California on the Brink

[Bullitt]

I wouldn't. My entire family lives in Southern California, I was born there and I wish to go back for good soon. Just as with many people across America, there are tons of folks in California who had no hand in this budgetary mess, my family included. So I think I'm allowed to be a bit offended when people just write off the whole state and everyone in it. "Let it burn", "Fuck em", etc. No, fuck you.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Didn't have a hand in it? Didn't stand by while their elected representatives went politically correct, hog wild, with unsustainable spending programs for special interests? Judging state programs by what's in it for me, rather than what's fair to everyone, and good for the fiscal health of the state? Not stopping the deluge of illegal aliens that are devouring the state?

Every state has fiscal problems this year, so we've got our own shit to worry about. We've got our own asshole politicians and misspent shortfalls to straighten out.

[slang]

Originally Posted by Bullitt

I wouldn't. My entire family lives in Southern California, I was born there and I wish to go back for good soon. Just as with many people across America, there are tons of folks in California who had no hand in this budgetary mess, my family included. So I think I'm allowed to be a bit offended when people just write off the whole state and everyone in it. "Let it burn", "Fuck em", etc. No, fuck you.

Yes, I do know that there are good people there in Cali. They number in the millions if not tens of millions. I've met many reasonable people that are residents there.

Could we possibly bail those people out? Selectively? No. So what are we left with? Allowing the entire system to collapse to give reasonable people the opportunity to take control again. Bailing out the current system will only give us more of what we have seen in the past 10+ years.

Consider this. Grey Davis supposedly drove the state into fiscal chaos and was replaced by "The Governator". I honestly thought Arnold could change things there and cut the spending to sustainable levels.

That was a very silly idea, that somehow one party might be able to make a difference more than the other. What they need IMO is a complete re-org. A reboot. At that point the normal folks might be a bit more aggressive at getting things right.

So that's for the "Let them fail" side of the argument.

What do you seriously think will change with a Cali bailout? And for that matter an Indiana, Arizona, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, etc bailout package?

It seems reasonable with the recent history here with the Feds that the thinking would be;

"Hey, they went along with that bullshit bailout....now let's get a bigger one"!

So, those normal people in Cali, like your family, will see hard times in the short term with a gov't failure. Most likely in ways that we've not seen in the US here in 80 years or so.

Why not prepare for the fall and take it knowing that it's going to happen. It's not a question of if but when. California, as well as many other states are completely unsustainable and completely out of control. The entire USA actually.

As for being offended, yes that's your "right" I suppose but this is the Cellar.

Do you believe that I've never been offended by what I read here?

[BrianR]

I had a nice long diatribe going but the crappy connection monster got it.

I'll try to get my steam back up and repost it later, hunny-do list permitting.

Suffice it to say I vote to let CA fail and pick up the pieces later.

[sugarpop]

Originally Posted by Perry Winkle

"Let" does not indicate desire. There are pragmatic benefits to letting the inevitable happen and then rebuilding.

Bailouts reward poor performance. Rewarding failure is the road to ruin, as we're now demonstrating spectacularly.

I agree. I don't think we should EVER bailout ANY company. In the situation we are in, however, not bailing out the banks would have been a complete disaster. I just think people need to be going to prison as well. Here is a link to something I watched about this recently... http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...eakingthebank/

In addition, it's fucking ridiculous that ANYONE in a failing company should be allowed to get ANY kind of a bonus. I don't give a shit if they have a contract or not.

And let's not forget, this has going on for a long time, giving people bonuses when the company loses money. We need to completely restructure the business model. But then, you know, everyone whines that we're interfering in the private sector. But the private sector isn't interested in changing. And why should they? They win, no matter what. So, we are in a viscious cycle. What to do, what to do...

We have become too complacent as a society about the corruption and greed in business and government. They get away with too much. We have privatized the profits and wealth, and socialized the debt. THAT is WRONG. The people at the top make risky choices, take home boatloads of money, then when it all goes south, they get to keep all that money while everyone else suffers. And those people knew it was going to crash. They had to. And now we are counting on those same people to get us out of this mess? AND they get to make boatloads MORE money in the process of cleaning up a disaster THEY caused? WTF?

I do not think it was very smart to give so much money to failing automakers either. IMO, we should have given money to people who are creating the cars of the future, like Tesla Motors, and it would not have cost NEARLY as much. The guy at Tesla said a billion, just ONE billion, is SO much money, they could do a LOT with it. But GM needs 30 billion MORE, in addition to what they have already gotten? I really don't see the justification in giving ANY company more than what it is actually worth. And I believe GM, at the time we gave them the first injection of money, was valued at about $1 billion. WTF?

We should have also spent the money of infrastructure, and creating new green tech companies, stuff like that. I believe this administration has handled the situation VERY POORLY.

[sugarpop]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

We don't, Sugarpop -- but that you hold this view of it tells me your thinking is by no means as unchained from hard leftism as you've in the past claimed.

Google on the phrase "creative destruction" and its economic results for a bit. Not altogether a bad thing, is it?

The only thing that's "going down" is the immense and costly establishment that is Big Government, which must not be confused with "this country." Small Government is our salvation, governmentwise. Knowing this is why I'm a libertarian, and not getting this is why you're not a libertarian. Yet. (I do think your every post shows your profound and wide-ranging ignorance, though. You're a leftist through not knowing any better. So far, anyway. I hope the things you may discover both here and in living adult life for a few years will fix it.)

We mean to recover the United States from its present socialist aberration. We don't know how many years it will take to repair the damage Obama and the Democrats are plunging madly to accomplish before the nation returns to its senses.

Respectfully UG, I disagree. I think all you people who are SO pro-business, and think business needs absolutely NO regulation, ar the ones who are ignorant. The business model has proven over and over again that they cannot be trusted to do anything that is in the best interest of the people of this country. They only do what is in their own best interest, and that means putting money in their own pockets at the expense of everyone else.

I agree government should be smaller, but probably not in the same way you do.

[Aliantha]

My state is in debt too. I don't think there's even a suggestion that the federal government should bail us out.

I think we should 'bail out' the current state government, even though the problems we're having now are mostly because of poor leadership by the previous premier who basically controlled everything and everyone in his cabinet.

[sugarpop]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Didn't have a hand in it? Didn't stand by while their elected representatives went politically correct, hog wild, with unsustainable spending programs for special interests? Judging state programs by what's in it for me, rather than what's fair to everyone, and good for the fiscal health of the state? Not stopping the deluge of illegal aliens that are devouring the state?

Every state has fiscal problems this year, so we've got our own shit to worry about. We've got our own asshole politicians and misspent shortfalls to straighten out.

The illegal alien problem is failing because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ISN'T PUNISHING THE CORPORATIONS/PEOPLE WHO ARE HIRING THEM. It is a failure of CAPITALISM, NOT SOCIALISM.

[jinx]

Bullshit. The problem is the resources they are using, not the paychecks a few are collecting.

[Aliantha]

I suppose if no one hired illegals they wouldn't come over the border so much would they?

[sugarpop]

It is multisource problem, and anyone who thinks different isn't looking at the whole picture and the effects of the situation. And are you AWARE of how many BILLIONS of dollars illegal workers send back to Mexico alone (not to mention other countries) every year? The payhecks a few are collecting. That is a freaking ridiculous statement. How many millions of those jobs could someone who is here legally have right now, and not be on unemployment?

Anyone who supports business hiring illegal workers is supporting a form of slavery.

[jinx]

Yes, I'm aware of the money they send back home.... tons of legal workers do the same, it's their money to do with what they want.
Business owners pay taxes to a govt that then turns around and protects illegals in the name of PC... you're surprised businesses/farms try to save a buck by hiring cheaply?

Stop them at the borders, inquire about immigration status at hospitals, schools, welfare/foodstamp office etc., eject the ones already here - and the hiring problem will be solved.

[sugarpop]

There aren't enough people to stop them at the borders. The borders of this country are too huge. And the ones who are caught and sent back just turn around and come back anyway. I know someone personally whose sister is with an illegal. He has been sent back 3 or 4 times already, and he just comes back. And he has a job that pays him $35/hour under the table, so it's not like he's doing menial labor either.

The best way to fight illegal immigration is to SERIOUSLY punish those who hire them. Jail time (5 years) and serious fines ($100k+) for each and every offense. And ENFORCE IT. THAT is the way to stop it. Nothing else is going to work.

[jinx]

There aren't enough people to check every business... the number of businesses in this country is huge. Entering the country illegally is a crime - ENFORCE THAT LAW.

[Perry Winkle]

Originally Posted by sugarpop

I agree. I don't think we should EVER bailout ANY company. In the situation we are in, however, not bailing out the banks would have been a complete disaster.

How is it not already a complete disaster? The bailouts are just prolonging the inevitable.

Anyway, the banks are just the tip of the iceberg. The situation in California is just a glimmer of what may happen to the entire Western world. Letting industry and banking go without bailouts may have given us more short-term pain in exchange for lessening some long-term pain.

Read up on economics. Please.

Originally Posted by sugarpop

I think all you people who are SO pro-business, and think business needs absolutely NO regulation, ar the ones who are ignorant. The business model has proven over and over again that they cannot be trusted to do anything that is in the best interest of the people of this country. They only do what is in their own best interest, and that means putting money in their own pockets at the expense of everyone else.

Ever hear of game theory? Part of the reason the banking and finance industry imploded is because they had to work around regulations. The proportion varies depending on which expert you're listening to. Yes, they would have made some of the same mistakes but Federal regulations demonstrably incentivized unsound decisions, increasing the magnitude of the problem.

Originally Posted by sugarpop

How many millions of those jobs could someone who is here legally have right now, and not be on unemployment?

Anyone who supports business hiring illegal workers is supporting a form of slavery.

First, those jobs would likely go empty without undocumented migrant workers. Even with increased unemployment, like we're experiencing now, those jobs would still go unfilled to a significant extent because white collar workers are not going to do them until their situation becomes most dire. Even (especially?) blue collar workers aren't going to do hard manual labor unless they have to.

Second, look at your statement from the other direction: Anyone who supports immigration restrictions is supporting a form of slavery by giving business owners incentive and a supply of exploitable labor.

Think about it. If we made it easy for all non-hostile (like no ties to terrorist organizations) immigrants to gain official status then businesses would have no incentive to favor undocumented migrants over citizens, except when it comes to suitability for the work.

Originally Posted by sugarpop

He has been sent back 3 or 4 times already, and he just comes back. And he has a job that pays him $35/hour under the table, so it's not like he's doing menial labor either.

The best way to fight illegal immigration is to SERIOUSLY punish those who hire them.

First, that is meaningless unless you define `menial` and tell us what he does and tell us how much it costs him in lost wages when he is deported.

Second, you gotta be fucking kidding me. The easiest way to fight illegal immigration is to get rid of immigration restrictions. That is LESS work and LESS burden on the judicial system.

Incarcerating someone for 5 years costs MORE THAN THE FINE YOU PROPOSE. That's just insipid.