have the charisma or the horse power of a Nixon or a Reagan. Schwarzenegger had the machismo and the glamor but the unions beat the crap out of him.

It is true, painfully, that infrastructure did not keep pace. Freeways are now parking lots, water in San Diego is rationed, hospitals and schools are overwhelmed. Quality of life has indeed declined precipitously. There should have been a law to require that infrastructure be in place before massive new housing tracts can be built. But when you live in a state where the politicians and media are all corrupted and the voters can't be bothered to pay attention that's just how it is. The special interests call the shots and nobody seems to care. Yes, some of us sometimes can rouse ourselves to vote against taxes. But for the most part we're too fat, lazy and stupid, too busy watching the Simpsons or TMZ to try to understand what's happening. When the whip comes down we'll cry and bitch and moan but I wouldn't bet that many of us will grab a clue. The TV sure won't tell us.

Oh well, at least the weather's nice.

Posted by Ebbang Uluque6305 2009-05-21 13:10|| 2009-05-21 13:10|| Front Page Top

#10 Some of the blame has to fall on the Cali voters who have not only elected the aforementioned pols, but have used their powers of referendum and initiative to pass laws mandating the government to fund their pet causes.

Posted by SteveS 2009-05-21 15:16|| 2009-05-21 15:16|| Front Page Top

#11 moose and other who propose more taxes: YOU MISS THE POINT! We don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. If they cut most of the useless agencies, negotiate smarter contracts with unions, and pace spending to inflation we would have plenty of money.

Posted by Cyber Sarge 2009-05-21 15:33|| 2009-05-21 15:33|| Front Page Top

#12 Help is on the way. The $billions set aside for Global Warming and Stem Cell Research hasn't kicked in yet. /sarc

Posted by GolfBravoUSMC 2009-05-21 15:53|| 2009-05-21 15:53|| Front Page Top

#13 Vandalism, $1000 + amount of damage.

Singapore appears to have solved that problem. Remember Michael Fay?

Posted by Zhang Fei 2009-05-21 15:58|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com]">[http://timurileng.blogspot.com] 2009-05-21 15:58|| Front Page Top

#14 Nobody wants to hear it, but the bottom line isn't that California needs to cut services. First, it needs to cut entitlements and salaries. After that, it needs to cut non-essential services, and by non-essential, I don't mean police, firefighter or sanitation worker headcount.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2009-05-21 16:07|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com]">[http://timurileng.blogspot.com] 2009-05-21 16:07|| Front Page Top

#15 How many states, realistically, could accommodate that kind of growth?

CA 20M->36M = +80%
TX 11.2M->24.3 = +117%

Californians have for a generation pursued a low growth policy resulting in decaying and overused infrastructure. Just as piss poor immigration and trade policies resulted in pro socialist voters and a financial system that could be toppled in one afternoon in Sept 2008 by foreign interests and get a Marxist elected as president of the United States. Bad choices result in bad outcomes.

Posted by ed 2009-05-21 16:17|| 2009-05-21 16:17|| Front Page Top

#16 Zhang Fei: You called it. However, caning is far less used in Singapore than fines for everything. All the disgusting and annoying things that impolite people do everywhere are rewarded with fines. Not surprisingly, all those fines do help to keep Singapore cleaner and somewhat more polite.

Cyber Sarge: I am well aware that they can always spend more than they take in taxes. However, I like the idea of fines as punishment for public pests like DUI.

I think the avoidance of personal responsibility goes a long way in explaining many of California's problems, and a smiling police officer with a Wifi credit card reader could suddenly clarify for a lot of Californians that their actions have consequences.

Posted by Anonymoose 2009-05-21 16:31|| 2009-05-21 16:31|| Front Page Top

23:36 OldSpook
23:32 texhooey
23:27 JosephMendiola
22:38 CrazyFool
22:19 Cornsilk Blondie
22:15 Cornsilk Blondie
21:57 DMFD
21:32 Frank G
21:29 Dino Spinens7431
21:28 GORT
21:19 Rambler in Virginia
21:18 Ptah
20:44 Glenmore
20:32 746
19:47 Tom- Pa
19:45 Frank G
19:30 Frank G
19:28 Frank G
19:25 JAB
19:06 Frank G
18:45 Anguper Hupomosing9418
18:42 Anguper Hupomosing9418
18:37 Barbara Skolaut
18:34 Barbara Skolaut