California’s worsening financial condition

September 27, 2011

Nearly nine in ten Californians, say the state is in bad economic times and don’t see things improving any time soon, according to a September 27 Field Poll.

Half of California voters believe their financial condition is worse than last year,

It is the fourth straight year this has occurred, and the first time it has happened since Field began the polling a half century ago.

“Pretty gloomy stuff,” said Field Poll director Mark DiCamillo. “The length of these negative reports is now becoming historic.”

Not surprisingly, the poll found a huge majority – 91 percent – of voters consider California’s economy to be in bad shape. About half those think things will improve by next year, 30 percent say it will get worse, and 26 percent look for an improvement.

California’s revenues already have fallen short during the second quarter, according to the state’s Department of Finance.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

A smart parasite knows not to kill it’s host. The parasites in Sacramento are NOT smart – just parasites.

Revenues are what they are, you can’t “enhance” them. If you take them (such as in higher taxes and fees), then someone out there has less to spend which will worsen the economy. We need a priorities list, then start at the top and funding them down the list. The stuff at the bottom gets pushed back until we start the economy going again. Sounds cruel, but cutting police, fire, etc., or letting criminals out of jail is just plane dumb.

Now only if you could get the democrats to understand that, but tax-borrow- and spend is their motto.

We had money when we had bush. Now both are gone.

But the tired slogans of the past remain.

Totally agree with this approach. The problem is only as complex as you make it.

Seriously, get a white board and list the top 5 things we MUST fund and everything else takes a back seat. Heres my list:

1. Education – teachers mind you, not administrators

2. Public Safety – Cops, Firefighters, criminal courts and Corrections

3. Infrastructure – Roads, bridges, tunnels etc, not landscaping or environmental impact reports or new government buildings. (side note, it bugs me that the gov builds their own buildings instead of leasing commercial)

4. Basic food and water inspection – Not full blown EPA protecting snowy plovers and endangered fresh water shrimp

5. I honestly couldn’t think of a 5th.

It all gets back to the basics on what we need in life. We need to eat and drink healthy clean food. We need to be safe in our homes and possessions. We need to get to and from work safely. And as a forward moving society above all we need to be smart.

It’s going to take more than ‘hope and change’ to save California.

I will take hope as all obama has left us with is “chump change”.

So sad when they can’t think for themselves.

Seriously? All you can post is cheesy bumpersticker fodder?

Zap posted a link to a wonderful article by an amazing economist. I just cut out part of it because it’s too long to post the whole thing. There are so many interesting points in that article, it should be mandatory reading. Here are just a few tid bits but the whole article is great:

“You never get paid what your labor is worth. Your produce a surplus, which is what your employer gets. In a corporation, hundreds of people work millions of hours to produce a surplus which is gathered by the board of directors and used to keep the system going. It works because the workers are basically ignorant of the reality, and teaching young people the reality would raise profound challenges to the operations of the machine.

The appropriators of the surplus are not stupid, and to keep it going, they make sure the political system is properly managed. They buy the system, to make sure we have the best democracy money can buy, ensuring that questions about the system itself are never raised, though the problem itself is the system. They take a portion of the surplus and use it control the political discourse, using foundations to shape and direct the discourse, dishing out neologisms along the way.

Where did all the money come that led to the massive indebtedness? From the surplus produced by labor itself [and, we would add, a fiscal system that creates money from debt].

As for the wars, it is in a sense a testimony to what I have said: Afghanistan, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya. The money to cover the Greek crisis amounts to two days’ military costs currently directed to the war efforts. But in the United States, we’re undercutting education at American universities. To cut back on the quality of education in those public institutions is to cut back on the quality of the American workforce, which is literally insane.”

{further down in the article}


“This crisis comes after 30 years of extraordinary development in the United States. Three decades ago, the United States was on the least unequal advanced industrial economies in terms of distribution of income and wealth. Today we are one of the most unequal. Produced enormous wealth for those at the top while we wiped out the middle.

The solutions debated in Washington are limited to how much to cut from Social Security, Medicare, and public education, instead of taking some back from those who have gained so much. How is that possible?

Last time we faced this system, in came Roosevelt on a program of balanced budgets, but when things got worse, Mr. Roosevelt underwent a transformation — not because of change of belief, but because he felt the heat, which came from beneath. The CIO organized millions, whose response was expressed in the rise of a militant Left, with membership surges in the Socialist and Communist parties.

Roosevelt’s response to unemployment was for government to create jobs, 11 million of them, providing decent incomes ensuring people kept up their mortgages payments, paid for by the corporations and the rich. And they did. At the end of WWII, federal government relied on taxing individuals and corporations. In 1945, for every dollar the federal government got from taxing individuals, it got $1.50 from corporations. Today, for every dollar the federal government gets from individuals, it gets from corporations — are you ready? — twenty-five cents. That is a massive shift of the burden of taxation off of corporations and onto yourselves.

But that’s only half the picture. Roosevelt went to the rich people and said, “I’m not just going to tax the corporations to pay for the jobs program. I’m going to tax all of you rich people. And he really went after them. First, in the Thirties he said “Im going to raise the rates of taxation on rich people. You’re going to pay a lot more than middle class people and low income people. A lot more. The rates were jacked up into the 90 percentile. In 1942, the war is already beginning, Roosevelt makes an even more dramatic proposal: A maximum income of $25,000 a year. The wealthy rebelled, and the Republican Party threatend to cap the national debt as the country was moving into war. FDR dropped the cap in exchange to raising the maximum tax rate to 94 percent, and the Republicans went along. 91 percent in the two decades after the war, now 35 percent.”

Thanks Zap, really good article.

Gosh, I’d love to hear why one of the 10 of you that gave me thumbs down disagree with this article. Perhaps you didn’t read it and just gave me the usual thumbs down because you don’t like me and it takes no thought to simply push the down symbol because this article is spot on.

We need another Roosevelt.

You are in “Tea Party Central”. Lemming like behavior.