California 'Hell-Hole' to Run $7 Billion Budget Surplus

[OSR stands with Israel]

Conservatives label CA a hell hole because of demographics and nothing else. You never hear them complain about quality of life in WV, KY, OK, KS, ect.

http://freerepublic.com/focus/news/948436/posts

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1949209/posts?q=1&;page=1

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1952705/posts

[John Dule]

Conservatives label CA a hell hole because of demographics and nothing else. You never hear them complain about quality of life in WV, KY, OK, KS, ect.

No. We call it a hellhole because it's prohibitively expensive in most metropolitan areas due to terrible zoning laws and rent control, which traps the working poor in a situation where they spend a huge percentage of their earnings on rent and gas. Oh, and violent drug addicts wander the streets in the cities. I love my state, but the people in this thread trying to pretend that it's some sort of progressive Xanadu (just because the government collects a lot of revenue from techies) are definitely not well-informed with regards to what it's actually like to live here.

So awesome to see conservatives give a flying f*** about the Working Poor when used solely to dunk on a successful liberal state.

Badger, I have tried to take you seriously on multiple occasions. But your constant insistence on assuming the worst of everyone you argue with makes this impossible. You add nothing to this forum's discourse aside from cheap generalizations.

There's nothing generalized about it. It's a very specific indictment about Republican policies. Sorry if reality intrudes on your cool dunk on California.

The generalization is that conservatives only care about the working poor when they criticize liberal policies. Has it crossed your mind that people might be libertarians or conservatives because they genuinely think those policies will help the poor the most?

[Landslide Lyndon]

Are we really comparing California to places Republicans ran to the ground like Kansas, Oklahoma, and Kentucky?

[OSR stands with Israel]

Are we really comparing California to places Republicans ran to the ground like Kansas, Oklahoma, and Kentucky?

Comparing those states is extremely disingenuous in every way .


If you wanna compete California to any state , compare it to Texas and Texas is clearly better

[Landslide Lyndon]

Are we really comparing California to places Republicans ran to the ground like Kansas, Oklahoma, and Kentucky?

Comparing those states is extremely disingenuous in every way .


If you wanna compete California to any state , compare it to Texas and Texas is clearly better

There was one Greek politician long ago who said that in our country "the numbers thrive and the people wither".
Texas seems to be a similar case.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Are we really comparing California to places Republicans ran to the ground like Kansas, Oklahoma, and Kentucky?

Comparing those states is extremely disingenuous in every way .


If you wanna compete California to any state , compare it to Texas and Texas is clearly better

There was one Greek politician long ago who said that in our country "the numbers thrive and the people wither".
Texas seems to be a similar case.

In what way is that true?

Texas is a far more affordable state than California, for starters.

[Mr. Smith]

Conservatives label CA a hell hole because of demographics and nothing else. You never hear them complain about quality of life in WV, KY, OK, KS, ect.

No. We call it a hellhole because it's prohibitively expensive in most metropolitan areas due to terrible zoning laws and rent control, which traps the working poor in a situation where they spend a huge percentage of their earnings on rent and gas. Oh, and violent drug addicts wander the streets in the cities. I love my state, but the people in this thread trying to pretend that it's some sort of progressive Xanadu (just because the government collects a lot of revenue from techies) are definitely not well-informed with regards to what it's actually like to live here.

So awesome to see conservatives give a flying f*** about the Working Poor when used solely to dunk on a successful liberal state.

Badger, I have tried to take you seriously on multiple occasions. But your constant insistence on assuming the worst of everyone you argue with makes this impossible. You add nothing to this forum's discourse aside from cheap generalizations.

There's nothing generalized about it. It's a very specific indictment about Republican policies. Sorry if reality intrudes on your cool dunk on California.

The generalization is that conservatives only care about the working poor when they criticize liberal policies. Has it crossed your mind that people might be libertarians or conservatives because they genuinely think those policies will help the poor the most?

It's very hard to take such claims seriously when you hear a sh*& ton of rhetoric against the poor for "terrible individual choices" and for "not pulling themselves up by the bootstraps".

I don't recall anyone ever questioning if just maybe Dems actually think taxing the rich might actually end up being a benefit to them in the long term. Why exactly then should conservatives and libertarians be afforded that luxury then when most of their rhetoric towards the poor is so hateful at face value?

[Badger]

Conservatives label CA a hell hole because of demographics and nothing else. You never hear them complain about quality of life in WV, KY, OK, KS, ect.

No. We call it a hellhole because it's prohibitively expensive in most metropolitan areas due to terrible zoning laws and rent control, which traps the working poor in a situation where they spend a huge percentage of their earnings on rent and gas. Oh, and violent drug addicts wander the streets in the cities. I love my state, but the people in this thread trying to pretend that it's some sort of progressive Xanadu (just because the government collects a lot of revenue from techies) are definitely not well-informed with regards to what it's actually like to live here.

So awesome to see conservatives give a flying f*** about the Working Poor when used solely to dunk on a successful liberal state.

Badger, I have tried to take you seriously on multiple occasions. But your constant insistence on assuming the worst of everyone you argue with makes this impossible. You add nothing to this forum's discourse aside from cheap generalizations.

There's nothing generalized about it. It's a very specific indictment about Republican policies. Sorry if reality intrudes on your cool dunk on California.

The generalization is that conservatives only care about the working poor when they criticize liberal policies. Has it crossed your mind that people might be libertarians or conservatives because they genuinely think those policies will help the poor the most?

Honestly, no. If you believe that, you are honestly the first libertarian I ever conversed with, and I've conversed with a hell of a lot, who genuinely believes that. At least Beyond some b******* cut billionaires taxes and that will help the homeless out by creating more jobs crap that even they don't seem to believe

[Badger]

Just going to conclude before I go play some computer games after taking off early for the weekend that it is particularly adorable to see California conservatives b**** and moan about what a horrible socialist it managed hellscape thirst aid is.

California conserva tards - - I hate California! The price of housing is immense. Taxes are high. Democrats have ruined this state!

Everyone else - - ok, the road to Oklahoma or Arkansas is that way. Need help packing?

Conserva tards - - um, well.....

Texas> California

In terms of obesity, people without health insurance coverage, High School Dropout rates, sub proficiency scores in math, science, English, bad highways, executions, oh, and to their advantage fossil fuel deposits. Sure.

On pretty much everything else that matters, except in your eyes electing Republicans to Statewide government, Texas is clearly horribly behind California

I am certainly no defender of Texas, but every cited educational deficiency seems to be made up based on stereotypes. The high school graduation rate is effectively at the upper quartile of US states whereas California is at the lower quartile.

As far as test scores, Texas is considered 'significantly above' the national average for both average and number of proficient students for mathematics and science. California is considered 'significantly below' in both subjects. Both are considered 'significantly below' for English. All subjects seems to have a very obvious north/south divide except for when Texas bucks the trend.

https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/profiles/stateprofile/

Interesting. Still, Google the u.s. & World Report ranking of State education systems. California ranks at least a moderate 21st in the nation, where is Texas ranks a rather dismal 34th.

No note about health insurance coverage from anyone I see.

[Joe Republic]

They have completely and utterly destroyed the education system of my state

Evidently.

[DC Al Fine]

Conservatives label CA a hell hole because of demographics and nothing else. You never hear them complain about quality of life in WV, KY, OK, KS, ect.

No. We call it a hellhole because it's prohibitively expensive in most metropolitan areas due to terrible zoning laws and rent control, which traps the working poor in a situation where they spend a huge percentage of their earnings on rent and gas. Oh, and violent drug addicts wander the streets in the cities. I love my state, but the people in this thread trying to pretend that it's some sort of progressive Xanadu (just because the government collects a lot of revenue from techies) are definitely not well-informed with regards to what it's actually like to live here.

So awesome to see conservatives give a flying f*** about the Working Poor when used solely to dunk on a successful liberal state.

Badger, I have tried to take you seriously on multiple occasions. But your constant insistence on assuming the worst of everyone you argue with makes this impossible. You add nothing to this forum's discourse aside from cheap generalizations.

There's nothing generalized about it. It's a very specific indictment about Republican policies. Sorry if reality intrudes on your cool dunk on California.

The generalization is that conservatives only care about the working poor when they criticize liberal policies. Has it crossed your mind that people might be libertarians or conservatives because they genuinely think those policies will help the poor the most?

It's very hard to take such claims seriously when you hear a sh*& ton of rhetoric against the poor for "terrible individual choices" and for "not pulling themselves up by the bootstraps".

I don't recall anyone ever questioning if just maybe Dems actually think taxing the rich might actually end up being a benefit to them in the long term. Why exactly then should conservatives and libertarians be afforded that luxury then when most of their rhetoric towards the poor is so hateful at face value?

I've heard those phrases an order of magnitude more from Atlas progressives strawmanning than from conservatives.

[DC Al Fine]

And yet we suffer from critical public underinvestment in all infrastructures from transport to electricity to housing, with catastrophic consequences. Muh liberal Dreamland.

One of the odder pathologies of American politics is the need to defend places that vote the right way, even from apolitical criticisms or criticisms from one's own side. As you noted, their are tons of good reasons to criticize California from the left. One doesn't see quite the same knee jerk defense of, say downtown Toronto, Newcastle etc.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

Interesting. Still, Google the u.s. & World Report ranking of State education systems. California ranks at least a moderate 21st in the nation, where is Texas ranks a rather dismal 34th.

No note about health insurance coverage from anyone I see.

I found this source. California is dragged up by its #4 ranking for colleges (which is a great deal less important for residents than K-12 on account of choice and how it affects everybody). Its K-12 ranking (37th) on this source is also lower than Texas (33rd).

I obviously give California credit for creating an incredible public college system (with some help from the likes of Stanford, Pepperdine and the plethora of Catholic colleges up-and-down the state) since this attracts permanent residents who will be providers of the innovation that drives the state's economy. New Jersey has the exact opposite problem of losing talent to everywhere else despite its incredible K-12 ranking, so it's a valid economic strategy assisted by corporate capital. But in spite of having ~10% of the top high schools in the country for the children of its richest residents, the rest of the K-12 system is rated as subpar for the rest of the people who are already there. It's a tale of severe inequality where even the very strong top can't bring the overall averages up very much.

I am in complete agreement with you on healthcare. California is clearly superior in that respect.

[Badger]

Interesting. Still, Google the u.s. & World Report ranking of State education systems. California ranks at least a moderate 21st in the nation, where is Texas ranks a rather dismal 34th.

No note about health insurance coverage from anyone I see.

I found this source. California is dragged up by its #4 ranking for colleges (which is a great deal less important for residents than K-12 on account of choice and how it affects everybody). Its K-12 ranking (37th) on this source is also lower than Texas (33rd).

I obviously give California credit for creating an incredible public college system (with some help from the likes of Stanford, Pepperdine and the plethora of Catholic colleges up-and-down the state) since this attracts permanent residents who will be providers of the innovation that drives the state's economy. New Jersey has the exact opposite problem of losing talent to everywhere else despite its incredible K-12 ranking, so it's a valid economic strategy assisted by corporate capital. But in spite of having ~10% of the top high schools in the country for the children of its richest residents, the rest of the K-12 system is rated as subpar for the rest of the people who are already there. It's a tale of severe inequality where even the very strong top can't bring the overall averages up very much.

I am in complete agreement with you on healthcare. California is clearly superior in that respect.

An accurate assessment. I will simply note that California's secondary education system clearly needs Improvement, but looking to conservative Texas as some type of noteworthy Improvement is incorrect. You are dead on in the fact that California's commitment to a reasonably well funded Public University system has contributed immensely to its economic and population gains.

[R.P. McM]

Conservatives label CA a hell hole because of demographics and nothing else. You never hear them complain about quality of life in WV, KY, OK, KS, ect.

No. We call it a hellhole because it's prohibitively expensive in most metropolitan areas due to terrible zoning laws and rent control, which traps the working poor in a situation where they spend a huge percentage of their earnings on rent and gas. Oh, and violent drug addicts wander the streets in the cities. I love my state, but the people in this thread trying to pretend that it's some sort of progressive Xanadu (just because the government collects a lot of revenue from techies) are definitely not well-informed with regards to what it's actually like to live here.

So awesome to see conservatives give a flying f*** about the Working Poor when used solely to dunk on a successful liberal state.

Badger, I have tried to take you seriously on multiple occasions. But your constant insistence on assuming the worst of everyone you argue with makes this impossible. You add nothing to this forum's discourse aside from cheap generalizations.

There's nothing generalized about it. It's a very specific indictment about Republican policies. Sorry if reality intrudes on your cool dunk on California.

The generalization is that conservatives only care about the working poor when they criticize liberal policies. Has it crossed your mind that people might be libertarians or conservatives because they genuinely think those policies will help the poor the most?

No. There was a time — prior to Trump — when I believed the NR/AEI crowd had an actual constituency. Now I know better — it's just WHITE POWER! all the way down. You can say whatever you like, but no one on the left is going to accept that you're sincere, or that real voters genuinely agree with you. Republicans are just racially retrograde whites, why are we trying to disguise their motivations?

[Kingpoleon]

State budgets don’t equal federal budgets; with the exception of... Kasich? Basically nobody has ever balanced a federal budget and then a state budget. Heck, George Dubya was “fiscally responsible” in Texas.

[Mr. Smith]

Conservatives label CA a hell hole because of demographics and nothing else. You never hear them complain about quality of life in WV, KY, OK, KS, ect.

No. We call it a hellhole because it's prohibitively expensive in most metropolitan areas due to terrible zoning laws and rent control, which traps the working poor in a situation where they spend a huge percentage of their earnings on rent and gas. Oh, and violent drug addicts wander the streets in the cities. I love my state, but the people in this thread trying to pretend that it's some sort of progressive Xanadu (just because the government collects a lot of revenue from techies) are definitely not well-informed with regards to what it's actually like to live here.

So awesome to see conservatives give a flying f*** about the Working Poor when used solely to dunk on a successful liberal state.

Badger, I have tried to take you seriously on multiple occasions. But your constant insistence on assuming the worst of everyone you argue with makes this impossible. You add nothing to this forum's discourse aside from cheap generalizations.

There's nothing generalized about it. It's a very specific indictment about Republican policies. Sorry if reality intrudes on your cool dunk on California.

The generalization is that conservatives only care about the working poor when they criticize liberal policies. Has it crossed your mind that people might be libertarians or conservatives because they genuinely think those policies will help the poor the most?

It's very hard to take such claims seriously when you hear a sh*& ton of rhetoric against the poor for "terrible individual choices" and for "not pulling themselves up by the bootstraps".

I don't recall anyone ever questioning if just maybe Dems actually think taxing the rich might actually end up being a benefit to them in the long term. Why exactly then should conservatives and libertarians be afforded that luxury then when most of their rhetoric towards the poor is so hateful at face value?

I've heard those phrases an order of magnitude more from Atlas progressives strawmanning than from conservatives.

You live in a state that believes in some kind of welfare state from all partisan sides, and you weren't around here and unlikely to be political in any way when the zenith of that thinking was there before The Recession.

So of course you'd think it's a strawman argument, rather than a verbatim argument amongst the GOP.

[DINGO Joe]

Meanwhile in KY:

Memo: Gov.-elect Beshear to face a massive budget shortfall

A memo from outgoing Gov. Matt Bevin's administration says Gov.-elect Andy Beshear faces a massive budget shortfall as he prepares to take office.

The memo from Bevin's budget director estimates the shortfall could exceed $1 billion during the next two year

[Landslide Lyndon]

Meanwhile in KY:

Memo: Gov.-elect Beshear to face a massive budget shortfall

A memo from outgoing Gov. Matt Bevin's administration says Gov.-elect Andy Beshear faces a massive budget shortfall as he prepares to take office.

The memo from Bevin's budget director estimates the shortfall could exceed $1 billion during the next two year

Shocking.

[Badger]

Meanwhile in KY:

Memo: Gov.-elect Beshear to face a massive budget shortfall

A memo from outgoing Gov. Matt Bevin's administration says Gov.-elect Andy Beshear faces a massive budget shortfall as he prepares to take office.

The memo from Bevin's budget director estimates the shortfall could exceed $1 billion during the next two year

Any autopsy results as to why? Is this because of some recent downturn in the Kentucky economy ( beyond the half-century downturn in the coal industry it's been suffering)? Or did Bevin and the Republicans in the legislature try to recreate brownback's failed Kansas experiment in Kentucky?

[ProudModerate2]

To put this into perspective ...
The California 7 Billion dollar surplus, is larger than the entire yearly budget for some states (5 states to be exact: DE, SC SD, MT, NH and VT).

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._state_budgets

[Badger]

To put this into perspective ...
The California 7 Billion dollar surplus, is larger than the entire yearly budget for some states (5 states to be exact: DE, SC, MT, NH and VT).

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._state_budgets

South Carolina's entire state budget is less than 7 million a year? What a crap hole that place must be

[Technocracy Timmy]

I’ve been back in California for one day after being in Texas for 7 months and I think I would rather live in a box on the 405 for the rest of my life than to redo those 7 months.

[Santander]

To put this into perspective ...
The California 7 Billion dollar surplus, is larger than the entire yearly budget for some states (5 states to be exact: DE, SC, MT, NH and VT).

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._state_budgets

South Carolina's entire state budget is less than 7 million a year? What a crap hole that place must be

He meant SD, and it's billions.

[ProudModerate2]

To put this into perspective ...
The California 7 Billion dollar surplus, is larger than the entire yearly budget for some states (5 states to be exact: DE, SC, MT, NH and VT).

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._state_budgets

South Carolina's entire state budget is less than 7 million a year? What a crap hole that place must be

I'm sorry Badger, but I made an error.
I originally wrote "SC," but meant to write "SD" (South Dakota).
It has been corrected now, in the original post.
And remember, we are talking billions, not "millions" (you wrote millions in your post, but I'm sure you meant billions).
Just an FYI ... the South Carolina yearly budget is listed at about 29.5 billion.