Despise Dubelya - embrace Arnie
Discussion
LA, why is the cost of living so much higher in CA than in other states? Apparently everything costs much more, and seems disproportionately more expensive than, say, life in FL (not that it's a model state or anything). Just wondering. We don't have a state income tax. What is their deficit from anyway? There must be something CA spends a lot more money on than other states.
seafarer said:
LA, why is the cost of living so much higher in CA than in other states? Apparently everything costs much more, and seems disproportionately more expensive than, say, life in FL (not that it's a model state or anything). Just wondering. We don't have a state income tax. What is their deficit from anyway? There must be something CA spends a lot more money on than other states.
For starters California has to buy a lot of their electricity from Washington. Sorry for buttin' in LA.
Trooper2.
Don't agree LA, but then I don't have to live it. I reckon Arnie's making the best of a bad job. He took over a state in undeclared bankruptcy, that was being run by a spineless grey man that no one would listen to.
Through being Mr Charisma, he managed to get consensus on a rights issue to finance their debt, and is justifiably tightening belts until California is out of the mire.
As for being an actor rather than a politician - what hindrance is that? At least he has the sense to use professional advisers, and the presence and popularity to get things done. Didn't seem to harm old Ronnie Reagan either - if Arnie can get the law changed on US presidents being born in the US (which will be difficult as it'd be a constitutional amendment), one day he'll be in Dubya's shoes. "I'll be back..."
Through being Mr Charisma, he managed to get consensus on a rights issue to finance their debt, and is justifiably tightening belts until California is out of the mire.
As for being an actor rather than a politician - what hindrance is that? At least he has the sense to use professional advisers, and the presence and popularity to get things done. Didn't seem to harm old Ronnie Reagan either - if Arnie can get the law changed on US presidents being born in the US (which will be difficult as it'd be a constitutional amendment), one day he'll be in Dubya's shoes. "I'll be back..."
BMGM3 said:
At least Bush started as a businessman and moved into politics .I can see how people may have voted for him . What on earth posses Americans to vote for a man that's nothing more than a bad actor ?
Arnie was a millionaire businessman long before he became an actor and, unlike Dubya, his businesses were successful and wern't started with his fathers money and connections...
branflakes said:Oh, come on......
At least Bush started as a businessman and moved into politics .I can see how people may have voted for him . What on earth posses Americans to vote for a man that's nothing more than a bad actor ?
Arnie was a millionaire businessman long before he became an actor and, unlike Dubya, his businesses were successful and wern't started with his fathers money and connections...
Trying to put a value on the relative political acumen of these two muppets is like playing "Rate my Poo".
Cheers
Pat
seafarer said:
LA, why is the cost of living so much higher in CA than in other states? Apparently everything costs much more, and seems disproportionately more expensive than, say, life in FL (not that it's a model state or anything). Just wondering. We don't have a state income tax. What is their deficit from anyway? There must be something CA spends a lot more money on than other states.
Simple, really.
California is SO much more inefficient than most states. There is so little accomplished with so much spent, the mind boggles!
One half of the state budget is earmarked for Education.
That's right-50% of the collected tax dollars, as mandated in the State Constitution.
What does that mean?
Per pupil, California spends in the top 20% of states.
What does California get in return?
For all age groups (5-12, 12-18) average test results in the BOTTOM 10-15%. What is the response from the State Education chief when this information came out?????
Any guesses???????
I'll wait..... (whistles a tune....)
Ready????
I quote, " We need to spend more money to improve California's Education system."
You can transfer any of your Nanny State wingeing to California simply by subsituting CA for UK.
Fact:
(Ok, these figures are close. If you like, YOU can look them up)
In the 1950-1960's, California spent 25% of the state's budget on highways, bridges, dams and other Public Works projects, with less than 10% going to Social programs. In 40 years, that situation is now reversed, with no possible way to dislodge the entrenched Special Intrests, voter blocks and people who think they are "Intitled" to State tax dollars. If the Government and the Governor does not have the money, it can't be spent, no matter how loudly people cry and moan.
California, during the Tech Stock boom in the 90's, spent money like an inebriated Midshipman on leave, on Social Programs, feel-good stuff with NO thought to the future of these programs if the revenue to the state did not continue to increase. Then the Clinton Justice Dept. sued Microsoft, the U.S. stock market (and the world's) took a dive, hurting California in particular. Then, during a period of hot weather and little rain, the previous Governor locked the state into long term contracts to buy electricity for (the equivalent) of a Dollar, when it now is selling for 10 cents, which, since California is now having a surplus of electricity, is what it is being sold for.
Doesn't that sound like sound fiscal policy?? Buy high, sell low??
And I don't want to hear about Enron, there was no gun to the head of anyone, forcing those prices to be paid.
Sorry LA, raising taxes will not fix the problems in California, just like raising taxes has not -and will not- fix YOUR problems in the UK. There is giong to have to be some serious stands taken on some serious issues, if California OR the UK is going to become better places to live, raise a family and earn a living.
Tuppence,
Dave
>> Edited by just dave on Friday 14th January 19:54
I go to the States quite a lot and I watched with interest when Arnie put himself forward as a candidate as Governor. I often tuned in to see what his policies would be, but all he ever said was "I'll be back" and "asta la vista baby". I thought "the Californians won't possibly vore someone who never talks about policies" - how wrong I was.
los angeles said:
Thankfully, I'm not yet eligibile to vote, Srebbe, having refused to take on USA citizenship. I shall die an impoverished Scottish scribbler.
LA,
Has the rain dampened your synapses??? Since when, in the State of California, do you have to be a citizen of EITHER California or the US to vote here????
Same for the State of Washington and their Governors race. I ONE county, there were almost 2,000 more votes counted that registered voters. Democrat votes just kept showing up before, during and after each recount, until the Democrat finally won by 180 votes.
just dave said:
One half of the state budget is earmarked for Education.
That's right-50% of the collected tax dollars, as mandated in the State Constitution.
What does that mean?
Per pupil, California spends in the top 20% of states.
What does California get in return?
For all age groups (5-12, 12-18) average test results in the BOTTOM 10-15%. What is the response from the State Education chief when this information came out?????
Any guesses???????
I'll wait..... (whistles a tune....)
Ready????
I quote, " We need to spend more money to improve California's Education system."
Sorry LA, raising taxes will not fix the problems in California, just like raising taxes has not -and will not- fix YOUR problems in the UK. There is giong to have to be some serious stands taken on some serious issues, if California OR the UK is going to become better places to live, raise a family and earn a living.
Tuppence,
Dave
>> Edited by just dave on Friday 14th January 19:54
Although throwing vast sums of money at the problem is not the solution, there is no solution to the problem where the first step is not to throw vast sums of money at it. California's education system spending may be in the top 10 states, and its results at the primary and secondary levels may be 8th worst, but this does not mean they are wasting money.
First off, close to 80% of public school budgets are spent on salaries and benefits for teachers, administrators, and other staff (nurses, coaches, janitors). Of this, 80% goes to the teachers. Teachers are paid as little as is necessary to retain them - the only reason illegal (in the US) teacher strikes are not broken up is because they cannot be. There is no one else who is qualified and willing to do the job who will work so hard for so little money. Although qualification doesn't guarantee competence, lack of qualifaction guarantees incompetence in secondary-level teaching. You cannot teach algebra, for example, without a solid understanding of the subject... To reduce expenditures on teacher costs, you either have to reduce the number of teachers employed or the amount the teachers are paid. Teacher salaries indicate the very lowest anyone with a bachelor's degree can be paid in that area. The only way to reduce this wage is to have a recession in that area.
Second off, schools in California (or the rest of America, for that matter) aren't funded anywhere near equitably. The schools that most need extra funding, better facilities, and more influence in their area are the ones least likely to get them. While large expenditures on education don't guarantee success, utter privation (classes in bathrooms, 60 students per teacher, students avoiding school because of the danger of violence) guarantees failure. Local funding may be the absolute worst way to optimize returns on education investment. Those in richer areas appreciate the value of education more and are thus willing to pay proportionally more for it; in return, they get new schools with plenty of capacity, plenty of teachers, and adequate equipment. Is it any wonder the students of these schools do well on tests? Is it any wonder these students succeed later on? Meanwhile, in the cratered industrial city ten miles distant, students are learning history from textbooks that refer to World War I as The Great War because World War II hadn't happened before the book was printed. These are the students who most need intervention, motivation, and education, and they are the ones least likely to get it. Is it any wonder that they are the ones who fail?
The principle of diminishing returns holds here. You get less for a dollar extra than you'd lose for spending a dollar less. A student who drops out or graduates, unready for college or life is more a failure for the school than a student who does is a success. With the most money spent on those who need it least and the least spent on those who need it most, is it any wonder that California's education spending yields disproportionately poor returns?
Now, back to throwing money at the problem as the only effective first step at the solution. Since no district that is adequately funded will give up this funding, the only way to improve the quality of education in this state is to increase the expenditure on the schools that need it most.
just dave said:
Thankfully, I'm not yet eligibile to vote, Srebbe, having refused to take on USA citizenship. I shall die an impoverished Scottish scribbler.
LA,
Has the rain dampened your synapses??? Since when, in the State of California, do you have to be a citizen of EITHER California or the US to vote here????
Same for the State of Washington and their Governors race. I ONE county, there were almost 2,000 more votes counted that registered voters. Democrat votes just kept showing up before, during and after each recount, until the Democrat finally won by 180 votes.
Actually, this one was actually aboveboard and honest. The votes that showed up in the second recount were legally cast and weren't counted in either the first count or the recount. These ballots included the one that the state election commisioner cast.
In Ohio this year, Bush's margin was reduced by 30,000 during the recount. The primary count is an estimate. The recount is a more accurate estimate, with some of the more egregious errors (i.e. 4000 votes in a single backcountry precinct in Ohio) thrown out. The next count is better still, with individual ballots actually being scrutinized for legality.
just dave said:
Chaparral,
Money does help the problem, but in the case of California, the money has been going up and up, for 20 years.
"More money needed" is the cry, same old results. Raising my taxes will not cure the problem.
Well, what element of education expenditure has gotten cheaper in 20 years? In the 70s and 80s, teacher pay was artificially lower than it should have been because of graduates avoiding Vietnam by going into teaching. As these teachers started leaving due to better opportunities elsewhere (and since the draft had gone), their wages rose to the predicted economic equilibrium level.
If you want to make a dent in the educational costs, you have to take a look at the other 36%. Sixteen percent goes into non-teacher compensation. If you can trim fat from the administration, that's the most obvious place to start. Facilities budgets are pretty much fixed costs.
BMGM3 said:
At least Bush started as a businessman and moved into politics .I can see how people may have voted for him . What on earth posses Americans to vote for a man that's nothing more than a bad actor ?
Bush was an utter failure in business, losing dozens of millions of dollars of investors' money. Schwartzenegger made a multi-dozen-million-dollar fortune in business.
chaparral said:
Actually, this one was actually aboveboard and honest. The votes that showed up in the second recount were legally cast and weren't counted in either the first count or the recount. These ballots included the one that the state election commisioner cast.
Chaparral,
I was addressing things like over 500 "voters" listing the Kings County Election Office building as their "home" address, suspiciously large turn-outs from the local "rent-a-space" companies and the ever popular (in Chicago) votes from people "residing" in the local Catholic cemetary.
Google the Seattle Post-Intellegencer. Fun stuff and to be expected, if your name is Richard Daley, Sr.
Dave
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff