Jobless Figures Pose Social, Political Threat for Obama, Dems

A month ago, when the jobless rate was edging toward 9 percent, it was clear that the most serious challenge facing the Obama administration was rising unemployment.

Unfortunately, Obama's pretty-close-to-clueless economic team peddled the absurd spin that because the rate of increase in the official total of out-of-work Americans had slowed somewhat in May the current recession might be easing. That happy talk dulled the sense of urgency, and the White House let another month pass without focusing seriously

That was a bad mistake.

During the month of June, 467,000 more Americans lost their jobs.

The official unemployment rate now stands at 9.5 percent.

That's the highest level since August, 1983, during the severe recession of the early 1980s.

It is now all but certain next month's figures will take America's official unemployment rate into double digits – and take the Obama administration closer to both an economic and political flashpoint that the president should be focused on avoiding. ((The key word there is "official," as the actual unemployment rate – including the long-term unemployed and the seriously underemployed, as well as those who are out of work but have not applied for benefits – is already in double digits.)

"The numbers are indicative of a continued, very severe recession," economist Stuart G. Hoffman told the New York Times, after reviewing the new jobless figures. "There's nothing in here to show that the economy and the market are pulling out of the grip of recession."

The stock markets reacted rationally.

The Standard & Poor's 500-stock index fell almost 3 percent.

The Dow Jones industrial average fell 223 points.

The Nasdaq composite index dropped 49.20 points.

The state of California is printing i.o.u.'s to "pay" local governments, vendors and taxpayers to which it owes money.

Referring to the ridiculously optimistic pronouncements of the president and his aides about "green shoots" of economic recovery, Tom Di Gamola of Guggenheim Partners told The Times, "These green shoots are turning brown."

The Obama administration needs to get a whole lot more serious about the real economy.

The president and his aides can begin by recognizing that the $787 billion stimulus plan of earlier this year was a political response to an economic crisis. It was weighted down with tax cuts for the wealthy and unfocused in its approach to job creation. The White House needs to start listening to people who know a thing or two about these matters, such as United Steelworkers union president Leo Gerard and Leo Hindery Jr., the chair of the Smart Globalization Initiative at the New America Foundation, who have outlined a plan to use smart manufacturing strategies and new trade policies to forge a job-driven recovery.

The failure of the president and his aides to focus on Main Street's unemployment crisis as aggressively as they have on Wall Street's financial crisis is already haunting Obama. If that official unemployment rate moves into the double digits, it will rapidly become the most serious threat to his presidency.

History is instructive, chillingly so, in this regard:

Administrations that focused too intently on repairing Wall Street and too little on the real hurt of real people.

The elections of 1930 (Depression shifts 49 House seats and 8 Senate seats R to D), 1932 (Depression shifts 101 House, 13 Senate R to D and parties of the left), 1958 (recession shifts 48 House, 12 Senate R to D), 1974 (Watergate/recession shift 48 House, 4 Senate R to D) and 1982 (recession shifts 26 House, 1 Senate R to D) all produced massive rearrangements in the makeup of the Congress. In each case, Democrats gained because they were seen as the party that cared more about working people than Wall Street. In contrast, in 1994, Democrats suffered massive losses after President Bill Clinton adopted Wall Street's agenda on free trade and NAFTA and proposed a health care "reform" that would have enriched some of the country's largest insurance companies.

No matter what your party or ideology, certain facts of political life hold steady. The first of these is that a party that lets unemployment surge -- especially if it gets into into double digits -- and that does not seem to be focused on addressing the crisis is "at risk" of suffering serious losses at the next election.

Comments (253)

1. Good article. If those angry "working class whites" almost voted in McPain and Caribou over Obama, just imagine what'll happen when they are "not-working working-class whites"!

   Posted by winyahn at 07/05/2009 @ 1:39pm

2. I also think you don't understand the real struggle. You really ought to read an excellent online essay by G. Edward White of the University of Virginia Law School, called "Historicizing Judicial Scrutiny." It's about changes in Constitutional regimes over the history of the U.S.

   The one we are currently in is the "scrutiny" regime, which comes from West Coast Hotel v. Parrish (1937). This case is usually said to stand for the proposition that states can pass health and welfare regulation (and the Federal Government can pass analogous legislation through its spending power).

   However, what is not so often stated is that individuals have very few rights under this case. Housing, for example, is still at "minimum" scrutiny--judges permit nearly every housing policy, and reject every individual claim opposing housing policy. The housing case is Lindsey v. Normet.

   The real struggle going on now is to remove the scrutiny regime and move on to the maintenance regime. The scrutiny regime says policy is Constitutional as long as it has a "rational relation to a legitimate government purpose. " The maintenance regime says that policy is Constitutional as long as it maintains important facts. The difference is individually enforceable rights. Both sides in this "elite" debate, opposing expanding individually enforceable rights.

   Even public opinion is vacillating. Public opinion has resisted concluding that, for example, housing is in the same Constitutional league as

   Posted by jrysk at 07/05/2009 @ 1:58pm

3. A recession has its own momentum and it takes time to change it but things have to be done to at least allow that change to occur. Passing a grotesque "cap-n-tax" bill tells the market and businesses that this government is not interested in free market economic activity and the result will be prolonging the recession and increasing unemployment. Given the left-wing feed frenzy in progress, positive "change" will probably have to wait until the next election cycle. Sometimes it takes a 2x4 between the eyes to get your attention.

   Posted by pyeatte at 07/05/2009 @ 2:44pm

4. With the exception of a few sentences and annointing the Steelworkers' union as job-producing magicians , Nichols sounds almost HAPPY!

   One blurb caught my eyes and perhaps Loonies here can fill in the gap. Nichols stated: "the $787 billion stimulus plan...was weighted down with tax cuts for the wealthy".

   Can someone point out what "tax cuts for the wealthy" that escaped my attention? NOTE: I'm NOT "wealthy" but is closer to it than `poor'!

   Posted by Happy at 07/05/2009 @ 3:07pm

5. Oops, forgot one of my favorite `calling card'.....

   Time is my friend! Everything falling in place.....as we foresaw and as Magic planned....too bad the independents and conservatives Dems didn't want to read our memos.....but heartily gobbled down the MSM's free thrills!

   Posted by Happy at 07/05/2009 @ 3:09pm

6. It will be a good show to see what happens in California and New York........as they are in the advanced phases of Obamanomics and regulatory & union-stranglehold Purgatory.

   Posted by Happy at 07/05/2009 @ 3:12pm

7. Happy-California was having problems long before Obama took office.It is impossible to be in the advanced stages of Obama economics since Obama has not been in office long enough to have anything be advanced.It takes awhile for a presidents economic plans to take effect and one would think that you would know that since you declare yourself to be the expert when it comes to economics.

   Posted by i'm nobody at 07/05/2009 @ 3:27pm

8. happy, government paralysis is not something limited to commie democrats. to use those states budgets crisises as an example of liberal failings is absurd to say the very least. to understand whats happening in those states i think the best comparision is to the united states government under its first constitution. the articles of confederation. they had no ability to levy taxes and hardly any power to make federal decisions which made for a weak government that couldnt pay it debts or provide and went into a crisis of inflation. the point is, these state governments have been suffocated by an inability to increase taxes or borrow money(a.k.a run a deficit) for various political and systemic reasons and as a result can't cover their debts. these are very deeprooted problems and aren't the fault of any political party, just a reality we have to deal with.

   Posted by nathantankus at 07/05/2009 @ 3:37pm

9. this is in reference to the troy davis story. I am not sure if he has done all of his appeals or not and I am not really sure what are the procedures of your trying to get him another trial. But I do know a little bit about law for I am currently pursuing a degree/career in law. I myself have been to the penitentary and I know some of the best(awesome) penitentary lawyers there are. They spent 20 and 30 years working on their cases and some got off. I am friends with Geraldine Smith the first woman in the state of Illinois to be given the death penalty and the first to come off of death row in Illinois before they stopped all executions. So.... I have a little bit of knowledge and I want to share some with you for troy. The first thing he needs to do is tally up the hours that his attorney who was on his case defending him at the time he was given the death penalty. If the hours do not match up with the kind of case troy had then that is reason for a new trial in the supreme courts. I know a guy who had life and when he tallied up his time spent with his attorney it was 26 hours and that was not enough time for a case of his magnitude and he got a new trial and his time was cut to around 50 something years. He was let go because he had served almost half of that time so he got time considered served. second he needs to take a look at that same attorney's work load and see if they were overloaded and unable to give troy the type of attention needed for a trial with charges that carried the death penalty. These are just a few of the matters I would like to address to whomever is covering this story and tell them to pass it on to whoever needs to know I am assuming Troy's family members and attorney's.It is imperative that he exhaust every option with intellegence

   Posted by micavbattle at 07/05/2009 @ 3:40pm

10. I'm, I know you're smarter than your 3:27pm post....feigning stupididty? You do that well w/lrjones, feigning stupididty that is, but you need to try harder to convince me....LOL!

    Fiscal crisis tarnishes Golden State's image

    Carla Marinucci, Chronicle Political Writer

    Sunday, July 5, 2009

    The optimistic, golden-glow appeal that symbolizes California is enshrined in the state's official seal - an elegant icon starring Minerva, the Roman goddess of wisdom, surrounded by bounties of food and natural wealth, and the Gold Rush motto: "Eureka!" More News

    But it seems the state has lost its way, with Minerva getting mugged by California's multibillion-dollar deficit, billions of dollars in IOUs to cover debt, financial mismanagement, legislative constipation and warring special interests.

    California's current fiscal troubles are not only beginning to define the place - but turning it into a late-night comedy routine punch line. Jay Leno ribbed that the state motto is now closer to "Welcome to California ... now available on eBay!"....

    =============

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=

    /c/a/2009/07/05/MNSD18HAT0.DTL

    Posted by Happy at 07/05/2009 @ 3:41pm

11. .....these state governments have been suffocated by an inability to increase taxes or borrow money(a.k.a run a deficit) for various political and systemic reasons and as a result can't cover their debts....

    Posted by nathantankus at 07/05/2009 @ 3:37pm

    You may not believe me, but I really hope you Libs attempt to `solve' Calif and New York's problem by increasing taxes, say doubling them.....

    Yep, those two state's problems are that taxes aren't high enough. I'll buy it as long as you Libs control those two states.

    Posted by Happy at 07/05/2009 @ 3:45pm

12. Happy-The prop 8 vote in California should have given you folks a clue,but it did not.California is not that liberal or prop 8 would have passed.Your views on the economy are quite simplistic and you just want to blame libs,but are forgetting that there are conservative states that are having problems and that no state is controlled by just one group..You are,also,forgetting that the GOP was in the white house for the last 8 years.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/05/2009 @ 3:58pm

13. Posted by i'm nobody at 07/05/2009 @ 3:58pm forgetting isn't the right term. intentionally ignoring is.

    Posted by nathantankus at 07/05/2009 @ 4:05pm

14. Happy-I noticed that you did not address my points,but went for the juvenile put down,like some of you are so famous for doing.You believe that if you respond with a childish put down that the person will then not confront you and ask that you back up your views with a fact rather than the generalized and meaningless nonsense that you guys post.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/05/2009 @ 4:06pm

15. Happy-Please,explain how these states can be in the advanced stages of a Obama's economic policies when those policies are new?

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/05/2009 @ 4:08pm

16. nathan-I was trying to give them the benefit of the doubt and was allowing them to pretend that they forgot.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/05/2009 @ 4:10pm

17. Please,explain how these states can be in the advanced stages of a Obama's economic policies when those policies are new?

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/05/2009 @ 4:08pm

    Simple answer: Look at list of high-tax, high-regulation states and see if they coorelate w/high unemployment and huge deficits!

    What does Magic want?

    I don't have the patience of lrjones to edumycate you....when you're feigning, or maybe you're not and are truly learning-resistant, ignorance.

    Posted by Happy at 07/05/2009 @ 4:19pm

18. Today's Hou. Chronicle had an article estimating that by 2030, the CapandDie bill will cost Texas alone, somewhere in the neighborhood of 600k jobs....ok, so we have many energy-intensive refineries and petrochem plants...

    =========================

    Green nonsense

    The 'cap and trade' bill would cost much and deliver little

    Sunday, July 05, 2009

    By Jack Kelly, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

    An unusually cold winter (it snowed in Saudi Arabia and Iraq; temperatures fell to minus 80 degrees in Siberia) was followed by an unusually cool spring (it snowed in North Dakota in June for the first time in 60 years).

    This may be why only 42 percent of respondents in a Rasmussen poll published June 18 think human activity is causing global warming, and many of those who do don't see it as a serious problem. (In a Gallup poll in March, warming ranked last among eight environmental concerns.)

    "Global temperatures have declined -- extending the current downtrend to 11 years with a particularly rapid decline in 2007-2008," said a draft report written in March by an expert at the Environmental Protection Agency.

    You haven't heard much about this report because the Obama administration is blocking its disclosure. The Competitive Enterprise Institute obtained a copy and put it on its Web site June 25....

    http://post-gazette.com/pg/09186/981471-373.stm#ixzz0KQFCjsDJ&D

    Posted by Happy at 07/05/2009 @ 4:25pm

19. Posted by jrysk at 07/05/2009 @ 1:58pm

    Makes about as much sense to me as Palin's worldwiew

    Posted by A_Pax_On_Your_Houses at 07/05/2009 @ 4:25pm

20. Happy-In haven't had any discussions with LRJones lately nor can he educate me and neither can you which is why you,once again,went for the juvenile put down rather than backing up your claims of brilliance.Nor were you able to back up your claim that those states are in the advanced stages of Obama's economic policies, as you stated.You only showed that you do not know what the word "advanced" means while claiming to be brilliant just as LRjones does not know what the word "shortly" means in the very first sentence of the book of Revelations while claiming to be brilliant..Yep,you guys sure are smart and I wish that I had no idea what "advanced" or "shortly" means so I can be as smart as you two.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/05/2009 @ 4:26pm

21. Hey, absolute proof of AGW.....NYC having the coolest June in over 50 years:

    THIS JUNE IS TIED FOR THE 8TH COOLEST ON RECORD. THE AVERAGE TEMPERATURE WAS 67.5...3.7 DEGREES BELOW NORMAL...WHICH ALSO OCCURRED IN 1897.

    THIS WAS THE COOLEST JUNE SINCE 1958...WHEN THE AVERAGE TEMPERATURE WAS 67.2 DEGREES.

    BELOW AVERAGE TEMPERATURES OCCURRED ON 23 OUT OF 30 DAYS THIS JUNE...OR 75 PERCENT OF THE MONTH.

    CENTRAL PARK HAS NOT HIT 90 DEGREES IN THE MONTH OF JUNE THIS YEAR. THE LAST TIME THIS OCCURRED WAS BACK IN 1996.

    CENTRAL PARK HAS NOT HIT 85 DEGREES IN THE MONTH OF JUNE THIS YEAR. THE LAST TIME THIS OCCURRED WAS BACK IN 1916. THIS HAS ONLY OCCURRED 2 OTHER TIMES...1903 AND 1886.

    Posted by Happy at 07/05/2009 @ 4:31pm

22. Pravda read our memos!

    From: http://news.scotsman.com/world/Obama-assured-of-a-chilly.5429112.jp

    Russian news agency Pravda was less than subtle in an editorial summing up the Obama administration, headlined: "Obama: Deceiver, cheat, swindler, liar, fraudster, con-artist."

    Posted by Happy at 07/05/2009 @ 4:35pm

23. "Obama: Deceiver, cheat, swindler, liar, fraudster, con-artist." i dont see how this differentiates him from any other president in history.

    Posted by nathantankus at 07/05/2009 @ 4:44pm

24. Obama's Statist Ambitions

    by Gene Healy

    This article appeared in the DC Examiner on June 30, 2009.

    "I am a firm believer in the power of the free market," President Obama told the Wall Street Journal recently. The "irony" surrounding his public image as a collectivist, the president insisted, was that "I actually would like to see a relatively light touch when it comes to the government."

    Either Obama is as confused about the definition of irony...or he was being disingenuous. Given the president's ambitious, state-bloating agenda and longtime disdain for free enterprise, the latter is more likely the case.

    ....The president is hell-bent on further extending government control over Americans' health care, and the administration-backed cap and trade bill that passed the House Friday, would, among other things, create a national building code. A "light touch," indeed....

    Posted by Happy at 07/05/2009 @ 5:03pm

25. happy-You do not know what "advanced" means so are you sure that you know what "irony" means?

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/05/2009 @ 5:09pm

26. Happy-When you connect a presidents name to the word economic,like you did,that means that you are referring to that particular presidents economic policies and not to policies that you think may be similar nor did you say that you thought that those two states may have similar policies.You linked their problems to Obama and his policies and then tried to claim that I'm ignorant for knowing that Obama has not been around long enough for his policies to have caused their problems since they had problems prior to Obama taking office.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/05/2009 @ 5:44pm

27. Well here we go again why does everyone expect immediate results this hole we are in took years to create, to expect it to be resolved overnight is a sign of just how clueless those anally retentive protagonists are.

    To those who actually believe capitalism will cure this read Shock Doctrine by Klein, the economic doctrines of Milton Friedman and his students (Rumsfeld was one of the Chicago Boys) have been proving to be the best friend of greedy industrialists and dictators for a reason privatizing /stealing the democratic society's blind.

    Continuing this recession / depression is just another mechanism for capitalists to create more confusion so they can hijack our economy.

    Banking interests can cure this economy but the price of allowing their lucrative mortgage contracts to be refinanced to increase VOC is to much to ask so we see bailouts for the financial institutions and the bending-over for the rest of the country.

    Jobless rates is where this post started question why haven't the "shovel ready projects been funded - because the same witless pinheads who rubber stamped all of the programs that created this mess are now suddenly cost conscience.

    Time to take the bull by the horns and do whatever it takes to create VOC and get this economy moving, hell we went to the moon on less, came forth for the greater good to get through WWII and now we're hijacked by greedy capitalists!

    Maybe the lesson of the French Revolution wasn't such a bad idea!

    Posted by dycel8r at 07/05/2009 @ 6:05pm

28. Bush made a lot of things a lot worse... and his 'followers' defiantly have declared immunity from their due responsibility for these resulting infernos by focusing their attention (and 'hopefully' everybody else's) on Barak's 'not so coincidental' appearance in the White House... and preventing logical practical rescue courses from being taken in order to salvage a little remaining luster in GWB's rapidly tarnishing legacy.

    Who cares if it works or not... we've got to get busy making a decent place out of this mess...

    I am confident that Obama will 'get down to business' here in the trenches of America's worst hours... but I think it is wise for him to be reinstilling global confidence in America's once outstanding moral fiber... and shoring up the entire global economic superstructure to prevent a complete world-wide collapse of investment and commerce was a nice touch...;^)

    But I agree with you on this one, John... remembering what Clinton said back in '92... that most Americans were only 'one pay check away' from potential disaster... well... now we all can look back on that as being 'the flush times'...;^)

    I'm not copathetic with this "Americans are hurting" pseudo-emphottic-mode social aswagering... in fact... it's galling me good.

    We're not hurting... we've been taken down by a series of illegal punches... in broad day-light... and through the stars still swimming through our visual synapses, we have been forced to sit idle and watch... while the 'powers that be' take care of their own.

    I'll say it again.

    Mr. President... the American People need some special attention right now.

    Emphasis on "right now".

    Posted by ttr at 07/05/2009 @ 6:28pm

29. The righties today are bringing new heft, breadth and scope to terms that per usual capture their essence, for example:

    VAPID and DAFT and OBTUSE

    Guess, all things considered, it's good for them that at least they're what they call "happy."

    Posted by winyahn at 07/05/2009 @ 6:50pm

30. there are conservative states that are having problems and that no state is controlled by just one group..You are,also,forgetting that the GOP was in the white house for the last 8 years.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/05/2009 @ 3:58pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    And the Demoncrats controlled congress exploding the national deficit exponentially for those two years over the prior 6 yrs!!! You forgot that!

    Here are the 10 states in the worst budget shape measured by the ratio of deficit to general fund, cited by CNBC.

    Highest Estimate of 2010 Deficit Percent of General Fund

    1. Nevada $1.2 billion 32 percent

    2. New York $17.65 billion 31.9 percent

    3. Alaska $1.35 billion 30 percent

    4. Arizona $3.0 billion 28.2 percent

    5. Florida $6.0 billion 27 percent

    6. California $24.79 billion 22.3 percent

    7. Vermont $238 million 21.5 percent

    8. Connecticut $3.968 billion 21.4 percent

    9. Illinois $7.29 billion 21.2 percent

    10. New Jersey $7.15 billion 20 percent

    Oh yea, It is intresting alrighty!

    Looks like lots of CHANGE (only in the right pocket)for the taxpayers, but darn little hope and NO JOBS, and few new businesses or industry!!!

    Posted by BigPasture at 07/05/2009 @ 7:09pm

31. Posted by Happy at 07/05/2009 @ 4:25pm

    You can't win with this mob Happy. The AGW levers, in the hands of believers, are a bit like the economic levers Obama is playing around with. They are not connected to anything at the other end.

    Posted by lrjones4 at 07/05/2009 @ 7:39pm

32. Bring back Cheney-Bush and launch Shock & Awe II on TAY-ran!

    Posted by winyahn at 07/05/2009 @ 7:45pm

33. big pasture-I did not forget that the democrats controlled congress and have been critical of them just as I am critical of most politicians which I have expressed on here numerous times and I blame them all unlike your partisan self who only finds ways to blame demoncrats while claiming to be an independent.Of course,I'm the independent and not you.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/05/2009 @ 7:47pm

34. lrjones-First Happy will have to figure out how a new presidents economic policies caused states to start to fail before he got into office before Happy can win with any crowd.Happy says that you can educate us so please explain how Obamanomics caused California to have problems even though Obama was not in office when California started to have their problems?

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/05/2009 @ 7:51pm

35. lrjones-More conservative states,also,started to have problems prior to Obama taking office so can you educate us poor dummies as to how Obamanomics caused those conservative states to have economic problems prior to Obama taking office.Happy said he could explain this stuff,but did not have the time..

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/05/2009 @ 7:55pm

36. This is "Bloody Thursday" commemorating the six union members killed in the July 5, 1934 San Francisco maritime strike of sailors & longshoremen, which turned into a citywide general strike.

    West coast ports from the Canadian to the Mexican border close every July 5 in honor of this history making event in the annuls of organized labor.

    Now after 70 years there is at least one non-union maritime firm operating on the Embaradero.

    Beware Americans, if this economic downturn is used to further union busting.

    Posted by Sorelish at 07/05/2009 @ 8:13pm

37. The Embarcadero is the pier area of the waterfront.

    Posted by Sorelish at 07/05/2009 @ 8:34pm

38. From the BLS, on the top 5 for Joblessness:

    47 CALIFORNIA 11.5

    48 RHODE ISLAND 12.1

    48 SOUTH CAROLINA 12.1

    50 OREGON 12.4

    51 MICHIGAN 14.1

    Note any commonality among these top-tier `performers'? All went BLUE!

    Ask me if I am sorry for the BLUE voters!

    Posted by Happy at 07/05/2009 @ 8:56pm

39. The Embarcadero is the pier area of the waterfront.

    Posted by Sorelish at 07/05/2009 @ 8:34pm

    You're off your rockers! It's not the "pier area". It's a huge complex of offices, a Hyatt Regency, retail, etc....it's near the piers as damn near everything is on East and North sides of SF.

    Posted by Happy at 07/05/2009 @ 9:00pm

40. ....why does everyone expect immediate results this hole we are in took years to create, to expect it to be resolved overnight....

    Posted by dycel8r at 07/05/2009 @ 6:05pm

    Maybe because Your Messiah, The One, told YOU?

    Have you had the courage to go track down the projected UNemployment curve WITH and WITHOUT the Pork Bill, that was part of the `song and dance' your Magic man used to grab $787 Billion to payoff his buddies?

    Hint: You won't find it in the NYT....scrubbed!

    Posted by Happy at 07/05/2009 @ 9:05pm

41. You can't win with this mob Happy....They are not connected to anything at the other end.

    Posted by lrjones4 at 07/05/2009 @ 7:39pm

    It wouldn't be nearly as entertaining if "win with this mob"!

    By 2011/12, there will still be 20% of Americans who will say Magic needs more time, more `stimulus' packages, more wealth-spreading, more regulations, more Green subsidies, more unions, more healthcare, more illegal immigrants, more pennies to tomato pickers......to bring back prosperity......that we just need to spend more and go into debt more.

    Posted by Happy at 07/05/2009 @ 9:11pm

42. Happy/LRJones-There is nothing to win on here.Where did you get the idea that there was?Just because you proclaim yourselves to be brilliant and right does not mean that you are brilliant or right.It just means that you have a partisan opinion that most on your side of the fence have just like the other side has similar views.Of course,history teaches that trying to govern based on having only views from one side of the fence does not work out well and,typically,leads to totalitarian rule.That is why I prefer the more moderate and middle ground and have views that cross partisan lines.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/05/2009 @ 9:49pm

43. From WSJ Online:

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124684183990798403.html

    JULY 6, 2009

    Minimum-Wage Increase Comes at a Bad Time for Weakened Job Market

    By KRIS MAHER

    The federal minimum wage goes up this month just as job losses are sending new alarms about the economy, giving traction to perennial fears that higher wages will hurt job creation......

    ==========================

    Before worrying about job creation, shouldn't there be more worries about some of the 10 million workers making a dollar or so above or below the new Min. Wage ($7.25), actually LOSING their jobs or having their hours cut, as their small-biz employers try to keep total labor cost the same while the Min. wage shoots up by 11%????

    Posted by Happy at 07/05/2009 @ 9:50pm

44. Happy-You have plenty of time to post so,please,explain how Obamanomics caused these states to have problems even though they had those problems prior to Obama taking office.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/05/2009 @ 9:53pm

45. You have plenty of time to post so,please,explain how Obamanomics caused these states to have problems even though they had those problems prior to Obama taking office.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/05/2009 @ 9:53pm

    I'd prefer to spend my time edumycating the masses rather than just you....you're beyond post-HOPE and CHANGE.....LMAO!

    Posted by Happy at 07/05/2009 @ 9:58pm

46. Posted by Happy at 07/05/2009 @ 8:56pm

    South Carolina went red. I know 'cause I live amongst these morons.

    Yee-haw.

    Posted by Malcontent at 07/05/2009 @ 10:10pm

47. Happy-In other words,you figured out that Obamanomics cannot possibly have anything to do with it,but your ego prevents you from admitting that since Obama was not even in office at the time the problems got started. Instead you decided to stroke your ego and claim that you can educate the masses.I'm not surprised,however,that you responded with the put down because that is what you, and others,do when you cannot defend your statements.The LMAO was quite juvenile as are your weak attempts at put downs and if put downs are the best that you can do then put effort into trying come up with a good one rather these weak ones.It's bad enough that you can only ape Rush with your Magic messiah nonsense,but put effort into your put downs.Show us some evidence of your self proclaimed brilliance so we can decide if you can educate the masses.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/05/2009 @ 10:15pm

48. Slaps

    I'm talking about the maritime industry. The broad boulevard is also called the Embarcadero. Look up the meaning in Spanish.

    You're confusing land with water, duffus. Read the post. Hotels, restaurants & souvenir shops are not the maritime business.

    Btw, I only lived within blocks of the Embarcadero for years.

    Posted by Sorelish at 07/05/2009 @ 10:18pm

49. The article made the point of the clueless economic team and that is indeed the problem. These people are so disconnected from the reality of what has happened to America and for that matter what to do about it if they did recognize it. There is such a huge hole in the economy it's pathetic. I have come to the conclusion it is in part their ages. They really have no idea of what America once was and if it isn't age it's because they have lived in a bubble their whole life and cannot see the difference. But just as Carter took the economic chaos left by Nixon and for a while had it turned around dropping the 11,5 % inflation rate to 6.5% only to have it go back up to 12%. It was only a matter of time before the bankers got to him and he overturned usury laws that now has America buried in debt. The problem is these bankers really have no concern for this country only their pockets. I'm reminded of Greenspans "only mistake" that he thought the bankers would regulate themselves. A guy as old as he is should be a bit smarter. The problem; as was noted in the recent Rolling Stones magazine, is the control the banks and other special interest groups have over Government policy and it's not going away any time soon, too many of of the politicians have been bought and paid for.

    Posted by ROinReno at 07/05/2009 @ 10:23pm

50. Now after 70 years there is at least one non-union maritime firm operating on the Embaradero.

    Posted by Sorelish at 07/05/2009 @ 8:13pm

    "Embaradero"? And I'm confused?

    And just how important is the so-called "maritime business" in SF today vs. the real Embarcadero businesses?

    Posted by Happy at 07/05/2009 @ 10:29pm

51. Happy-Did you get your opinions about Obamanomics and how they caused economic problems prior to Obamas coming into office from Pravda,also?

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/05/2009 @ 10:41pm

52. Posted by Happy at 07/05/2009 @ 10:29pm

    Knew a longshoreman who carried a cargo hook in his back pocket while imbibing in his favorite North Beach watering hole.

    Lucky you were down at the tourist hotel while visiting SF else you'd be offered a "piercing"; a cargo hook through the cheeks of your ass.

    Posted by Sorelish at 07/05/2009 @ 10:58pm

53. "I'd prefer to spend my time edumycating the masses rather than just you...."

    Posted by Happy at 07/05/2009 @ 9:58pm

    Translation: I have no coherent answer to your direct and explicit question.

    Posted by Malcontent at 07/05/2009 @ 11:01pm

54. all this nonsense about republicans versus democrats....

    hmmmm......

    ¿coke or pepsi?

    how dare you!?

    everybody knows we have:

    Coca-Cola · New Coke · Caffeine-Free Coca-Cola · Coca-Cola Cherry · Coca-Cola with Lime · Coca-Cola Vanilla · Coca-Cola Citra · Coca-Cola Black Cherry Vanilla · Coca-Cola Blāk · Coca-Cola with Lemon · Coca-Cola Raspberry Diet Diet Coke/Coke Light · Coca-Cola C2 · Coca-Cola Zero · Coca-Cola Cherry Zero · Coca-Cola Light Sango · Diet Coke Plus · Coca-Cola Orange

    and

    Pepsi · Crystal Pepsi · Pepsi Blue · Pepsi Free · Pepsi Twist · Pepsi Raw (Pepsi Natural)

    Diet Pepsi · Jazz Diet Pepsi · Pepsi Max (outside North America) · (Diet) Pepsi Max (North America only) · Pepsi ONE

    Pepsi Kaffe · Pepsi Kona

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/05/2009 @ 11:39pm

55. COCA-COLA INTRODUCES COKE MANDATORY

    Coke Mandatory, the new beverage "you'll simply have to love."

    "Yes, Coke has done it again," said Gerald Hasworth, Coca-Cola vice-president of product development. "We've taken the classic taste the whole world knows and loves and made it so irresistible, you won't be allowed to go a day without it."

    Hasworth then held up a two-liter bottle of Coke Mandatory to the assembled reporters and said, "Coke Mandatory: You'll Have No Other Option Than To Love It.™"

    Though possible repercussions for failing to meet daily Coke Mandatory consumption requirements have not been formally announced, Hasworth stressed that one 12-ounce can of Coke Mandatory per day is "essentialicious," and that those who fail to comply with minimum daily allotments "will wish they'd done as they were told."

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/05/2009 @ 11:41pm

56. hmmm....

    hey happy, ¿what happens when the arctic ice cap melts?

    where is that cold, wet air gonna go?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/05/2009 @ 11:42pm

57. obama is disposable. (metaphorically: relax nsa)

    just ask the folks at goldman sachs.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/05/2009 @ 11:43pm

58. whoa!

    "In the clearest signal yet that we are still in a potentially devastating global deflationary spiral, The Riksbank, Sweden's central bank and the world's oldest central bank, has effectively cut interest rates to minus 0.25% and has started a program of quantitative easing a.k.a printing money. These are the most dramatic moves yet by a major central bank and will be watched the world over for signs of success or failure."

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/05/2009 @ 11:55pm

59. BIDEN: The truth is, we and everyone else misread the economy. The figures we worked off of in January were the consensus figures and most of the blue chip indexes out there.

    not everybody, mr. biden.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/05/2009 @ 11:58pm

60. Obama will be disposed of just as soon as his usefulness -- mainly symbolic -- fades under pressure of realities, e.g. continuous high unemployment. The real govt -- as represented by its reps (e.g. Summers, Geithner, Gates et al) will continue to care for its own (1% of Americans thereabouts) at the great expense of the vast majority. If this requires allowing a real challenge to Obama in '12, so what. He's disposable. An op multibillionaire Bloomberg is assiduously preparing for, to present himself The Great Manager who'll show Americans how to be blessed again. They won't be of course, but that won't matter to the real govt, who for quite some time have become accustomed to being cared for "right now," e.g. TARPs.

    Posted by sloper at 07/06/2009 @ 12:06am

61. Posted by frosty zoom at 07/05/2009 @ 11:39pm

    You forgot- Deep-fried Coke. Coming to a county fair near you!

    Posted by twillie at 07/06/2009 @ 12:26am

62. Posted by twillie at 07/06/2009 @ 12:26am

    That'll keep the stack of your double-wide smokin'.

    Posted by Sorelish at 07/06/2009 @ 12:33am

63. I blame them all unlike your partisan self who only finds ways to blame demoncrats while claiming to be an independent.Of course,I'm the independent and not you.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/05/2009 @ 7:47pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    I am an Independent , but it is totally "unnecessary" and redundant for me to discuss any missteps taken by Republicans;

    1. All the leftist marxist posting here spend 100% of their time finding nothing but fault ,even falsely ,with the Repubs., the U.S.A., and misrepresenting and interputing the Constitution and laws of the U.S.A. specifically intent based on revisionist history.

    2. hardly any fault is found with the perverted cultural and social policies and socialistic authoritarian attitudes of the Demoncrats.

    3. Pelosi has turned 100+yrs. of house rules and ethics upsidedown allowing NO Republican input, bills, or even allowing the American Public or the Repubs. any input or foreknowledge of legislation etc. the Demoncrats will vote on!

    4. the Obamnation administration is the most controlling non-transparent administration EVER seen out side of FDR's and he was fighting a WWII on two fronts! No citisism, opposition media, or another unfavorable information is allowed to reach the general public as HE and his henchmen control the media! NO FREE PRESS that is unfavorable is allowed!

    Posted by BigPasture at 07/06/2009 @ 12:58am

64. Posted by BigPasture at 07/06/2009 @ 12:58am

    How would you find time to peruse a FREE PRESS when you're always listening/watching Rush & Hannity?

    You're an environmentalist & don't even know it. Savin trees & energy.

    Posted by Sorelish at 07/06/2009 @ 01:14am

65. Can someone point out what "tax cuts for the wealthy" that escaped my attention? NOTE: I'm NOT "wealthy" but is closer to it than `poor'!

    Posted by Happy at 07/05/2009 @ 3:07pm

    Hmm, have we all forgotten when you folks were trying to tells us that 400,000 people losing their jobs last year in a month wasn't a big deal.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 01:22am

66. Happy-You have plenty of time to post so,please,explain how Obamanomics caused these states to have problems even though they had those problems prior to Obama taking office.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/05/2009 @ 9:53pm

    This means he doesn't have an answer.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 01:23am

67. How would you find time to peruse a FREE PRESS when you're always listening/watching Rush & Hannity.Posted by Sorelish at 07/06/2009 @ 01:14am | ignore this person | warn this person

    I've heard of Rush as the neighbor listens to that guy, but who is the other guy? No cable or dish, so it must not be someone on the airwave digital!

    Apparently you know what I posted is true as some empty senseless insult is all you have!

    Posted by BigPasture at 07/06/2009 @ 01:36am

68. How would you find time to peruse a FREE PRESS when you're always listening/watching Rush & Hannity.Posted by Sorelish at 07/06/2009 @ 01:14am | ignore this person | warn this person

    I've heard of Rush as the neighbor listens to that guy, but who is the other guy? No cable or dish, so it must not be someone on the airwave digital!

    Apparently you know what I posted is true as some empty senseless insult is all you have!

    Posted by BigPasture at 07/06/2009 @ 01:36am | ignore this person |

    oh yes the fact that he didnt respond to your blatent propoganda bs makes you right. first of all stop calling obama a marxist, i can only pray that he took even one inkling of an idea from karl marx. he has not. he does whats good for bankers, hedge fund managers and the rich. he might tax them a bit more but they know what their in for isnt bad and thats why many put there money on him last year. the idea we dont criticize demorcarts is absurd, we do nothing but criticize them, this orginal article was democratic criticism. third its obviously bullshit that pelosi doesnt let republicans speak, you know thats a lie, just watch cspan. and finally, obama does not controll the media you moron, obama simply hasnt been in office long enough to get prolonged criticism from none fox news sources(especially since he hasnt done enough to garner criticism, except from very left wing and very right wing sources).

    Posted by nathantankus at 07/06/2009 @ 02:39am

69. Is it any surprise that this administration has so far failed to address rising unemployment in any meaningful way? Many people, although sadly too few on the left, attempted to point out that the "stimulus" bill was not really aimed at providing much actual stimulus and certainly did not focus on job-creation (despite some specious claims to the contrary).

    Also, hiring the likes of Summers and Geithner and allowing them to continue and expand up the Bush administration's cynical, corrupt policy of handing out hundreds of billions of dollars to Wall Street and other big-money interests (with no real accountability) amounts to a betrayal of the majority of Americans, who are facing increasing economic desperation.

    Additionally, most of this administration's and this congress's agendas involve making job-creation more difficult without providing much in the way of compensatory benefits (this applies, for example, to the new cap and trade bill in its deeply flawed present form).

    Last but not least, the war machine still seems to be running at high speed, wasting the lives of Americans and innocent civilians as well as diverting massive amounts of wealth from more productive (and far less bloody) uses here at home. Obama steadfastly refuses to end the Middle East misadventures and is instead determined to escalate one of them; if for no other reason, he should end the wars now before a potential economic implosion here at home forces his hand.

    With all due respect to the president, I paraphrase the Clintonian mantra: It's the economy, professor.

    Posted by feinfein at 07/06/2009 @ 02:53am

70. Well the democrats do have their hands full.. I believe pres.Obama will have economy back up by January 2010. pres.Obama has a great team supporting him and i think they'll have this whole thing figured out.. As for 2010 elections, dems are bound to lose a few house seats.. I believe the dems will gain a couple of senate seats.. I can see no reason why the GOP should be allowed to screw our country up again in teh near future..

    Posted by e4phil at 07/06/2009 @ 02:55am

71. "That's the highest level since August, 1983"--John Nichols

    Hmmmm?....wasn't that TWO YEARS AFTER...

    Reagan passed his tax cuts?!??!?!??

    Yet our right-wing friends (and some on the left) think Obama should have "fixed the economy"...in six months?

    Posted by Mask at 07/06/2009 @ 06:15am

72. I've heard of Rush as the neighbor listens to that guy, but who is the other guy? No cable or dish, so it must not be someone on the airwave digital!

    Apparently you know what I posted is true as some empty senseless insult is all you have!

    Posted by BigPasture at 07/06/2009 @ 01:36am

    Speaking of senseless insults.

    Do you seriously expect us to believe that after all the YEARS you have posted here, under various names, you still don't know who hannity is?

    I don't own a tv (other than this tv/monitor I'm viewing now, which has no antenna/cable attached to it) but there is youtube and millions of the mans quotes, right here on these blogs.

    Hell, some of the articles here are about that asshole.

    You are a true moron, or a liar.

    Posted by Malcontent at 07/06/2009 @ 06:51am

73. Posted by Malcontent at 07/06/2009 @ 06:51am

    And isn't it interesting how many right-wingers DENY "listening to Rush" ("Oh, not me, I just hear him over at my NEIGHBOR's house!")...

    but if "The Nation" posts an article on Limbaugh....they RUSH to his defense????

    Posted by Mask at 07/06/2009 @ 07:46am

74. It always bothers me that the "official" unemployment rate is always about 60% lower than the actual unemployment rate, which at the moment is 16.5%.

    I wonder how an inaccurate figure becomes "official"? Does someone who is considered official just take the actual unemployment rate and the subtract 60%?

    It seems that when you hear the word official, it almost always is contrary to the Truth.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/06/2009 @ 08:41am

75. Posted by chaoszen at 07/06/2009 @ 08:41am

    So, how do you get the additional 60%?

    Posted by Mask at 07/06/2009 @ 08:58am

76. Passing a grotesque "cap-n-tax" bill tells the market and businesses that this government is not interested in free market economic activity and the result will be prolonging the recession and increasing unemployment.Posted by pyeatte at 07/05/2009 @ 2:44pm

    That was funny. It is always a treat to get a good laugh so early in the morning, courtesy of our right wing friends.

    The cap and trade bill does stink, I will agree with that. It is a giveaway to the giant multi-nationals. But on the other hand I think the government, which is chock full of the crooks who take payola from multi-nationals, are there to ensure the continued existence of uncontrolled laissez-faire capitalism.

    So it strikes me as funny that you allude to the idea that free market economic activity is the solution to the problem.

    Since uncontrolled free market abuse was the cause of the problem in the first place.

    I notice neo-cons do that alot. Kind of like finding someone dying of Arsenic poisoning and then prescribing more Aresenic as the cure.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/06/2009 @ 08:59am

77. So, how do you get the additional 60%?Posted by Mask at 07/06/2009 @ 08:58am

    Bad math I guess. It should be 9.5% plus about 72%. Sorry my bad. I just got done driving 438 miles and am road weary. Unless you mean where did I get the 16.5% figure in the first place. Which means you want me to quote sources. I can do that but I was just trying to make a point and enjoy a beer...

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/06/2009 @ 09:12am

78. ........as they are in the advanced phases of Obamanomics and regulatory & union-stranglehold Purgatory.

    Posted by Happy at 07/05/2009 @ 3:12pm

    Actually Happ at least in the case of California I believe they are in the final death rattle of Republican obstructionism and life threatening Republican tax policies. I'm not sure about New York though.

    I would say it is a bit early to start blaming Obamanomics just yet. He has only been in office for about six months.

    But I know you like jumping the gun and blurting out all kinds of things that you don't regret later.

    Like an alcoholic without a conscience.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/06/2009 @ 09:33am

79. Posted by nathantankus at 07/05/2009 @ 3:37pm

    I'm a commie, but not a Democrat. But I still thought that was a very good post you made there..

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/06/2009 @ 09:38am

80. Posted by Happy at 07/05/2009 @ 4:31pm

    That's it Happ. Put everything in CAPS when you are really telling a winger'! That utilizes the neo-con 101 tenet of always screaming louder when you tell a lie. That tenet was adopted from the five year olds guide to excuses when fooling your parents into believing that your sister did it.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/06/2009 @ 09:53am

81. Guess, all things considered, it's good for them that at least they're what they call "happy."

    Posted by winyahn at 07/05/2009 @ 6:50pm

    Yeah, they are all just as "Happy" as recently decanted Epsilons in Aldous Huxley's "Brave New World". I wonder when Happ was decanted?

    I'm sure he is holding out on the Soma ration aswell.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/06/2009 @ 09:59am

82. Actually Happ at least in the case of California I believe they are in the final death rattle of Republican obstructionism and life threatening Republican tax policies. I'm not sure about New York though.

    I would say it is a bit early to start blaming Obamanomics just yet. He has only been in office for about six months.

    But I know you like jumping the gun and blurting out all kinds of things that you don't regret later.

    Like an alcoholic without a conscience.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/06/2009 @ 09:33am

    What a joke..

    Dems have increased spending by over 30% the past 4 years.

    The highest overall taxes in the nation

    And Republicans failure to authorize more taxes and spending is the problem?

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/06/2009 @ 10:05am

83. "Actually Happ at least in the case of California I believe they are in the final death rattle of Republican obstructionism and life threatening Republican tax policies. I'm not sure about New York though."

    Ah, yes. Straight from the Proggy playbook. If Repubs are in the majority-blame the economic woes on them. If they are in the minority- blame the economic woes on them--- as obstructionists. Consider them the "counter-revolutionaries", like in the USSR under Stalin.

    I'm laughing.

    Posted by twillie at 07/06/2009 @ 10:05am

84. "If Repubs are in the majority-blame the economic woes on them. If they are in the minority- blame the economic woes on them--- as obstructionists."---Posted by twillie at 07/06/2009 @ 10:05am

    You mean, kind of like how "Barney Frank and Chris Dodd IN THE MINORITY in 2003-2004 are responsible for the housing crises of 2008"?

    Posted by Mask at 07/06/2009 @ 10:10am

85. Posted by chaoszen at 07/06/2009 @ 09:12am

    Just a bit suspect, Dubya or Obama, of these "addtional millions of unemployed who aren't counted anymore" or whatever.

    Posted by Mask at 07/06/2009 @ 10:12am

86. Posted by frosty zoom at 07/05/2009 @ 11:39pm

    Love that post. Cracked me up. (Oops!) I'm not supposed to hit the pipe when I could crack (Oops again!) open a sparkling cold fresh can of COKE! Why imbibe in a real drug when you can feel Pepsi Free!

    I digress..

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/06/2009 @ 10:14am

87. to use those states budgets crisises as an example of liberal failings is absurd to say the very least... these are very deeprooted problems and aren't the fault of any political party, just a reality we have to deal with.

    Posted by nathantankus at 07/05/2009 @ 3:37pm

    You may be too young to remember the hyperbole from a few years back, but Liberals and Democrats were giddy with anticipation. With Democrat Governor Grey Davis at the helm and a legislature that was overwhelmingly Democrat, there were prediction that CA was going to lead the nation in wonderful, new, progressive initiatives that would stun the world.

    Conservatives were giddy, too. Predicting that CA would be bankrupt within a generation.

    It only took a decade. Here is an example:

    ******************

    http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles? article=californias_progressive_mosaic

    California's Progressive Mosaic

    Harold Meyerson | June 17, 2001

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 10:20am

88. Posted by frosty zoom at 07/05/2009 @ 11:39pm

    Actually it might be a good idea to introduce a completely new line of beverage's. You already have the product name right there in your screen name.

    "Frosty Zoom" and entirely new taste sensation!

    Better patent it quick, before this communist decides to go China on ya.. LOL.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/06/2009 @ 10:20am

89. Darin-Why would conservatives be giddy over the idea of a state going bankrupt and people suffering?

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/06/2009 @ 10:24am

90. Maybe because Your Messiah, The One, told YOU?

    Have you had the courage to go track down the projected UNemployment curve WITH and WITHOUT the Pork Bill, that was part of the `song and dance' your Magic man used to grab $787 Billion to payoff his buddies?

    Hint: You won't find it in the NYT....scrubbed!

    Posted by(slap) Happy at 07/05/2009 @ 9:05pm

    Well O-witless-one first lets set the record straight Just how much real pork is there in the $787 Bil bill the wing-nuts love to point at, the misc little $800K - 10mil projects and scream PORK these make up what 1% of the bill.

    As to paying off his buddies after gw's privatizing of government functions to award no bid contracts Obama couldn't hold a candle to the prior administrations graft. You really should read Klein's Shock Doctrine the uses unfettered capitalists used to created profit are real eye openers

    The first "Pork Bill" $700 B was created by Mr Paulsen under jr's reign to bailout the financial institutions because they "were" to big to fail of course if you and your witless friends had your way you would have let them fail and then cried about your life savings, 401k, etc disappearing because the losses would have exceeded the governments ability to cover the FDIC insurance bill.

    The "projected" numbers you want to use to justify unemployment numbers are the same used by gw's team to misrepresent the unemployment levels during their administration. The key is the small business birth to death ratio a figure that is at best a moderate guess but comes in handy if you need to manipulate the results.

    Whats with the Messiah bit you still listening to Caribou Barbie trying to equate Obama with terrorists! you reall should take your head out and let the sun shine on it hiding it there is all warm and fuzzy but the smell.

    Posted by dycel8r at 07/06/2009 @ 10:35am

91. Note any commonality among these top-tier `performers'? All went BLUE!

    Ask me if I am sorry for the BLUE voters!

    Posted by Happy at 07/05/2009 @ 8:56pm

    Hey Happ, which is the chicken and which is the egg?

    Do declining economic prospects lead voters to try to "vote themselves some economic stability"?

    Or do voters get a wild hair up thier collective assess and vote Dem, which then creates an economic crater?

    A mix? A socially liberal trend that becomes symapthetic to the left that creates a little bad economic news, that creates more Dem voters that creates more bad economic news that creates more Dem voters. Maybe voting Dem is just the result of a vicious, reinforcing economic cycle.

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 10:38am

92. republiscams....

    demoncrats..... (h/t rio, the wannabe canadian)

    folks, please wake up.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/06/2009 @ 10:40am

93. Darin-The economy did well under the democrat Clinton.I cannot find the connection that you partisan people claim exists between political party and the economy.History says that the economy can do well or go bad no matter which party has power.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/06/2009 @ 10:49am

94. Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 10:20am

    Hey Troll! Hiya! In order to really look into the crux of California's economic disaster you have to get in the wayback machine and set the date for June 6th, 1978.

    Ready? Let's go! Howard Jarvis and Paul Gann were the backers of the ballot initiative called "Peoples Initiative to Limit Property Taxation," Prop 13. It Sounded great! But it was sponsored by two ultra right wing nut (conservative Republicans) nut cases, like yourself.

    It decreased tax revenue from property taxes by about 57%.

    And it had devastating effects across the board. Especially in education.

    When Grey Davis came on board in spite of this standardized test scores increased for five straight years.

    Davis was incorrectly blamed for the dot com bubble burst and was recalled.

    Then they got Arnold. Another Repug. And the rest is disaster.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/06/2009 @ 10:51am

95. Darin-Why would conservatives be giddy over the idea of a state going bankrupt and people suffering?

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/06/2009 @ 10:24am

    I guess it's akin to "teaching them a lesson". You know the famous advice: "Be careful what you wish for. It may come true." This is the moral of many stories, that all end badly. Someone is granted a wish and it makes their lives miserable.

    This is one of the main philosophical differences between Conservatives and Liberals. Many times Conservatives will stress the importance of being "free to fail."

    I think I've said it here in a more bombastic fashion. I've said Cons believe the purpose of government is to prevent force and fraud, (technically, this is the Libertarian philosophy) and Libs believe the function of government is to protect the irresponsible for the consequences of thier actions.

    Yes, admittedly, that is hyperbole. But from a particular perspective, abortion rights, welfare for single mothers, pro-criminal legal perspectives (like this one: Posted by micavbattle at 07/05/2009 @ 3:40pm), lax drug enforcement, etc. can be viewed as irresponsible-friendly.

    Cons warned voters against voting for too much collectivism. Well, the voters of CA didn't listen. To this we can only say, "Well, you've buttered your bread, now lie in it."

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 10:52am

96. long ears......

    short ears.....

    "Reagan statue unveiled in Capitol Rotunda"

    "Kosovo Albanian sculptor Izeir Mustafa works on a statue of former President Bill Clinton in a studio in the northern Kosovo town of Podujevo, 50km (30 miles) north of Pristina on Thursday May 24, 2007. "

    www.economicexpert.com/a/Kings:of:Easter:Island.htm

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/06/2009 @ 10:52am

97. wow........

    http://www.jollyobama.com/

    stupid humans.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/06/2009 @ 10:53am

98. Darin-That is one of the reasons that I must distance myself from modern conservatives who get happy when others suffer,support and admire quitters,draft dodgers,and cowards.Old time conservatives are blessed because most are dead and do not see what you people have done to dishonor them and conservatism..

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/06/2009 @ 10:57am

99. Posted by chaoszen at 07/06/2009 @ 10:51am

    Without prop 13, CA would be in much worse shape than it is now. The job flight would have been even worse.

    I read an article today about Myspace vs. Facebook and the racial disparity. Someone has charge that whites are leaving Myspace in droves turning it into a gheto similar to the "white flight" from the cities in the '70s.

    Without Prop 13, you would have seen the socio-economic equivalent of this racial phenomenon. The productive would flee CA leaving the poorer behind to subsidize the Mexican immigrants.

    Upon reflection, I guess I can't know it would have been worse. I mean the job flight would have, but it may have hit a tipping point earlier reversing the collectivist policies earlier, but we'll never know.

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 10:58am

100. Posted by dycel8r at 07/06/2009 @ 10:35am

     Nice post dyce!

     Posted by Extraneous at 07/06/2009 @ 11:06am

101. Posted by i'm nobody at 07/06/2009 @ 10:57am

     There's an old saying. It's something like, "Experience is the only school for man. He will learn at no other."

     There are just some things you can't tell a man. He has to learn them on his own.

     Now, I don't advocate letting a toddler pull a pan of boiling water onto himself. One function of parents is to protect the child, physically, until maturity. But when it comes to life's lessons regarding responsibility, everyone has to learn some hard lessons one way or another.

     Let me reverse this. What would you have me do? Your adult son had told you about this incredible investment opportunity call network investing, that has made a 30% return every year for the last decade and he has invested every cent he has with the company.

     You know it is going to implode. You tell him, "If it's too good to be true, it probably is." "Don't put all your eggs in one basket." But. Yada, Yada, Yada" is all he hears.

     When it implodes, what do you do? Do you tap into your retirement savings to give him back everything he lost? No, you respect his liberty and allow him the freedom to fail. It is the only way people learn.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 11:07am

102. The economy did well under the democrat Clinton.Posted by i'm nobody at 07/06/2009 @ 10:49am

     Clinton was like a bomb that exploded with a delayed fuse.

     Like supposed "Welfare Reform". Free Trade crap like Nafta, Tafta and Cafta. Or how about the inspired repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act which is in large part reponsible for the current banking crisis. And his crowning acheivement the telecommunications act of 1996.

     I did like the "spatter of baby batter" though.

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/06/2009 @ 11:11am

103. Darin-That is one of the reasons that I must distance myself from modern conservatives who get happy when others suffer,

     Posted by i'm nobody at 07/06/2009 @ 10:57am

     And to be a little more clear, it's not the suffering we're happy about: it's being able to say, "I told ya so." that makes us happy.

     We veiw the suffering as an inevitable part of maturity. It's neither good nor bad: it is just a necessary part of growing.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 11:12am

104. Darin-That is one of the reasons that I must distance myself from modern conservatives who get happy when others suffer,

     Posted by i'm nobody at 07/06/2009 @ 10:57am

     And to be a little more clear, it's not the suffering we're happy about: it's being able to say, "I told ya so." that makes us happy.

     We veiw the suffering as an inevitable part of maturity. It's neither good nor bad: it is just a necessary part of growing.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 11:12am

105. One of my favorite sayings is, "Adversity builds character." Adversity isn't inherently good. But strong character is, and aversity is necessary.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 11:15am

106. Darin-Everyone views suffering as part of life,but you guys delight in it just so you can say "I told you so".Old time conservatives would rather be proven to be wrong than to watch people suffer just so they could say "I told you so".Suffering is always bad even if it is part of life and,often,suffering ends life..

     Posted by i'm nobody at 07/06/2009 @ 11:19am

107. '...During the fall campaign, Obama relentlessly criticized his Republican opponent, Sen. John McCain, for declaring, "The fundamentals of our economy are strong." Obama's team painted the veteran senator as out of touch and failing to grasp the challenges facing the country.

     But on Sunday, that optimistic message came from economic adviser Christina Romer. When asked during an appearance on NBC's "Meet the Press" if the fundamentals of the economy were sound, she replied: "Of course they are sound."...' -- 15 March, 2009 -- NBC news -- http://www.nbc sandiego .com/news/us_world/Obama-Aide- Economy-Is-Fundamentally- Sound-.html

     Posted by HonestLiberal at 07/06/2009 @ 11:24am

108. Darin-Actually,few people learn by failing and will continue to be themselves.Most people promote ideas that history has shown to fail,but continue to support those things,anyway.

     Posted by i'm nobody at 07/06/2009 @ 11:25am

109. Addition to quote library!

     '...the annuls of organized labor...' -- Posted by Sorelish at 07/05/2009 @ 8:13pm

     Posted by HonestLiberal at 07/06/2009 @ 11:32am

110. sound?

     i can hear a pin drop.

     Posted by frosty zoom at 07/06/2009 @ 11:34am

111. Old time conservatives would rather be proven to be wrong than to watch people suffer just so they could say "I told you so".

     Posted by i'm nobody at 07/06/2009 @ 11:19am

     Name one.

     Name one old time conservative that would like to be proven wrong. Name one that would like it proven to them that fathers are unnecessary; that thrift and sobriety are unnecessary; that God doesn't exist; that there is nothing wrong with having hundreds of sexual partners; that you can tax a man at 95% and he will contintue to be as productive as when you tax him a 25%; that the govenment can take his guns away because it doesn't matter whether or not he can defend his family.

     Name one.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 11:38am

112. Seeing a lot of comment on California's financial woes here lets review the history of this problem.

     First Gov Wilson runs an intense campaign to "De-regulate energy" claiming it will create competition and reduce costs. Side bar to bill required all Calif energy Co to sell off their energy producing facility's or power transmission interests.

     Sen Gramm & Mrs. Gramm's (headed the economics bureau of the Federal Trade Commission's Division of Consumer Protection, then on the board of Enron) involvement w/ Commodities Futures Modernization Act 2000 opens the door to create the infamous Enron Loophole.

     http://www.consortiumnews.com/2008/051908a. html

     California's energy market is manipulated by Enron to the tune of $42 Billion the Bush administration refuses to look into the issue, after the courts the final figure outstanding was $28 Billion.

     Gray Davis inherits financial disaster is discredited because of his inability to resolve financial woes, leads to recall election w/ Arnold Schwarzenegger.

     Gov Schwarzenegger's support of special interests, and refusal to raise income taxes and the voters support of infrastructure and school bonds results in massive debt.

     Gov attempts to resolve financial problems by unorthodox means.

     Attempting to accessing the funds of the Public Employees Retirement Fund failed was sounded voted down, latest ventures were ballot propositions to allow state to access / hold back funds from schools, lottery, etc without providing any source of revenue to replace funding, final results if passed would be more sales taxes, special property taxes, etc.

     There are serious rumors of another recall election floating around here in California. Even though Gov Schwarzenegger's not responsible for the current situation here his partisan resolutions to the issues have failed to resolve the issues here.

     Posted by dycel8r at 07/06/2009 @ 11:39am

113. The economy did well under the democrat Clinton.Posted by i'm nobody at 07/06/2009 @ 10:49am

     To be fair, I said, "too much collectivism" and not "Democrat". Clinton's most ambitious project of collectivism went down in flames (health care).

     Beyond that, welfare reform was anti-collectivst and his only "achievement" a 10% increase in the top rates was modest.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 11:42am

114. Old time conservatives would rather be proven to be wrong than to watch people suffer just so they could say "I told you so".

     Posted by i'm nobody at 07/06/2009 @ 11:19am

     And agian, it's not just to say I told you so. We believe we know how the world works and we tell people when we think thier actions will ultimately hurt them.

     If your friend makes a habit of driving drunk. Are you happy when he gets a DWI? Well, it's better than killing himself and other innocents. And if it stops his irresponsible behavior, ultimately it's a good thing. Wouldn't it have been better if your friend had listend to the Conservatives: "Don't drink and drive"?

     What if you found out your brother-in-law is cheating on your sister and having an affair. Wouldn't it have been better if he had listened to the Conservatives: "Don't have affairs"?

     My first preference is for people not to have affairs. If they don't listen to my advice, I hope they get caught so as to end the damage as quickly as possible.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 11:52am

115. Darin-Why would conservatives be giddy over the idea of a state going bankrupt and people suffering?

     Posted by i'm nobody at 07/06/2009 @ 10:24am

     While no conservatives are "giddy" about California's bankruptcy, we do look at this as the only opportunity to restructure all of the union contracts and boondoggle spending of the leftist Dems that created this mess.

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/06/2009 @ 11:56am

116. Posted by dycel8r at 07/06/2009 @ 11:39am

     Thanks for posting the things that I missed. But there are more. California's economic mess is quite convoluted. And not entirely the result of any particular party. They are in many ways related to the Intiative/Proposition form of government and have been for many years. The idea sounds good on the surface. Kind of like a popular vote gone wild.

     It entrusts decisions on important issues to essentially an ill-educated and politically naive population that is easily confused by political catch phrases and misleading information.

     If you take the average citizen and present an initiative like "The no more tax on anyone act or anything act." The ignorant will hoist a beer and say "Woohoo!" That is until the chickens come home to roost. Then they say "BooHoo!"

     And rush to blame anyone but themselves. This is human nature. But an honest and moral political system will not allow this sort of rule by ignorance.

     I stress the word "honest".

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/06/2009 @ 11:58am

117. South Carolina went red. I know 'cause I live amongst these morons.

     Yee-haw.

     Posted by Malcontent at 07/05/2009 @ 10:10pm | ignore this person | warn this person

     howdy neighbor...

     Posted by ibbleblibble at 07/06/2009 @ 11:58am

118. Darin-My dad is one who had conservative views when it came to economic matters,but would not care if some liberals economic ideas work and would be happy that they did and that is true of most conservatives in his generation.The subject is ones views on economic matters and not God and guns,but if it could be proven that God did not exist then my dad would have accepted that.He was not big on guns and did not believe that people needed them for self defense and kept his hunting weapons unusable because he knew that we kids would kill each other with them and was more concerned with that.Many old time conservatives screwed around with more than one person and not all were sober.

     Posted by i'm nobody at 07/06/2009 @ 11:59am

119. While no conservatives are "giddy" about California's bankruptcy, we do look at this as the only opportunity to restructure all of the union contracts and boondoggle spending of the leftist Dems that created this mess.

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/06/2009 @ 11:56am

     Uh, Larry. The cause of the "mess" in California can easily be laid at the doorstep of conservatives. The sordid tax policies designed to bankrupt the state and demolish public education and labor were for the most part a Republican disinformation campaign.

     Although like I said before the trouble is not entirely a result of Republican policies. The weak wishy washy Democrats also have a stake in the current crisis.

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/06/2009 @ 12:11pm

120. Darin-My dad. Posted by i'm nobody at 07/06/2009 @ 11:59am

     For a second there, I thought Darin was your Dad. Whew! The thought of some Troll actually producing progeny temporarily terrified me. I was sure that any aberration of the human genome would certainly be sterile. Thank the God's!

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/06/2009 @ 12:17pm

121. antisocialis-Darin said he was giddy about it and Happy,Rush and others seem to be happy about it,also and are gloating.I'm afraid that no one group can be blamed for California's and the rest of the countries problems.This was a group effort and failure and the group needs to get together and solve the problems and stop the finger pointing.Neither sides views will work and we must take the best ideas from both sides and try to get things working,but that will not happen.

     Posted by i'm nobody at 07/06/2009 @ 12:22pm

122. <Uh, Larry. The cause of the "mess" in California can easily be laid at the doorstep of conservatives. The sordid tax policies designed to bankrupt the state and demolish public education and labor were for the most part a Republican disinformation campaign.

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/06/2009 @ 12:11pm>

     Absolute nonsense. The CA Democratic legislature has spent like drunken sailors with no letup.

     <California has had a 50% spending increase over the past five years.

     Over the past 10 years state spending from state sources has more than doubled in nominal terms (not adjusted for inflation), and during the current governor's tenure state spending from state sources has risen almost 40 percent

     The state budget is based on assumptions about future revenue: According to California's 2004-2005 state finance director Tom Campbell, the source of the long-term problem is that assumptions of future revenue are unreliable, and when they prove wrong, the spending has already been committed.

     Productivity drain: According to Devin Nunes, a congressman from California, one source of the problem is that the "entrepreneurs, investment capital and the hardy workers who made it a global leader in agriculture, technological innovation and scientific research" are fleeing the state because it has an unattractive tax and regulatory burden. California has the sixth-highest tax burden in the country.

     Significant increases in compensation of state and local government employees: Michael Haley of the Napa Valley Taxpayers Alliance points out that the funds required for the expanded pension and compensation of government employees that began in 2000 "are more than we can ever hope to collect in taxes, even with large tax increases">

     http://tinyurl.com/6lxq37

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/06/2009 @ 12:23pm

123. chaoszen-Why would you think that darin was my dad?I'm older than he is.

     Posted by i'm nobody at 07/06/2009 @ 12:24pm

124. I'm laughing.

     Posted by twillie at 07/06/2009 @ 10:05a

     I'm very Happy! That you know how to laugh twillster. But a little disturbed at the vision of a cackle issuing from a rictus grimacing face.

     Nice try though!

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/06/2009 @ 12:27pm

125. chaoszen-Why would you think that darin was my dad?I'm older than he is.

     Posted by i'm nobody at 07/06/2009 @ 12:24pm

     I didn't. It was only that you started out your post with Darin-My dad. It just gave me a vehicle to take a cheap shot at the Troll.

     Sorry for any misunderstanding. I'm just in the mood to cut these bastards off at the knees today. It is quite therapeutic for me. I'm just venting my stress on those that, I feel have it coming.

     Sorry if I included you in my anger management program.

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/06/2009 @ 12:34pm

126. There is no recovery without well paying jobs, since 60 to 70 percent of Western markets is dependent on the consumer spending they support! This is a no brainer!

     Posted by pjcasey at 07/06/2009 @ 12:34pm

127. I promised to try and avoid even addressing these miscreants. I failed. But I did indicate that I might. It is difficult for me to get in touch with my Buddha Nature.

     I'm a bad Buddhist today. I will try again tommorrow.

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/06/2009 @ 12:38pm

128. "...and his only "achievement" a 10% increase in the top rates was modest."------Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 11:42am

     "Modest"?!?!??!?.....I thought that was the new definition of "socialism" and "statism"?!?!?!?!?!?!?!??

     heheh

     Posted by Mask at 07/06/2009 @ 12:38pm

129. Many old time conservatives screwed around with more than one person and not all were sober.

     Posted by i'm nobody at 07/06/2009 @ 11:59am

     Three points:

     1) Yes, there are Conservatives who are hypocrites. They think they can "get away with it" while others can't.

     2) "Giddy", "Happy", etc. Let's get this straight. There is a perception among some on the Left that those on the Right giggle every time Sally Struthers comes on a "Save the Children" commerical. It's as if you think we find the sight of bloated bellies and flies comical.

     So what did I mean about, "I told you so" etc?

     3) Let's go back to impeachment. Would you have been "happy" or "giddy" to see Bush and Cheney impeached by the House and convicted in the Senate? If not, I'm sure there are several here who would. We all want to believe that there is justice in the universe. When other people do things that we believe is wrong or violates our sense of morals, we want to see a negative consequence. We want to believe that Karma is on our side.

     Now, the next point must not be ascribed to Conservatives at large, because it is very specific to me.

     For me there is an added dimension. For me it is personal. I freely admit to being a California bigot. I have an irrational dislike of Californians. It's related to naming the sewage treatment plant after Bush. It's related to Berkley's agressive anti-military campaign. It's related to it's embrace of radical collectivism. It's realted to Hollywood's portrayal of people like me as ignorant hicks. It's related to California's contempt for tradition. It's related to the LA riots. It's related to celebrity worship. It's related to La Raza. There are a lot of reasons that I am experiencing shcedenfraud over CA's predicament.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 12:42pm

130. Absolute nonsense. Posted by antisocialist at 07/06/2009 @ 12:23pm

     Of course it is Larry. Absolute nonsense. And that is why you just spent the time to respond to it. Because "Absolute Nonsense" is what you seem ton be attracted to. Just like a moth to a flame.

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/06/2009 @ 12:43pm

131. Seems like a stray "n" creeped into my "to". No "ton" intended.

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/06/2009 @ 12:46pm

132. The economy did well under the democrat Clinton.Posted by i'm nobody at 07/06/2009 @ 10:49am

     patently untrue. we had a series of bubbles while real wages didnt go up. investors and corporations made out like bandits while the worker was left in the cold. our economic woesnow have been a culmination of democratic and republican deregulation policies of the past 30 years.

     Posted by nathantankus at 07/06/2009 @ 12:48pm

133. Of course it is Larry. Absolute nonsense. And that is why you just spent the time to respond to it. Because "Absolute Nonsense" is what you seem ton be attracted to. Just like a moth to a flame.

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/06/2009 @ 12:43pm

     I didn't think you would have any real comeback to the actual data that disputed your accusations; and I wasn't disappointed.

     I've had to live with the outrage that is CA politics for 6 decades.

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/06/2009 @ 12:48pm

134. chaoszen-Why would you think that darin was my dad?I'm older than he is.

     Posted by i'm nobody at 07/06/2009 @ 12:24pm

     I didn't. It was only that you started out your post with Darin-My dad. It just gave me a vehicle to take a cheap shot at the Troll.

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/06/2009 @ 12:34pm

     Don't you remember my original handle, marybretbrad?

     Mary's the wife and Bret and Brad are the sons. I'm raising them in fine Conservative fashion. You know, teaching them how to subjugate women, bully the cripples on the playground, how to steal lunch money from the poor kids, and how to beat the tar out of any boy or girl with questionable sexual orientation. But most of all I'm teaching them the best racial epithets I used when I was growing up.

     You know, typical Conservative stuff.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 12:50pm

135. darin-I'm not a lefty.No.I would not have been happy to see any politician impeached or convicted, even if they were guilty, because hurts my country.

     Posted by i'm nobody at 07/06/2009 @ 12:51pm

136. chaoszen-No problem.

     Posted by i'm nobody at 07/06/2009 @ 12:51pm

137. "Mary's the wife and Bret and Brad are the sons. I'm raising them in fine Conservative fashion. You know, teaching them how to subjugate women, bully the cripples on the playground, how to steal lunch money from the poor kids, and how to beat the tar out of any boy or girl with questionable sexual orientation. But most of all I'm teaching them the best racial epithets I used when I was growing up."----Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 12:50pm

     How about teaching them to claim stuff...and then admit later what you said wasn't true?

     "No wonder Obama called her a pig."------Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 09/11/2008 @ 4:10pm

     "I'll admit he wasn't calling Palin a pig....."-----Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 09/11/2008 @ 4:46pm

     Feminism We Can Believe In posted by Christopher Hayes on 09/11/2008 @ 12:47pm

     Posted by Mask at 07/06/2009 @ 12:58pm

138. I didn't think you would have any real comeback to the actual data that disputed your accusations; and I wasn't disappointed.

     I've had to live with the outrage that is CA politics for 6 decades.

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/06/2009 @ 12:48pm

     Actual Data? In all the time I have been blogging here, I have never seen you post any true "Actual Data". I have on many occasions perused and wasted my time on your links and pseudo facts that are nothing but regurgitated neo-con talking points.

     Actual Data? Neo-Con Fascist's rarely spend any time producing facts. Facts are dangerous for the likes of you. A "Fact" to a Neo-Con is like dawn to a vampire.

     Who do you think you are kidding? Surely no one here. Your time would be better spent on Right Wing blogs. Because they would flourish in the dark there.

     Here they are just amusements.

     But then again there is no money in your pocket for preaching to the choir, is there?

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/06/2009 @ 1:11pm

139. I would not have been happy to see any politician impeached or convicted, even if they were guilty, because hurts my country.

     Posted by i'm nobody at 07/06/2009 @ 12:51pm

     Really?

     I've admitted before that I was wrong to call for Clinton's impeachment. It did hurt our country. I'm glad that Bush wasn't impeached because the evidence wasn't there. The only way to convict was to assume the worst about his motives.

     But when someone is truly guilty I think impeachment is healthy. Like Alcee Hastings or Spiro Agnew.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 1:27pm

140. Actual Data? Neo-Con Fascist's rarely spend any time producing facts. Facts are dangerous for the likes of you. A "Fact" to a Neo-Con is like dawn to a vampire.

     Who do you think you are kidding? Surely no one here. Your time would be better spent on Right Wing blogs. Because they would flourish in the dark there.

     Here they are just amusements.

     But then again there is no money in your pocket for preaching to the choir, is there?

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/06/2009 @ 1:11pm

     As usual, you have it backwards, but no surprise there either. If there is one things communists hate (besides G-d), it is facts.

     And I receive ZERO for posting here. I do so 1)for amusement, 2) to be reminded what the disease of leftist thought produces, and 3)to at least post some debate in what is otherwise a vacuum of ideas and love of liberty.

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/06/2009 @ 1:34pm

141. We want to believe that Karma is on our side. Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 12:42pm

     Good one Troll. "Karma is on our side". That had me rolling on the floor. Thanks for that.

     Nobody but you could have picked four better words to describe Karma from the perspective of a... Well I'm at a loss here and can't quite find the right word to describe such a statement. Maybe someone can help me out here.

     Karma is on our side. WOW!

     Uh Troll, Karma has only one side. Karma is very personal. In other words Karma can't pick sides. Karma is only the total effect of Fate, as expressed in a very personal and singular way.

     Karma can never take sides. Because it deals with only one side at a time. It is a singularity of personal fate and action.

     Karma is not an army of inter related casuality.

     Oh crap... Nevermind. I need some sleep.

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/06/2009 @ 1:39pm

142. darin-If someone is guilty of something then a conviction is a good thing,but is not something that makes me happy.Clintons problems did hurt the country.

     Posted by i'm nobody at 07/06/2009 @ 1:39pm

143. As Lewis Black said, "When will conservatives and Democrats agree on what the f--- reality is?"

     I see 4 different explanations for what is the cause of the California budget crisis is caused by. All of them different. It's hilarious.

     Darin, you say you hate Californians for all these reasons one of which is that they stereotype you as a hick. Isn't that just you doing to them what they are doing to you? Doesn't that strike you as a bit hypocritical? I am from California and have lived in and been all over the US there are great parts and there are not so great parts. One thing I found about California is that it is one of the most diverse states when it comes to culture. As was displayed around the time of Prop 13. You are taking a whole state and boiling it down to the sum of a few collective bubbles which is exactly what you accuse of us doing to you.

     Also what's your problem with La Raza? People being Anti-War(Are you pro-war)? You call it contempt for tradition others call it be ahead of their time, but again you have missed a huge portion of the state outside of LA and San Francisco. To you the LA riots was bullshit, to a lot of LA blacks it wasn't, maybe you should get to understand it from the black point of view.

     You are reducing all of California, the largest state in the union, down to a few bubbles. Which is what you claim they do to you. I think what you are describing is cyclical. I think people gained a dislike of Californians and Californians have gained a dislike of everyone else. But the one thing I have found as I have been all over the US is that one of things I most often hear is "You are nothing like what I thought Californians were like." That's because like everyone else we are not the sum of our bubbles.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 1:44pm

144. No wonder Obama called her a pig."------Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 09/11/2008 @ 4:10pm

     "I'll admit he wasn't calling Palin a pig....."-----Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 09/11/2008 @ 4:46pm

     Posted by Mask at 07/06/2009 @ 12:58pm

     Mask, Mask, Mask,

     You tried this one before and failed.

     The first quote, when not taken out of context read, "No wonder Obama called her a pig. I'm surpised he didn't call her a fucking pig. She's going to cost him the election."

     Do you honestly believe I was "surprised" that [candidate] Obama didn't call Palin a "fucking pig" during national campaign?

     I his statements [candiate] Obama was alluding to Palin's earlier comments; he wasn't calling her a pig. But the Conservative media was trying to twist it into an insult by claiming he called her a pig. In my first post, I was playing along and boasting that Palin was going to win, but clearly, I was not serious. In the second post, which followed 36 minutes later, I give it up and say, "Yes, I know he wasn't calling her a pig."

     Picking Palin was the equivalent of a Hail Mary pass. It was McCain's only chance. And like 99 out of 100 Hail Mary passes, it fell incomplete. But there was two or three days right after the pick where McCain led in the polls by a point or two. And skittish Dems were worried and outraged. I was just having a little fun.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 1:49pm

145. Karma is not an army of inter related casuality.

     Oh crap... Nevermind. I need some sleep.

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/06/2009 @ 1:39pm

     Hey cut me some slack. I learned everything I know about Karma from "My Name is Earl". If you do good, Karma will reward you. If you do bad, Karma will punish you. Hopefully, Karma has the same view of good and bad as I do.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 1:52pm

146. Posted by antisocialist at 07/06/2009 @ 1:34pm

     You are over-extending very far on 2 and 3, into the realm of bigotry. In 2 and 3 both you are using opinion instead of fact just as chaos did in his post. You are simultaneously accusing him and performing the accused action. Maybe you should reel it back and not be so insulting and hateful of people who believe the same things as you. You say leftist thought is a disease but rightist thought is to keep traditions that are good, leftist thought is what is used to overcome certain traditions that are no longer useful. You may not see but what you deem as a disease has been extremely important to this countries develop which has made us into a superpower. If we stuck only to tradition and never overcame it we would be no different than many third-world countries who stick so slavishly to tradition with no care of what the needs of the new world bring.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 1:54pm

147. Hey cut me some slack. I learned everything I know about Karma from "My Name is Earl". If you do good, Karma will reward you. If you do bad, Karma will punish you. Hopefully, Karma has the same view of good and bad as I do.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 1:52pm

     Your Christian and you haven't even bother looking into Buddhism? How can you know you're Christian if you have never studied any other religion enough to even know what Karma is?

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 1:56pm

148. You are over-extending very far on 2 and 3, into the realm of bigotry. In 2 and 3 both you are using opinion instead of fact just as chaos did in his post.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 1:54pm

     First of all, Chaozen dismissed the California budget data without any countering data. That is debating fact vs opinion.

     On 2 & 3, those are both supposed to be largely about opinion.

     Facts are not nearly as debatable as opinions are. the debate of ideas is expressly the arguing of opinions. So I'm not sure where you are coming from on this one.

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/06/2009 @ 2:06pm

149. Your Christian and you haven't even bother looking into Buddhism? How can you know you're Christian if you have never studied any other religion enough to even know what Karma is?

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 1:56pm

     While it is certainly laudable to understand other belief systems, that doesn't mean that only through examination of other beliefs can you know the certainty of your own beliefs.

     Care to cite me where Jesus commanded those who sought to follow Him, "but seek after other beliefs and then follow after Me"?

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/06/2009 @ 2:09pm

150. Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 1:44pm

     You're right. I deserved that. I know it's wrong to stereotype all Californians. I tell myself that it doesn't really matter, but maybe it does.

     Just last night I was reading "Predictably Irrational". I read the chapter on expectations. The author conducted some studies that showed how expectations shape perception and opinions.

     He introduces the chapter by describing a scene where an Eagles fan is watching a game with a Giants fan. The last play of the game comes down to a spectacular pass in the back of the end zone. Two men watching the exact same television will have wildly different perceptions as to whether the catch was good or not. This is expectations shaping perceptions.

     He also talked about stereotypes as a sort of short cut for expectations. Then he described an experiment. There is a stereotype that women are bad at math, but Asians are good at math. So what about female Asians?

     They tested two groups of female Asians on a math test. The first group started the test by answering a bunch of questions about gender. The second group started the test by answering a bunch of questions about race. The group that focused on race performed better than the group that focused on gender.

     Stereotypes may be far more pernicious than I believed.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 2:11pm

151. antisocialist-Jesus said to seek the Truth and Truth seeking requires that one look at everything and question everything.

     Posted by i'm nobody at 07/06/2009 @ 2:12pm

152. "In my first post, I was playing along and boasting that Palin was going to win, but clearly, I was not serious."------Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 1:49pm

     Is there some "italic" or something you can use when you're "not serious"...so we can tell?

     Posted by Mask at 07/06/2009 @ 2:17pm

153. "Jobless Figures Pose Social, Political Threat for Obama, Dems" - Nichols

     Yeah, not to mention it is a real problem for the unemployed...

     But that's cool, we already know the Democrats are about power politics, not "the people".

     Posted by freiheit1 at 07/06/2009 @ 2:22pm

154. Is there some "italic" or something you can use when you're "not serious"...so we can tell?

     Posted by Mask at 07/06/2009 @ 2:17pm

     There used to be. From now on, I'll use the little winking smiley face emoticon.

     ;-)

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 2:24pm

155. Posted by chaoszen at 07/06/2009 @ 11:58am

     Spot on All of us are only as smart as nail most of the time, the wing nuts well assumption is a way of life.

     Posted by dycel8r at 07/06/2009 @ 2:37pm

156. 3. Pelosi has turned 100+yrs. of house rules and ethics upsidedown allowing NO Republican input, bills, or even allowing the American Public or the Repubs. any input or foreknowledge of legislation etc. the Demoncrats will vote on!

     Posted by BigPasture at 07/06/2009 @ 12:58am | ignore this person | warn this person

     third its obviously bullshit that pelosi doesnt let republicans speak, you know thats a lie,

     Posted by nathantankus at 07/06/2009 @ 02:39am | ignore this person | warn this person

     "May 16, 2007

     In a stunning move, House Democrats today revealed they will attempt to rewrite House rules that have gone unchanged since 1822 in order to make it possible to increase taxes and government spending without having to vote and be held accountable. House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) today vowed Republicans will use every available means to fight this unprecedented change.

     "This is an astonishing attempt by the majority leadership to duck accountability for tax-and-spend policies the American people do not want," Boehner said. "The majority leadership is gutting House rules that have been in place for 185 years so they can raise taxes and increase government spending without a vote. House Republicans will use every tool available to fight this abuse of power."

     Last November, House Democratic leaders promised the most open, ethical Congress in history: "

     -----------------

     You sure miss a lot nathantankus! No wonder you can't tell the truth from you own lignorant lies! Speaking from the house floor on C-Span is nothing since the Demoncrat fools have done just what I said leaving a majority of Americans totally UNREPRESENTED!

     Posted by BigPasture at 07/06/2009 @ 3:15pm

157. Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 2:24pm

     What about when you said we are "becoming Russia"????

     Posted by Mask at 07/06/2009 @ 3:23pm

158. Posted by BigPasture at 07/06/2009 @ 3:15pm | ignore this person "In response to an earlier post, the Democrat Leadership responded to the protest votes (after about 4 hours) and pulled the rule change from the bill. Read Chairman Hensarling's statement here.

     Earlier today, House Democrats, led by Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), today sought to rewrite the rules of the House to prevent PAYGO offsets from expanding the scope of germaneness to further what Republicans may offer in their motions to recommit the bills to Committee. Such a change would allow House Democrats to more easily raise taxes and increase government spending without being held to account. The move would have marked the first change in the germaneness rule since 1822 and is a direct infringement on the rights of the Minority in the House and the Americans that they represent. The Republican Study Committee Floor Action Team, under the leadership of Rep. Lynn Westmoreland (R-GA), began requesting a series of procedural protest votes every 30 minutes in response to this power grab by the Majority, and was joined Rep. Tom Price, another member of the RSC floor Action Team. Today was a big win for all Republicans in the House."

     never happened; nice try though

     Posted by nathantankus at 07/06/2009 @ 3:30pm

159. Posted by antisocialist at 07/06/2009 @ 1:34pm

     http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/25/opinion/25krugman.html

     Here is an article by Paul Krugman for happy and Darin who think it is patently ridiculous that Prop 13 caused CA's economic crisis. I will try to sum it up and explain why it makes much more sense than both your explanations. He basically says that Prop 13 made CA completely dependent on the income tax. The problem is that income taxes are as volatile as the economy which means CA is unstable tax wise.

     This actually plays perfecly into what you posted Anti. The piece you posted says that CA governors are overestimating the amount of revenue. Why would they overestimate if they control the taxes? Because the taxes are bound to income which is bound the economy, which means that even if you had the best economist in the world California wouldn't be able to figure out how much money would be coming in the future.

     The reason California has the highest income taxes in the country is,because of prop 13, it is more reliant than any other state in the country on income taxes for revenue. If prop 13 had never been passed income taxes would be lower in the state. Why is California's school system so subpar? Because usually school systems are paid for by property taxes, but since property taxes in CA are capped you can't pay for them.

     So every explanation you guys have given even down to rampant spending while still irresponsible is not at the heart of the matter. The heart of the matter lies solely in two hard right Republican's moves to cap property taxes and you can post any article you want but I can show you how it is linked to the passing of Prop 13.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 3:33pm

160. it amazing how you cherry picked only the facts that supported your opinion even though they are refuted in your own conservative sources. and im the ignorant liar.

     Posted by nathantankus at 07/06/2009 @ 3:35pm

161. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_13_%281978%29

     If you want a summed up version look at the positive and negative effects of prop 13. Basically everything I outlined is in the negative effects.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 3:35pm

162. If you look at Cal-Tax data, California isn't in the top 10 for personal income taxes. So income taxes aren't the fifth highest in the nation. we are fifth overall but if you look at the property taxes, even though property in California is some of the most expensive in the nation we are int he bottom 25 when it comes to property taxes. Maybe if property taxes were not capped, we could lower income taxes because property taxes would more than make up the difference.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 3:42pm

163. While it is certainly laudable to understand other belief systems, that doesn't mean that only through examination of other beliefs can you know the certainty of your own beliefs.

     Care to cite me where Jesus commanded those who sought to follow Him, "but seek after other beliefs and then follow after Me"?

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/06/2009 @ 2:09pm

     I think it is EXTREMELY important to understand other religions. While Jesus did not command it I am curious how you can claim certainty when you have never explored other alternatives. That is like me saying I'm certain the earth is flat if I have never explored it to find out. My biggest problem with some religious people is that so many of them claim they are certain about their faith when they have no idea about any other alternative. No alternative in my mind is you settling for what's there not seeking the truth.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 3:45pm

164. Stereotypes may be far more pernicious than I believed.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 2:11pm

     I agree with you. From one CA, I don't think your a dumb hick, you are clearly very educated. I have been to both that south and midwest. I used to live in Tennessee there is a wealth of culture and educated people in both those places. And though culturally both of them differ from fastpaced places like Los Angeles, San Francisco and New York, to the point that I once wanted to slap a slow talking Texan because I wanted him to get the point, they are just as beautiful of places with just as interesting people.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 3:49pm

165. What about when you said we are "becoming Russia"????

     Posted by Mask at 07/06/2009 @ 3:23pm

     When did I say that?

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 3:54pm

166. It also explains why California is hit harder by every downturn than any other state. We have been one of the most severely hit in this current downturn and when you think about it we shouldn't be. Most of the financial industries are not based in CA and none of the auto industries are based here. So why is it we are ranking up with the states that are the bases of the industries? It's because the economies, downturn hit CA because it is completely reliant on the income tax because of prop 13 rather than still bringing in stagnant revenue from the property tax. I can go on and on.

     Basically the way the tax system SHOULD work is that property tax should bring in a semi-predictable and, without a massive crisis, ever increasing stream of revenue that makes up the majority of a states spending and then property taxes provide an elastic system that can be raised or lowered depending on how the economy is doing in order to augment the property taxes where it is needed. In CA it works the opposite but not in a good way. Income taxes provide the majority of the income which is elastic, but because prop 13 made the state require a 2/3s majority to pass a change in state taxes it is inelastic. Property taxes are stagnant even though property costs have gone up because people stay in their houses longer here because they don't want their property taxes to increase.

     Which means California is basing it's econmic goals on an income that changes with the wind, but cannot not be increased or decreased because if you try to increase it to balance the budget Republicans block it.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 3:58pm

167. All of this is precisely why Arnold is moving to change the CA constitution. So he can try to change increase the income tax and probably remove prop 13 without the need of an ever increasingly fringe CA Republican party.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 4:00pm

168. Comfy,

     On taxes, the states get revenue from

     1) The federal government

     2) Personal income taxes

     3) Corporate income taxes (premium taxes for insurance)

     4) Sales taxes

     5) Personal property taxes

     6) Sin taxes: Alcohol, tobacco, gambling, etc.

     I've never lived in a state where the state levied a property tax. All of my property taxes have been paid to the county government. I've paid a payroll tax (1% of payroll) to Kansas City, MO. (New York city has one of these also.)

     I guess my point is that taxes are fungible. CA can raise its income or sales or sin taxes to make up the shortfall in property taxes. People consider the total tax load when making economic decisions.

     I find it hard to believe that all of CA problems can be blamed on this initiative supported by Conservatives.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 4:18pm

169. I find it hard to believe that all of CA problems can be blamed on this initiative supported by Conservatives.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 4:18pm

     Read the things I posted. You can see that basically Democratic spending wouldn't be a problem or would not be nearly as big of a problem if it wasn't for prop 13. Now I agree right now the only way to lower the debt is to lower spending but it wouldn't be a problem at all if it wasn't for prop 13.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 4:24pm

170. http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/08599190493800

     I know generally TIME is considered a liberal haven but here is another article taken from Time.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 4:26pm

171. So why is it we are ranking up with the states that are the bases of the industries? It's because the economies, downturn hit CA because it is completely reliant on the income tax because of prop 13 rather than still bringing in stagnant revenue from the property tax. I can go on and on.

     Basically the way the tax system SHOULD work is that property tax should bring in a semi-predictable and, without a massive crisis, ever increasing stream of revenue that makes up the majority of a states spending

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 3:58pm

     Hang on there. First of all, ask yourself what set off the financial crisis? It was 30% to 40% declines in real estate values in California, Florida, Phoenix, and Las Vegas.

     So with real estate values down 30% to 40%, where is your stable base of revenue from property taxes?

     And again, I've never lived in a state where the state government levied a property tax. (Personal property is car tags.) Most states don't follow your prescription for raising taxes. Most states have the counties tax property to fund the schools and the state taxes income for the roads and medicaid.

     Just how different would it be if a state had a 7% sales tax and a 7% income tax or a 14% sales or income tax? It's essentially the same number of tax dollars.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 4:29pm

172. http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2008/06/the_truth_about_1.html

     This actually is an article by a far left group but I am including it because he makes some interesting points.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 4:32pm

173. I'm going to try a little research to see what proportion of tax revenue is from property taxes in the state's I've lived in.

     I'll be back in a bit.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 4:34pm

174. http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/05/

     28/prop-13-and-the-california-fiscal-crisis/

     Here are some of the arguments against it. But the problem is he isn't taking into account elasticity of income taxes.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 4:36pm

175. North Carolina:

     Individual Income 56.1%

     Sales and Use 26.5%

     Corporate and Franchise 10.2%

     Insurance 2.5%

     All Other 8.5%

     (Property tax is not listed as a category)

     http://www.nccivitas.org/media/publication-archive/ fact-sheet/who-pays-taxes-north-carolina

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 4:37pm

176. Just how different would it be if a state had a 7% sales tax and a 7% income tax or a 14% sales or income tax? It's essentially the same number of tax dollars.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 4:29pm

     I'll answer your question with a question. If we assume that people in office are semi-intelligent, we should be able to assume that they would be intelligent enough to realize that bankrupting their state government is kind of a problem in staying in power. So we can argue that these people are just recklessly spending money, but I think any non-partisan person would step back and see that it's not possible that all of these people have just decided to keep spending and spending and spending knowing the consequence of their action.

     That is why I believe you have to look past the surface and into the depths. I think people who blame spending are blaming it reflexively and rarely look past it to see if there is something behind the issue.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 4:40pm

177. http://www.caltax.org/research/table05.gif

     Here is the data you wanted Darin.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 4:41pm

178. http://www.caltax.org/research/taxspend.htm

     This is cal-tax on the tax system in California. Property taxes are 23% of the pie. My argument hinges on the fact that because of increasing cost of housing in California it SHOULD be higher. But it isn't because of Prop 13.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 4:44pm

179. Iowa

     Individual income 50.9%

     Sales and use 36.8%

     Consumption tax (sales) 9.2%

     Misc 2.2%

     Inheritance 1.0%

     (Again property is not a category of tax revenue for Iowa)

     http://www.iowa.gov/tax/educate/0878508.pdf

     Page 9

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 4:47pm

180. Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 4:37pm

     The problem is, if local government can't pay for schooling they go to the state.

     http://www.edsource.org/iss_fin_FAQ_cacompares.html

     If you look at this data California is actually almost 500 dollars below the national average per student in spending in education.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 4:48pm

181. Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 4:47pm

     Darin, the problem isn't the state it's that local governments can't pay so they go to the state for money.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 4:51pm

182. You can call it trickle up economics. The problems at the local level trickle up to the state level. Which is why Arnold is cutting costs from schooling in order to gain income. The are cutting another 5.3 billion dollars from schools which are supposedly only a local issue but why cut the cost if it's all supposed to be handled with property taxes? It's because property taxes aren't covering the cost of schooling, and local governments are getting money from the state.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 4:54pm

183. Iowa

     Individual income 45.6%

     Sales and use 37.6%

     Corporate tax (sales) 5.8%

     Tobacco 2.2%

     All other 8.7%

     http://www.lancekinzer.com/07KSBudget.ppt #257,3,Where does the money come from?

     Interestingly, I did find this:

     http://countybudget.jocogov.org/basics.htm

     It says 1% of property taxes were paid to the state of Kansas. I assume part of the 8.7%

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 4:55pm

184. Oops, the last one was Kansas.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 4:58pm

185. http://www.caltax.org/research/table10.gif

     Here is another interesting piece of data Darin. California is actually number 10 in state spending. Guess who takesw number 1? Alaska. Now if you go to Cal Tax and compare all of it's stats to New York, you will find that even though California has more economic diversity than New York, it is doing worse in the overall picture. Yet New York is higher in every tax bracket than California, even in corporate income taxes. So why is New York doing ok but California is not even if California is spending less. Look at the difference in property taxes if you want to see why.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 4:58pm

186. Alaska spends WAY more per worker in state spending. How does it do it if spending is always the culprit?

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 5:02pm

187. Alaska spends almost twice as much per worker than it's closest competitor, New York. Yet both of them are doing better than California.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 5:03pm

188. Missouri

     Individual Income 58.5%

     Sales 26.5%

     Corporate Income 8.2%

     All other 6.8%

     http://oa.mo.gov/bp/budg2009/Budget_Summary.pdf

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 5:07pm

189. People like to say California spends more than any other state. Yes California spends a huge amount overall. But that's because it has the largest population in the United States. But if you break it down by per worker spending it's not as much as you think it is. If you break it down by per 1,000 dollars of income we rank 23rd in the amount of spending. Which means in actuality we aren't spending very much overall.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 5:09pm

190. Minnesota

     Income 30.5%

     Property 23.9%

     Sales 22.4%

     Excise 10.4%

     Corporate 4.8%

     Other 7.9%

     http://www.taxes.state.mn.us/legislative2009/ PDFPrint/09_LegPack_Tax_System_Overview.pdf

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 5:12pm

191. I can't find the figures for Georgia.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 5:26pm

192. Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 5:26pm

     look at my other posts.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 5:39pm

193. The Democratic Party's dealing with our acute economic crisis is akin to a whore who fully understands the adverse impact of prostitution, but finding it ever hard to quit.

     Republicans have created most of our economic problems, but there were many times when the Democrats were in full control of the ship and did not solve any of these problems.

     Just examine the contrast between the level of campaign promises of the Democrats in 2006 and 2008 and what has actually been delivered so far.

     The Democrats are torn between the promises they made to Americans and the expectation of their corporate masters. Look at the war in Iraq, healthcare reforms, environmental and banking regulations, etc.., the Democrats are back-paddling on their promises on all these fronts. The main reason for this is the enormous influence of the corporate lobbyists.

     The only way to liberate the Democrats, and the country as whole, from this deadlock is to institute a meaningful public financing mechanism to our elections.

     Posted by CripThink at 07/06/2009 @ 5:39pm

194. California can breath a sigh of relief.....not quite officially JUNK yet.....but the lemmings are now, one the cliff edge!

     =========================

     California: Teetering closer to junk

     Fitch Ratings downgrades the state's bond rating to BBB, just above junk status. Budget impasse continues to rile the state's financial standing.

     By Tami Luhby, CNNMoney.com senior writer

     Last Updated: July 6, 2009: 6:23 PM ET

     NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- California's bond rating is far from golden.

     Citing the Golden State's ongoing budget upheaval, Fitch Ratings on Monday downgraded California's long-term debt to BBB, one category above junk bond status. The next step is BBB- before the state's bonds would be considered speculative debt....

     California's bond rating is the lowest of any state....

     Posted by Happy at 07/06/2009 @ 6:04pm

195. California's bond rating is the lowest of any state....

     Posted by Happy at 07/06/2009 @ 6:04pm

     Which only bolsters my point. Why, if California is not taxing or spending anymore per person than other states is it doing worse than everyone else?

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 6:12pm

196. CNN chimes in after WSJOnline:

     Higher minimum wage coming soon

     Federal wage floor will rise to $7.25 an hour on July 24. Hike will be felt in 29 states. Can the job market handle it?

     By Aaron Smith, CNNMoney.com staff writer

     Last Updated: July 6, 2009: 2:56 PM ET

     NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The federal minimum wage is set to increase later this month as the job market shows signs of further decay.

     The federal minimum wage will go to $7.25 an hour on July 24 from its current level of $6.55, according to the U.S. Department of Labor.

     The impact will be felt in 29 states, and many of them plan to match the federal minimum when it goes through.

     Seven states already have laws mandating $7.25 minimum pay, while 14 states and Washington, D.C., exceed the new minimum. Employers are required to pay whichever is the highest: Federal or state....

     Posted by Happy at 07/06/2009 @ 6:13pm

197. People like to say California spends more than any other state. Yes California spends a huge amount overall. But that's because it has the largest population in the United States. But if you break it down by per worker spending it's not as much as you think it is. If you break it down by per 1,000 dollars of income we rank 23rd in the amount of spending. Which means in actuality we aren't spending very much overall. Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 5:09pm

     How California's income tax and sales tax rates compare

     1:28 PM, February 19, 2009

     We're No. 1 -- only more so.

     The budget deal the Legislature reached today will keep California's top personal income tax rate and sales tax rate the highest in the Union. The agreement will raise personal income tax rates by 0.25 of a percentage point across the board, beginning with the current tax year. The highest rate, on taxable income of more than $1 million, will rise to 10.55% from 10.3%.

     As for sales taxes, the budget deal will push California's base rate to 8.25% from the current 7.25%. Those rates don't include taxes added by individual cities and counties. The next highest state sales tax rate as of Jan. 1 was 7%, which was shared by Indiana, Mississippi, New Jersey, Rhode Island and Tennessee. Note, though, that sales tax burdens aren't uniform because some states tax food while others, including California, don't. (See a full state-by-state list of sales taxes here.)

     http://tinyurl.com/dk238u

     As of this April 2009 report, CA is 2nd in gasoline taxes

     http://tinyurl.com/nu4nnq

     more to follow

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/06/2009 @ 7:44pm

198. CCC,

     So, 1st in income tax, 1st in sales tax, 2nd in gasoline tax

     As to property taxes, you neglect 2 critical facts

     1.CA property values are among the highest in the nation-thus the average homeowner pays as much or more than a higher property tax rate state like New Jersey- My just over 300k home in CA (which doesn't buy a lot is nearly $4000 per year).

     2.Prop 13 saved many seniors from losing their homes. That was a key factor in passing Prop 13. Many seniors whose homes were paid for, lost them to the county tax collector because they could not pay the ever increasing tax payments on their homes.

     Perhaps you'd like to see a return to those days?

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/06/2009 @ 7:45pm

199. "What about when you said we are "becoming Russia"????"---Posted by Mask at 07/06/2009 @ 3:23pm

     "When did I say that?"---Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/06/2009 @ 3:54pm |

     "Read this article. I think you will find it fascinating:

     http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123318805587026591.html

     It's about the Gietner "exception".

     Increasingly, political allys are becoming expendable pawns for PR purposes.

     "In March, Obama foreign policy adviser Samantha Power was quoted by a newspaper in nearby Scotland calling Hillary Clinton a "monster." The Obama campaign immediately threw her out the window. Cowed and numbed, no one in politics raised an objecting peep at the absurd disproportion."

     "More serious was the elimination of Paul Wolfowitz at the World Bank. After a media show trial that lasted several weeks, Mr. Wolfowitz lost his job running the Bank because apparatchiks inside concocted an ethics violation."

     We're turning into Russia."---Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 01/30/2009 @ 08:21am

     Blago Removed --- After Mounting a (Really) Lame Defense posted by John Nichols on 01/29/2009 @ 5:21pm

     Posted by Mask at 07/06/2009 @ 7:52pm

200. Perhaps you'd like to see a return to those days?

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/06/2009 @ 7:45pm

     The problem is that the people who passed Prop 13 did not see the consequences of their actions. At the end of your statement you say

     "Perhaps you'd like to see a return to those days?"

     But this is a strawman to the inth. You present it as if there is only one option or the other. There are plenty of other types of legislations you could have passed in order to help seniors stay in their homes. Prop 13 like no Child Left Behind was an in the end very destructive method that they would curb a problem, when there were many other methods of addressing the problem.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 8:54pm

201. Posted by antisocialist at 07/06/2009 @ 7:45pm

     You ignored local assessements, corporate income taxes, property taxes. When I said we were 11th I meant for overall taxes accrued. You ignored most of the facts for certain pieces.

     Also if you break down the taxes you presented per person, per work, and per capita you are wrong, we are not number 1. Here are the two charts according to Cal-Tax.

     Sales Tax:

     http://www.caltax.org/research/taxspend.htm

     Personal Income Tax if you break it down by per 1000 dollars of personaly income California is 23rd in personal income tax rates.:

     http://www.caltax.org/research/table03.gif

     You know who has the highest corporate income taxes in the US, you know those taxes you like to say drive buisinesses away? Alaska.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 9:00pm

202. Oh wait that data is old.

     http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/443.html

     Here is the new data. According to this we were 6th in income taxes in 2008

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 9:04pm

203. "So, 1st in income tax, 1st in sales tax, 2nd in gasoline tax"

     This is actually deceptive. You are claiming that we are number 1 in income tax which isn't true. In actuality we are number 6. Our TOP income tax bracket is the highest in the nation but overall we are number 6 when it comes to total income tax.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 9:06pm

204. http://valleyecon.blogspot.com/2009/03/moving-to-california-tax-cut.html

     Here is a piece posted from someone who moved here from Maryland who said basically if you earned less than 250,000 dollars you would pay less in taxes in California than in Maryland.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 9:09pm

205. http://www.retirementliving.com/RLtaxes.html

     When you look at these figures, which are used to decide where you want to move to and consider the various weighting on taxes we are actually not 1st in the nation in Sales Tax either. We are actually eigth in the nation.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 9:12pm

206. http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/290.html

     Here's the updated date showing that in income per person California is 5th in the nation when it comes to taxed income per Capita.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 9:16pm

207. Err I'm sorry 11th in the nation.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 9:17pm

208. Fitch Ratings on Monday downgraded California's long-term debt to BBB, one category above junk bond status.

     Posted by Happy at 07/06/2009 @ 6:04pm

     ----------------------------------------------------

     Damn dude, you're just kicking Obama's #$%&! There's more man. Cheek it out!

     Obamanomics... in the Bush-Cheney years

     December 18, 2003 ASSOCIATED PRESS Fitch Ratings lowered the state's bond rating three notches, from A to BBB.

     May 22, 2004 Los Angeles Times Fitch and S&P continue to rank California as BBB.

     Aug 9, 2003 San Francisco Chronicle Standard & Poor's dropped the state's rating two weeks ago to BBB

     Posted by winyahn at 07/06/2009 @ 10:08pm

209. Posted by winyahn at 07/06/2009 @ 10:08pm

     All you've helped to prove, is California is a habitual deficit-holic, can't stay off the bottle of high spending and instead of periodic rehabs that don't last, the state needs a major `operation'.....what's been the constant through all these years? A Dem-dominated state legislature! I'd say lots of TEA Parties are in order!

     I hope, and would view it w/giddiness, if California elects to increase its taxes, by a lot, to fix its budget. As Texas begins to wane a bit, we could use more Cali refugees who are beginning to be noticeable in a pocket of high-tech just north of Houston called The Woodlands!

     It's about time Houston get to share some of them Cali refugees who've traditionally flocked to Austin.

     Posted by Happy at 07/06/2009 @ 10:35pm

210. Posted by Happy at 07/06/2009 @ 10:35pm

     His brain is starved of facts.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 10:45pm

211. Ccomfo1- I suggest you read Darin's link above to The American Prospect. That progressive, writing in 2001, painted a rosy picture of CA as a prog paradise, that was finally overcoming the constraints imposed on it by prop 13. so, if those constraints have been lifted for 8 years, how is prop 13 still a problem?

     Posted by twillie at 07/07/2009 @ 12:38am

212. It's about time Houston get to share some of them Cali refugees who've traditionally flocked to Austin. Posted by Happy at 07/06/2009 @ 10:35pm |

     Buahahaha...thanks for the laugh, Happy.

     Houston is a veritable cultural void compared to Austin and you'll see people flooding to Vegas or Portland before they'd sentence themselves to that hole.

     Heck, El Paso would be better.

     Posted by snowball777 at 07/07/2009 @ 12:46am

213. Heck, El Paso would be better.

     Posted by snowball777 at 07/07/2009 @ 12:46am

     Not sure about that. El Paso is really dusty. The dust will find it's way into everything. Into your nostrils, Your ears, your eyes and the clothes you wear, into your food, into your electronics. And after awhile,into your soul. I know.

     El Paso may not be the best choice. Unless you can stand the sand.

     Cali refugees would be served better by moving to the midwest. I live in Des Moines, IA. No lack of jobs here. Nice city. Clean. Good place to raise a family.

     I just gave away a best kept secret. And the reason is, I need a change. So if California moves here. I will be forced to leave.

     Like I said. I need a change..

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/07/2009 @ 05:51am

214. I will probably wait for all the Cali people who were not born there to go away. Then I will sneak in the back door and reclaim my homeland.. LOL.

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/07/2009 @ 05:56am

215. Ccomfo1- I suggest you read Darin's link above to The American Prospect. That progressive, writing in 2001, painted a rosy picture of CA as a prog paradise, that was finally overcoming the constraints imposed on it by prop 13. so, if those constraints have been lifted for 8 years, how is prop 13 still a problem?

     Posted by twillie at 07/07/2009 @ 12:38am

     It hasn't overcome it because it hasn't been repealed. I suggest you reaqd the article I posted about how Prop 13 is a piece of transformative legislation that was supposed to attach itself to the system and never allow itself to be removed. As long as prop 13 is in place it is only an illusion to say that it is not having an affect. The Paul Krugman article I first posted on the NYtimes, is the most up to date one I have seen.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/07/2009 @ 06:43am

216. Ccomfo1- I suggest you read Darin's link above to The American Prospect. That progressive, writing in 2001, painted a rosy picture of CA as a prog paradise, that was finally overcoming the constraints imposed on it by prop 13. so, if those constraints have been lifted for 8 years, how is prop 13 still a problem?

     Posted by twillie at 07/07/2009 @ 12:38am

     I know you absolutely refuse to believe that Republicans, especially Regan era Republicans are responsible for this but just look att he facts and use logic to step through them. You will see how this is completely linked to Prop 13 and that is why even though California is 6th in the nation in income taxes 11th overall and in like 23rd place in spending per 1000 dollarsd of income we are still barely limping along. We are not spending or tax more than other people yet we still are insolvent. That's because it goes beyond the normal conservative line of spend less tax less. In trying to tax less conservatives 30 years ago did not see the long term repurcussions of their actions on the solvency of the state of CA, which is why now that the economy is doing so poorly there is finally talk of repealing Prop 13, but which an ever fringe CA Republican party will not allow them to do. Hopefully once and for all they can change the Constitution and make some meaningful reform.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/07/2009 @ 06:48am

217. Posted by ibbleblibble at 07/06/2009 @ 11:58am

     Eek! You're one of them!

     ...and I used to have respect for you.

     ;o)

     Posted by Malcontent at 07/07/2009 @ 08:44am

218. Posted by chaoszen at 07/07/2009 @ 05:51am |

     I hear ya...I spent several years while my dad was in the Air Farce at WSMR in NM...you'd find an inch of sand in the bottom of your car that came in through the air vents and it would strip the paint off of anything, but it's still better than Houston.

     How do you know a Texan has taken viagara?

     They get a couple inches taller.

     Posted by snowball777 at 07/07/2009 @ 09:48am

219. Perhaps you'd like to see a return to those days? Posted by antisocialist at 07/06/2009 @ 7:45pm |

     Why didn't the seniors take care of themselves and prepare for their retirement like you're always saying everyone else should?

     Why didn't they sell their homes and move to a cheaper locale?

     For someone who complains about income redistribution and personal responsibility all the time, you seem to be calling the kettle black.

     Posted by snowball777 at 07/07/2009 @ 09:59am

220. Good God, is John Nichols shocked---SHOCKED---that this season's Dems won't go to the mat on jobs for the people? What did he think, the Obama administration would really go the full Keynsian route? Not with people like Geithner at the helm of the Treasury.

     Face it, folks: we did not elect a field Negro. We did quite the opposite. Next time, let's get over our trepidation at phantom threats to abortion and look at people who offer the real audacious form of hope: the notion that workers ought to control the means of production.

     Posted by DP in TC at 07/07/2009 @ 11:53am

221. "So, 1st in income tax, 1st in sales tax, 2nd in gasoline tax"

     This is actually deceptive. You are claiming that we are number 1 in income tax which isn't true. In actuality we are number 6. Our TOP income tax bracket is the highest in the nation but overall we are number 6 when it comes to total income tax.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/06/2009 @ 9:06pm

     While I and many others completely agree with that statistic, the quote I gave your was from your leftwing LA Times.

     Even they say we are 1st in the income tax.

     One of the problems with your figures is that CA gives less standard deduction, far less personal exemption than most states. And the top rate (other than the millionaire rate) starts at 47k for singles which is several hundred thousand less than most high tax states.

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/07/2009 @ 11:57am

222. As Happy put it so very well: "It will be a good show to see what happens in California and New York........as they are in the advanced phases of Obamanomics and regulatory & union-stranglehold Purgatory." The problems may have pre-dated Obama but they did not pre-date the Democrats. The chickens are coming home to roost in CA and NY. The Dems are getting what they deserve. Unfortunately there are others who will suffer as well. The big problem with socialism: Sooner or later you run out of other people's money.

     Posted by torgo2009 at 07/07/2009 @ 11:58am

223. Posted by snowball777 at 07/07/2009 @ 09:48am

     Good viagra joke. Although somehow I doubt if viagra would have any effect whatever on the likes of Anti.

     The Anti's of the world really need a planet of their own. I wouldn't want to live there, but it would be amusing to watch them from very far away.

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/07/2009 @ 12:15pm

224. Posted by torgo2009 at 07/07/2009 @ 11:58am |

     http://www.taxfoundation.org/ taxdata/show/289.html

     WRT State Income Tax COLLECTED per capita, CA is 11th, not 1st with $3152.

     One might ask WTF is wrong with the Republicans in Wyoming ($3911) and Alaska ($5060).

     I'm sure the hundreds of thousands of perma-temps loading Chinese crap onto trucks in Fontana for below-poverty wages (soon arriving at a Wal-Mart near you) feel truly empowered by the teachers and firefighters.

     You can try to lay this at the feet of the CA Dems, but the simple truth is that the legislature has been hamstrung by the initiative process and CA's willingness to pass bond measures instead of raising taxes as they should.

     CA should make > $1M 15%, $750,000 12%, and > $500,000 10%...budget problem solved. And if that means I won't get to share my state with Larry Ellison, so be it.

     I sincerely hope that Happy is right and that I can bid good riddance to the Pug fools leaving for Texas and Oklahoma in a reverse dustbowl migration back from whence their sorry asses came, but, unlike their idiotic SUVs, they won't be able to take their Central Valley farmland with them.

     Posted by snowball777 at 07/07/2009 @ 12:16pm

225. I guess we can all bailout Wallstreet and the Banks along with crooked insurance giants like AIG. But when it comes to helping out the 7th largest economy in the world, California. I guess they just have to suck it up.

     They have to suck up Republican obstructionism and crazy Pug economics.

     California is an example of what the entire country would look like (and increasingly does) if the neo-dicks had their way.

     But the tragedy is, the Democrats are so weak,ineffective and corrupt. Obamabush is a dissapointment. I truly hoped he was different. But it is my fault that I was fooled into believing that anything would really change.

     As the eternal optimist my only remaining hope is that the People will wake up and reclaim our great nation.

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/07/2009 @ 12:43pm

226. Once again conservatives are proven right given the tenor of the posts by the leftists.

     For them, there will never be too much taxation. Given their totalitarian bent, it would be wonderful to them if we gave all of our income to almighty govt to manage and control our lives.

     After all, in their minds, the masses are too stupid to make their own financial decisions. Only the govt knows what is best for them and thus it is only right that they pay the "small price" of the fruit of their labors so that mommy/daddy govt can take care of everything.

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/07/2009 @ 12:52pm

227. Posted by antisocialist at 07/07/2009 @ 12:52pm

     You seem to constantly ignore the fact that the Government in this country are ideally "The People". We are the government according to our Constitution.

     We are supposed to make the laws here. We are supposed to ensure the will of the people is done. If you look at the polls most of us want Single Payer Healthcare. Most of us want and end to wars of choice. Most of us want an end to the war on drugs. Most of us want an end to Nuclear weapons. Most of us want an end to sexual discrimination. Most of us want and end to poverty. Most of us want our jobs back. Most of us want an end to corporate control of our lives through the corruption of our politicians by lobbyists. Most of us want free education through college for those who qualify.

     The list goes on and on. But "some" of us like you want to subjugate these ideals. Some of us like you want to see a theocracy in this country. Some of us, like you want to see the status quo maintained, so that a few can dictate to the many.

     America is a country of the people, by the people and for the people.

     America is not a country for the few, the elite and the rich.

     You and your oligarchy can go to hell.

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/07/2009 @ 1:18pm

228. The list goes on and on. But "some" of us like you want to subjugate these ideals. Some of us like you want to see a theocracy in this country. Some of us, like you want to see the status quo maintained, so that a few can dictate to the many.

     America is a country of the people, by the people and for the people.

     America is not a country for the few, the elite and the rich.

     You and your oligarchy can go to hell.

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/07/2009 @ 1:18pm

     You are such a ridiculous ideological jerk at times. You have posted here long enough to know that my views are not what you charge.

     I do not want a theocracy in this country. That would be terrible.

     I have no part of any oligarchy and in fact fight against just that.

     I agree that America is of, by, and for the people. That is precisely why I have devoted a lifetime of fighting the tyranny of totalitarianism that your worldview represents and seeks to impose on the American people.

     Communism has proven wherever it has been tried that giving the level of control over the decisions of individuals, families, and their finances to a central govt has always been disasterous. It results in a loss of freedom, never a gain of freedoms.

     What years remain to me will continue to consist of fighting your type and your ideology with all that I have and am.

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/07/2009 @ 1:29pm

229. I do not want a theocracy in this country. That would be terrible.Posted by antisocialist at 07/07/2009 @ 1:29pm

     That is one lie. Is your nose getting bigger?

     I have no part of any oligarchy and in fact fight against just that. Posted by antisocialist at 07/07/2009 @ 1:29pm

     Another lie. I have been posting here long enough allright.

     Communism has proven wherever it has been tried that giving the level of control over the decisions of individuals, families, and their finances to a central govt has always been disasterous.Posted by antisocialist at 07/07/2009 @ 1:29pm

     Obviously you have not been paying attention to my posts. If you did you would know that in truth I am no Communist. I am an advocate of the Social Democracy that our country was founded on.

     I only seem to be a Communist to the likes of you and your ilk. That is what you call me. Comrade and such. You attempt to label me as a Communist, so I go along.

     In reality I am an American. And a patriotic American at that. So I feel it is my duty to fight those who would attempt to destroy my country.

     That would be you and the likes of you who post here.

     Yout screen name is half right. Anti, yes. Antiamerican.

     And I will continue to work until my last breath to destroy your kind.

     How is that for being an idealogical jerk?

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/07/2009 @ 2:05pm

230. While I and many others completely agree with that statistic, the quote I gave your was from your leftwing LA Times.

     Even they say we are 1st in the income tax.

     One of the problems with your figures is that CA gives less standard deduction, far less personal exemption than most states. And the top rate (other than the millionaire rate) starts at 47k for singles which is several hundred thousand less than most high tax states.

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/07/2009 @ 11:57am

     These aren't "MY" statistics, just like it isn't "MY leftist LAtimes", these are the statistics of the TAX FOUNDATION. They are taking into account all of that stuff to look at overall comparable rates. Just like the example I gave of the guy from Maryland was someone who came over and here and actually paid a noticeable amount less in taxes.

     So "My" LAtimes is wrong. They are practicing yellow journalism instead of posting the real facts.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/07/2009 @ 3:01pm

231. Once again conservatives are proven right given the tenor of the posts by the leftists.

     For them, there will never be too much taxation. Given their totalitarian bent, it would be wonderful to them if we gave all of our income to almighty govt to manage and control our lives.

     After all, in their minds, the masses are too stupid to make their own financial decisions. Only the govt knows what is best for them and thus it is only right that they pay the "small price" of the fruit of their labors so that mommy/daddy govt can take care of everything.

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/07/2009 @ 12:52p

     Please stop these posts. They render all of your intelligent fact based posts pointless. Again according to the tax foundation per capita, Alaska and Wyoming are taxing more than CA. Two hard right states. So it shows that for some reason you guys don't my taxing so much either.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/07/2009 @ 3:04pm

232. Please stop these posts. They render all of your intelligent fact based posts pointless. Again according to the tax foundation per capita, Alaska and Wyoming are taxing more than CA. Two hard right states. So it shows that for some reason you guys don't my taxing so much either.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/07/2009 @ 3:04pm

     Your data is still distorted. The taxes in Alaska for individuals and families is ranked 50th.

     Your total taxes is because of the taxes on oil revenues in Alaska.

     Back to property taxes;

     Thanks to prop 13, we no longer are burdened by outrageous property taxes. But even with prop 13, the Tax Foundation ranks CA as 10th in prop taxes paid.

     Also, prop 13 remains popular with voters in CA because it has given us some level of control over the runaway spending by the leftist Democratic State legislators. They spend at rate higher than the inflation rate. They increase public school spending even as enrollment has declined the past few years. They are owned by the Teachers union.

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/07/2009 @ 3:45pm

233. "Your data is still distorted. The taxes in Alaska for individuals and families is ranked 50th.

     Your total taxes is because of the taxes on oil revenues in Alaska. "

     It's not distorted, if you look at my post I said OVERALL taxes, not personal income.

     "Thanks to prop 13, we no longer are burdened by outrageous property taxes. But even with prop 13, the Tax Foundation ranks CA as 10th in prop taxes paid.

     Also, prop 13 remains popular with voters in CA because it has given us some level of control over the runaway spending by the leftist Democratic State legislators. They spend at rate higher than the inflation rate. They increase public school spending even as enrollment has declined the past few years. They are owned by the Teachers union."

     It's only "runaway spending" because they don't have a semi-predictable platform to lay their spending on. Instead they are entrusting any spending to completely erratic income taces.

     "They increase public school spending even as enrollment has declined the past few years."

     "But "overfunded" compared to what? In 2001-02, California spent $6,542 per student, compared to the U.S. average of $7,158, putting us 32nd among the states. When high costs are considered, we ranked 46th among the states, spending only 82 percent of the national average. The states that spent less included Mississippi, Tennessee and Utah -- hardly inspiring comparisons. "

     That is from this article: http://tinyurl.com/ms3g8k

     So we spend 46th in the nation on education yeah that's completely run away spending. That means every other state in the union including Arizona are spending god awful amounts per student. I wonder why that is?

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/07/2009 @ 6:37pm

234. Also, prop 13 remains popular with voters in CA because it has given us some level of control over the runaway spending by the leftist Democratic State legislators. They spend at rate higher than the inflation rate. They increase public school spending even as enrollment has declined the past few years. They are owned by the Teachers union.

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/07/2009 @ 3:45pm

     Prop 13 remains popular not because it allows you to check "runaway spending" it's because people don't want to pay taxes. That is why. It has nothing to do with spending. When the programs are there people are more than happy to use them. It's because people don't want to pay taxes and it doesn't mater the consequences of those actions. It doesn't matter that Prop 13 is bankrupting the state.

     You can sugar coat it all you like but it comes down to plain old simple not liking to pay taxes.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/07/2009 @ 6:39pm

235. "They increase public school spending even as enrollment has declined the past few years."

     Oh and maybe the reason they spent more per student was because right now we are 46th in the nation when it comes to public school spending with the current amount of students.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/07/2009 @ 6:40pm

236. http://www.edsource.org/iss_fin_FAQ_cacompares.html

     Oh I'm sorry. According to edsource we managed to move up to 24th in the nation. So we are right at the average. Arizona being the bottom. Yeah that's CRAZY out of control spending. Average is really insane. Maybe the reason they increased spending is because right now in classes sizes we are still ranked 50th in the nation.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/07/2009 @ 6:44pm

237. Posted by antisocialist at 07/07/2009 @ 3:45pm

     Prop 13 was incredible short sightedness is what it boils down to. There were plenty of ways to fix the tax system without it. They chose the one system that was completely worthless and would cripple the state later. It's not the Dem's fault the Republicans during Regan times were too shortsighted to see the result of their actions, or worse yet didn't care about the results.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/07/2009 @ 6:46pm

238. And before you complain about teachers being paid the most in the nation. You should look at the difference in the cost of living in LA than in most anywhere else. Or in San Francisco.

     http://swz.salary.com/CostOfLivingWizard

     /layouthtmls/coll_metrodetail_98.html

     That is a good site for that. You can put in your current salary in any city in the world and compare it with any other city to see what the difference is in cost of living. To see how much you would have to make to sustain your current lifestyle.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/07/2009 @ 9:19pm

239. Did you know that if you live in Birmingham Alabama you have to make on average 73.4% more money to sustain your lifestyle.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/07/2009 @ 9:20pm

240. Posted by antisocialist at 07/07/2009 @ 1:29pm |

     "I do not want a theocracy in this country. That would be terrible."

     Agreed; there are already enough sex scandals in Washington.

     "I have no part of any oligarchy and in fact fight against just that."

     Uh huh...you're a 1st chair trumpet for the MIC, as big an oligarchy as the planet has ever seen.

     "I agree that America is of, by, and for the people."

     And yet you argue against the public interest at almost every turn; curious.

     "That is precisely why I have devoted a lifetime of fighting the tyranny of totalitarianism that your worldview represents and seeks to impose on the American people."

     Get that strawman...get him good.

     "Communism has proven wherever it has been tried that giving the level of control over the decisions of individuals, families, and their finances to a central govt has always been disasterous. It results in a loss of freedom, never a gain of freedoms."

     I'm sure the folks getting visits from the sheriff because Bushonomics imploded and they've lost their jobs and can't make the balloon payment on their Bank of Lynching America subprime IED don't really feel the same level of control over their lives that you think they do.

     Unregulated, neoliberal capitalism is just as much a straight-jacket for 60% of the US.

     Why debate about what kind of wood was used to make the barrel one is being bent over?

     "What years remain to me will continue to consist of fighting your type and your ideology with all that I have and am."

     By attempting to paint you with a broad brush that is in no way indicative of what you actually believe and hurling pointless epithets into the digital void; brava.

     Posted by snowball777 at 07/08/2009 @ 12:32am

241. Dispelling the lies and misinformation about California's prop 13

     http://hjta.org/faq/

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/08/2009 @ 12:36pm

242. Posted by antisocialist at 07/08/2009 @ 12:36pm |

     Jarvis on Jarvis' Tax Revolt...how incredibly non-biased of you. Not.

     Do I agree we need to look into spending less on services in CA? Yes.

     Do I believe that prop taxes suck when the RE market booms like crazy making it difficult for seniors to make their payments? Yes.

     Do I believe that a 2/3 majority should be required to adjust the tax structure of a state with 24M more people than it had in Jarvis' day? Hell no.

     Prop 13 was the wrong solution for simple problem and has caused more harm to CA than it could have possibly helped in 30 years.

     Posted by snowball777 at 07/08/2009 @ 1:30pm

243. Jarvis on Jarvis' Tax Revolt...how incredibly non-biased of you. Not.

     Do I agree we need to look into spending less on services in CA? Yes.

     Do I believe that prop taxes suck when the RE market booms like crazy making it difficult for seniors to make their payments? Yes.

     Do I believe that a 2/3 majority should be required to adjust the tax structure of a state with 24M more people than it had in Jarvis' day? Hell no.

     Prop 13 was the wrong solution for simple problem and has caused more harm to CA than it could have possibly helped in 30 years.

     Posted by snowball777 at 07/08/2009 @ 1:30pm

     HJTA remains one of the best friends of the residents of California.

     I remain thankful every week for the 2/3's rule and Prop 13.

     Without these two restrictions, California would have become completely unlivable years ago. It's bad enough now, but I shudder to think what it would be like if your view on taxation here succeeded.

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/08/2009 @ 2:03pm

244. Without these two restrictions, California would have become completely unlivable years ago. It's bad enough now, but I shudder to think what it would be like if your view on taxation here succeeded.

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/08/2009 @ 2:03pm |

     The sentence of someone who refuses to see the truth and instead wants to just continue blaming Democrats instead.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/08/2009 @ 4:40pm

245. It's much like the people who still think No Child Left Behind was a great bill that is working magnificently.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/08/2009 @ 4:54pm

246. Without these two restrictions, California would have become completely unlivable years ago. It's bad enough now, but I shudder to think what it would be like if your view on taxation here succeeded.

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/08/2009 @ 2:03pm |

     The sentence of someone who refuses to see the truth and instead wants to just continue blaming Democrats instead.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/08/2009 @ 4:40pm

     No, I just don't agree with your view of what is the truth.

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/08/2009 @ 6:35pm

247. No, I just don't agree with your view of what is the truth.

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/08/2009 @ 6:35pm

     My view is backed up by facts and the reality that exists. The reality is California does not spend more per person than other states, does not tax more per person than other states and yet it is bankrupt. Now you can keep saying it's runaway spending but the facts don't show that.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/08/2009 @ 6:40pm

248. Posted by antisocialist at 07/08/2009 @ 6:35pm

     You want to know what one of the biggest spending increases and therefore biggest additions to the budget has been? Prisons.

     http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2009/04/a-dialog-on-sta.html

     Interesting article about CA state spending.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/08/2009 @ 7:00pm

249. http://emergentfool.com/2009/05/25/more-on-the-california-state-budget/

     Here is another article. Combine that with the previous one and you will find that incarceration is indeed the biggest spending piece. So do you want to reduce incarceration rates?

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/08/2009 @ 7:06pm

250. So Anti, can you come up with some evidence that disproves the assertions I have made? Because so far all of your evidence has been disproven by mine and you opinion on the matter is essentially boiling down to damn the facts the I will believe what I want to believe. I wait with bated breath for you to prove me wrong.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/08/2009 @ 7:11pm

251. My view is backed up by facts and the reality that exists. The reality is California does not spend more per person than other states, does not tax more per person than other states and yet it is bankrupt. Now you can keep saying it's runaway spending but the facts don't show that.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/08/2009 @ 6:40pm

     1st of all, it doesn't matter what other states spend. Costs are different in each state.

     2. California spending has outpaced inflation over the past 5 years.

     <The Mercury News analyzed state spending, line by line, from 2003 to 2008. The major conclusions:

     California's general fund under Schwarzenegger's tenure has grown 34.9 percent -- from $76.3 billion in the 2003-04 fiscal year to $102.9 billion in 2007-08.

     But over that same period, population growth and inflation together grew by only 21.5 percent.

     If state spending had grown only at that rate, it would have reached $92.7 billion last year. Instead, Schwarzenegger and the Legislature spent $10.2 billion more.>

     http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_11649004

     I quoted a moderate left resource for you CCC.

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/08/2009 @ 7:33pm

252. So Anti, can you come up with some evidence that disproves the assertions I have made? Because so far all of your evidence has been disproven by mine and you opinion on the matter is essentially boiling down to damn the facts the I will believe what I want to believe. I wait with bated breath for you to prove me wrong.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/08/2009 @ 7:11pm

     Actually I'm still waiting for YOU to prove me wrong.

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/08/2009 @ 7:40pm

253. Actually I'm still waiting for YOU to prove me wrong.

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/08/2009 @ 7:40pm

     I've proved you wrong accross the board. You have yet to post any facts to back up your point all you have done is said no my view is right and yours is wrong. I have posted a multitude of facts so far. So please, where are the facts, that it isn't Prop 13, other than, NO I DON'T WANT TO BELIEVE.

     "1st of all, it doesn't matter what other states spend. Costs are different in each state. "

     Yes, they are different this is perfectly true. But you can take into account costs in comparable places. We are one of the states that cost the most to live in and have some of the most expensive services because we are one of the most populated states with 2 of the biggest city centers in the country and a couple of major industries based here. So yes it is more expensive here than in most places. But if you adjust you will find that we still spend less per person comparable to other states.

     On top of that most of the spending increases have gone to incarceration. I have already posted the statements about education so that is a moot point. Unless you want prisoners walking free of course that's fine.

     You have yet to post anything to actually argue the points I have made you have simply resorted to "I am right and you are wrong."

     I await your facts not just your opinions and if none come I guess this conversation is closed.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/09/2009 @ 03:18am