Donate!
Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register :: View Members
Pages: 1
Send Topic Print
CA and IL (Read 65 times)
WebsterMark
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

SuzukiSavage.com
Rocks!

Posts: 13112

Gender: male
CA and IL
11/12/12 at 05:50:39
 
the post below got lost in some of our usual yacking and never address. I just read something else about California and thought it would be worthwild to bring it up again. I just read this: A full third of Americans on public assistance reside in California, even though it houses only one-eighth of the nation’s population.

Conservatives keep trying to paint liberals as the half that wants something for nothing...
What we want,.. is value for our money...

Okay, let’s put that to the test. Let’s look at two large states with wide variance in population demographics that have been historically run by liberals and see what the results are.

Let’s look at the two largest states run by liberals for a long period of time: my neighboring state of Illinois and how ‘bout a representative from the Left Coast; California.

The state auditor of Illinois said not long ago they have unfunded liabilities of over $200 billion dollars in government pensions. The rest of the state is so heavily taxed to fund the Chicago democratic machine that Caterpillar Corp refused to build their new plant there because they had no confidence they weren’t going to be singled out to fund this nonsense. There are over 6,500 Illinois pensioners receiving over $100,000 per month. The former head of Univ of Illinois receives $35,000 PER MONTH. Note: as far as I can tell, this is cash payments only, healthcare benefits are separate and equally outrageous. I’m going to go out on a limb here and say this qualifies as ‘something for nothing’…. Oh, by the way, the Illinois University system is under investigation for the leaders letting in the sons and daughters of wealthy political donors and those with connections at no cost. We looked at U of I for my daughter but they said the tuition, which was sky high, was non-negotiable. Guess I should have been sending on Rahm a few bucks now and then….

California, on the other hand, makes Illinois look like it’s run by a miser. What can you say positive about California’s finances? Nothing. They are home to the largest US city to file bankruptcy which was followed by two others fairly quickly. Democrats have run California state houses in the major cities for years. The only recent Republican governor, Arnie, morphed into a liberal after his attempt to rein in spending his first term got his hand slapped. California is a fiscal nightmare yet liberal Brown’s solution is a ridiculous “high speed” train from North to South that no one will ride and it will be heavily subsidized to operate after heavy borrow is done to build it. I’ve flown from San Fran to LA on SWA for $79. Why would I take a train that will take twice as long and cost about the same? California is not Japan. California is a national joke away from the tourist areas. It’s like visiting a Mexican resort and they straying off the property.

So there are two examples of liberals in charge of areas for a long period of time. If you want to push this out and look for a country wide example; pick Greece, Italy, Spain or any number of EU countries with strong liberal / socialist histories. So the idea that liberals are fiscal stewards does not hold up when actually examined.

Now, in the spirit of this supposed inclusion and bi-partisanship I absolutely have to adopt in order to survive (or so I’m told) note I have not called you any names or made any false allegations. My point is Illinois and California have been lead by liberal democrats statewide for a very long time. Why aren’t they perfect ‘laboratories’ that allow us to see how a nation run by liberal democrats for a long would look?
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
Paraquat
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

SuzukiSavage.com
Rocks!

Posts: 2206

Re: CA and IL
Reply #1 - 11/12/12 at 06:12:37
 
Why aren't we allowed to?
Because the feds rolled over the 11th amendment.


--Steve
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
srinath
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

I love YaBB 1G -
SP1!

Posts: 5349

Re: CA and IL
Reply #2 - 11/12/12 at 07:22:49
 
I'm sorry Webster in case you forgot, Calieee-fornia was run for most of the last decade by Gov-nurr Aaaaaaah nold ... In case you dont remember ... he is rebublican ...

OK try again huh ... maybe one of the othe rstates will fit your "example".

Cool.
Srinath.
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
WebsterMark
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

SuzukiSavage.com
Rocks!

Posts: 13112

Gender: male
Re: CA and IL
Reply #3 - 11/12/12 at 07:26:08
 
I didn't forget, maybe you didn't read it all. As I stated, Arnie tried to be  Rep his first term, got his wrist slapped and turned Rino.

so, instead of dodging, why don't you address the issue.

if you want a red state example, i'd vote for Texas, but i'm interested in liberal's views of Ca and Il.
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
srinath
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

I love YaBB 1G -
SP1!

Posts: 5349

Re: CA and IL
Reply #4 - 11/12/12 at 07:51:24
 
WebsterMark wrote on 11/12/12 at 07:26:08:
I didn't forget, maybe you didn't read it all. As I stated, Arnie tried to be  Rep his first term, got his wrist slapped and turned Rino.

so, instead of dodging, why don't you address the issue.

if you want a red state example, i'd vote for Texas, but i'm interested in liberal's views of Ca and Il.



There is a lot of dino's as well .. sorry Not letting you shirk your party's share in this mess ...

And, I know why there are welfare recipients in CA etc etc etc, but I am not indulging you. Your argument is facetious ... something like the "tiger tax" of dilbert ... no tigers you see ... the tiger tax keeps them away.

Cool.
Srinath.
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
WebsterMark
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

SuzukiSavage.com
Rocks!

Posts: 13112

Gender: male
Re: CA and IL
Reply #5 - 11/12/12 at 08:17:08
 
And, I know why there are welfare recipients in CA etc etc etc, but I am not indulging you. Your argument is facetious ... something like the "tiger tax" of dilbert ... no tigers you see ... the tiger tax keeps them away.

don't know the reference.
and why not indulge again? Facetious? How so?
Illinois and California have been run by liberals for past couple of decades, particularly at the state house level. since i live next to Illinois and hear their news all the time, I know this is the case.
They are fiscal basketcases. why isn't there a direct corelation?
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
Serowbot
YaBB Moderator
ModSquad
*****
Online

OK.... so what's the
speed of dark?

Posts: 28633
Tucson Az
Gender: male
Re: CA and IL
Reply #6 - 11/12/12 at 08:24:20
 
Qoute from Business Insider...
Quote:
As it turns out, it is red states that are overwhelmingly the Welfare Queen States. Yes, that's right. Red States — the ones governed by folks who think government is too big and spending needs to be cut — are a net drain on the economy, taking in more federal spending than they pay out in federal taxes. They talk a good game, but stick Blue States with the bill.

Take a look at the difference between federal spending on any given state and the federal taxes received from that state. We measure the difference as a dollar amount: Federal Spending per Dollar of Federal Taxes. A figure of $1.00 means that particular state received as much as it paid in to the federal government. Anything over a dollar means the state received more than it paid; anything less than $1.00 means the state paid more in taxes than it received in services. The higher the figure, the more a given state is a welfare queen.

Of the twenty worst states, 16 are either Republican dominated or conservative states. Let's go through the top twenty.

   New Mexico: $2.03
   Mississippi: $2.02
   Alaska: $1.84
   Louisiana: $1.78
   West Virginia: $1.76
   North Dakota: $1.68
   Alabama: $1.66
   South Dakota: $1.53
   Kentucky: $1.51
   Virginia: $1.51
   Montana: $1.47
   Hawaii: $1.44
   Maine: $1.41
   Arkansas: $1.41
   Oklahoma: $1.36
   South Carolina: $1.35
   Missouri: $1.32
   Maryland: $1.30
   Tennessee: $1.27
   Idaho: $1.21

Does anyone else notice the overwhelming presence of northern "rugged individualist" states, like Alaska, the Dakotas and Montana, along with most of the South? Why it's almost like there's a pattern here or something.

Where can we find liberal bastions California, New York, and Massachusetts? California is 43rd, getting back only $0.78 for every dollar it sends to Washington. New York is 42nd, and one penny better off, at $0.79 per dollar. Massachusetts is 40th, receiving $0.82 for every dollar it sends to DC.

Read more: http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-08-18/politics/30039546_1_blue-state...
Back to top
 
 

Ludicrous Speed !... ... Huh...
  IP Logged
srinath
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

I love YaBB 1G -
SP1!

Posts: 5349

Re: CA and IL
Reply #7 - 11/12/12 at 08:25:28
 
First off, I would question your source, its probably bogus like the Mitt Rmoney 23 million out of work figure etc ...

OK since you have thought about that a while ...

I will limit my statements to CA, cos I have lived there for years and years ... and suffered ... as well as enjoyed it when things went really well ... and this was the pre aaaaahnold years.

IL I have not even set foot in ... so I dunno ...

California - there is actually 2 california's ... or even 3 ... that is the non tourist areas.

The first and second is the high tech CA, very very high paid tech and executive positions, very clean and spectacular. However the first groups in this is the older established long term residents who really make all the $$$ ... the second is the mass of immigrants who seemingly make 70-80-90K or more a year but since they have to pay almost 2g for rent and all the rest are proportional, they barely break even ... I used to live like that and could not wait to move out. Most people dont have the sense to do so, and they work all their life trying to stay in CA. Eventually they make it to the first set ... These people dont get to become welfare recipients. Ocassionaly they are on the unemployment lists.

The third group is the immigrants and their anchor babies ... they typically live in the near slum conditions of towns like Pacoima in so cal or Palo alto in Northern CA. Enough said ... there is no reason to give dole to someone with an anchor baby ... deport the whole lot.

4th - retirees. You see CA is a milder and gentler AZ. Its more crowded and there are fewer golf courses ... but if you ahve lived most of your life there, its just better to retire there. Being a big state with lots of people there is a good many retirees ...
1/8th the population would mean 1/8th the retirees ... but if you consider that there has been some out migration from CA and the fact that in the 60's and 70's there was in migration into CA. Potentially @ the peak they may have had more than 1/6th or 1/5th the nations population ... you can have more than 1/8th the retirees.

BTW Webster - I call your numbers bogus on another count ... cos WV, SC, MS, AL are all very very backward states and all very very very red states. You are cherry picking information to suit your political bias. being on the dole isn't the only reason you need to "improve" a state.

Cool.
Srinath.
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
srinath
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

I love YaBB 1G -
SP1!

Posts: 5349

Re: CA and IL
Reply #8 - 11/12/12 at 08:30:36
 
WebsterMark wrote on 11/12/12 at 08:17:08:
And, I know why there are welfare recipients in CA etc etc etc, but I am not indulging you. Your argument is facetious ... something like the "tiger tax" of dilbert ... no tigers you see ... the tiger tax keeps them away.

don't know the reference.
and why not indulge again? Facetious? How so?
Illinois and California have been run by liberals for past couple of decades, particularly at the state house level. since i live next to Illinois and hear their news all the time, I know this is the case.
They are fiscal basketcases. why isn't there a direct corelation?


I hear very little about Illinois cos I dont live next to it ... I used to when the whole debacle of selling Obama's senate seat etc etc was up ... but then not much.
CA I heard of when the Aaahnold related dysfunction was out, then the aaaahnold affair and the Aaaaahnold baby ... but after that nothing outsized. but I am on the other side of the country. I hear SC related crap a lot. I will never move to SC. Its the state that famously banned home schooling cos the kids were graduating from the "school of Mom" dumber than a box of rocks and pregnant to boot ... like WTF ...

Cool.
Srinath.
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
WebsterMark
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

SuzukiSavage.com
Rocks!

Posts: 13112

Gender: male
Re: CA and IL
Reply #9 - 11/12/12 at 09:11:50
 
BTW Webster - I call your numbers bogus on another count ... cos WV, SC, MS, AL are all very very backward states and all very very very red states. You are cherry picking information to suit your political bias. being on the dole isn't the only reason you need to "improve" a state.

completely confused on your point. CA and IL are issues because they are so large. i'm not cherry picking anything. i don't believe WV is in any danger of going bankrupt and even if they did, the effect on the nation as a whole would go finiancially un-noticed wouldn't it? It would be like a mom and pop hardware store closing up.

i'm leaving now so i'll get into the rest later.
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
WebsterMark
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

SuzukiSavage.com
Rocks!

Posts: 13112

Gender: male
Re: CA and IL
Reply #10 - 11/12/12 at 09:32:06
 
before i go, i'll leave you with this analysis from this morning's WSJ.
instead of attacking the WSJ or the writer or whatever, subtract their partisianship and consider the facts presented.

     
While the rest of America was holding an election last week, the gnomes at the Congressional Budget Office released the final budget totals for fiscal 2012. They're worth reporting because they illuminate the real fiscal choices that confront the country, as opposed to the posturing you'll be hearing over the next few weeks.
The nearby table lays out the ugly details. The feds rolled up another $1.1 trillion deficit for the year that ended September 30, which was the biggest deficit since World War II, except for each of the previous three years. President Obama can now proudly claim the four largest deficits in modern history. As a share of GDP, the deficit fell to 7% last year, which was still above any single year of the Reagan Presidency, or any other year since Truman worked in the Oval Office.

Tax revenue kept climbing, up 6.4% for the year overall, and at $2.45 trillion it is now close to the historic high it reached in fiscal 2007 before the recession hit. Mr. Obama won't want you to know this, but this revenue increase is occurring under the Bush tax rates that he so desperately wants to raise in the name of getting what he says is merely "a little more in taxes." Individual income tax payments are now up $233 billion over the last two years, or 26%.
This healthy revenue increase comes despite measly economic growth of between 1% and 2%. Imagine the gusher of revenue the feds could get if government got out of the way and let the economy grow faster.
Now let's look at outlays, which declined a bit in 2012. That small miracle was achieved thanks to a 4% fall in defense spending, a 24% fall in jobless benefits, and an 8.9% decline in Medicaid spending.
Note, however, that federal spending remains at a new plateau of about $3.54 trillion, or some $800 billion more than the last pre-recession year of 2007. One way to think about this is that most of the $830 billion stimulus of 2009 has now become part of the federal budget baseline. The "emergency" spending of the stimulus has now become permanent, as we predicted it would.
When Beltway politicians claim they want a "balanced" approach to reducing the deficit, what they really mean is raising taxes to finance this new higher spending level. And the still-higher level that is coming with ObamaCare.
The reality is that the fastest way to raise revenue is with faster economic growth. To the extent that raising tax rates will reduce the rate of growth, it will slow the flow of tax revenue and increase the deficit.
Even if Mr. Obama were to bludgeon Republicans into giving him all of the tax-rate increases he wants, the Joint Tax Committee estimates this would yield only $82 billion a year in extra revenue. But if growth is slower as a result of the higher tax rates, then the revenue will be lower too. So after Mr. Obama has humiliated House Republicans and punished the affluent for the sheer joy of it, he would still have a deficit of $1 trillion.
Most of our readers know all this, but we thought you'd like some new evidence to rebut the kids who voted for your taxes to go up when they return from college for Thanksgiving. Maybe they'll figure it out when they have a job, if they can find one.
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
srinath
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

I love YaBB 1G -
SP1!

Posts: 5349

Re: CA and IL
Reply #11 - 11/12/12 at 11:05:12
 
WebsterMark wrote on 11/12/12 at 09:11:50:
BTW Webster - I call your numbers bogus on another count ... cos WV, SC, MS, AL are all very very backward states and all very very very red states. You are cherry picking information to suit your political bias. being on the dole isn't the only reason you need to "improve" a state.

completely confused on your point. CA and IL are issues because they are so large. i'm not cherry picking anything. i don't believe WV is in any danger of going bankrupt and even if they did, the effect on the nation as a whole would go finiancially un-noticed wouldn't it? It would be like a mom and pop hardware store closing up.

i'm leaving now so i'll get into the rest later.



Size shouldn't make any difference whether its got dole recipients or not ... when you're trying to pin it on democrats.

Big or small, stupid is stupid. Of course you're cherry picking information as I am. You blame democrats, I blame repugs for being on Dole ... kapeesh.

Cool.
Srinath.
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
Starlifter
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

It only snows seven
months of the year
here.

Posts: 3746
Eastern Michigan
Gender: male
Re: CA and IL
Reply #12 - 11/12/12 at 11:36:22
 
The WALL STREET JOURNAL, is a right wing's mouthpiece!

In right-wing blogs, the Wall Street Journal, and National Review are the leaders of the pack.
Back to top
 
 

Proud to be everything the right-wing hates.
  IP Logged
Pages: 1
Send Topic Print


« Home

 
« Home
SuzukiSavage.com
09/21/24 at 06:53:51



General CategoryPolitics, Religion (Tall Table) › CA and IL


SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2!
YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved.