Comments on: Wayne Root: ‘California Nightmare: Why California leads the nation in deficit, debt and out-migration’

By: Wonkette

Wonkette — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 05:10:50 +0000

Wayne said:

The best way to stimulate the economy is simple: dramatically cut the taxes of those who earn the money and create the jobs. There’s no middleman (government) needed. Let people keep more of the money they already earn. Now that’s the most powerful economic stimulus plan in the world. Give taxpayers and job creators like me a vacation for the next year from income taxes and watch the economy rebound. Watch real estate prices rise again. Watch the stock market soar. Watch credit and capital markets start to lend again. Watch jobs increase. Give taxpayers and job creators dramatically and permanently reduced taxes, so we can keep more of our own money, and get ready for the greatest economic expansion in history.”

Possibly. The problem here is the assumption that given lower taxes or no taxes for both individuals and businesses, that the money they save will be used for expansion, leisure, etc. Perhaps, but more and more people are simply saving it away for a really rainy day in the future. Money in the bank does little to stimulate the economy except make said banks have greater holdings. We cannot assume that given a bigger paycheck (due to lower taxes) will result in more spending. In the recent past, this assumption proved partially true, but in today’s recession, I would say, not true any longer.

By: Bill

Bill — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 20:37:27 +0000

The arguments are very good about the education system. What we are doing does not work and it needs to change. However, with issues such as global warming, mandates need to be put in place because humans discount future costs too much. I cannot imagine someone disagreeing with the idea that global warming, in its worst case scenario would be a fate much worse than the tax armaggedon we are talking about in the state of CA. I read this article about the effects global warming is ALREADY having on California. Check it out: article

By: David N

David N — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 19:54:05 +0000

My wife and I are both professionals (engineers). We used to live in the Bay area and were paying $1800/month to live in a 2 bedroom apartment. We were also paying over $1000/month in state income taxes. We moved to Texas in 2006. Our house (3500 sq. foot, built in 2001) costs us $1432/month (including taxes, insurance, etc.). Texas has no income tax. Frankly, moving to Texas was the best thing we ever did. California is a one word IQ test with the answer: “Leave.”

By: Susan Hogarth

Susan Hogarth — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 20:15:14 +0000

California is also the money maker, the innovator(Genetics, software, hardware), which benefit the rest of the states. Therefore it is not surprising to see such a debt.

Please explain why you think this statement makes sense. Shouldn’t innovators and benefactors have people in their debt rather than the other way around?

The truth is that the STATE of California innovates exactly *nothing*.

By: libertariangirl

libertariangirl — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 20:13:35 +0000

me 3

By: paulie cannoli

paulie cannoli — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 20:10:53 +0000

Me too.

By: Gene Trosper

Gene Trosper — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 20:09:18 +0000

I am a long time Libertarian and honestly, I felt that way about Root, but lately, I am warming up to him. I hope he stays and becomes stronger in his libertarian outlook.

By: MOISES

MOISES — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 20:05:30 +0000

YOU PEOPLE ARE CRAZY… You CANNOT compare the deficits in this stupid way.
Has it occurred to you that California has about 50-100 times more population than the average state?!!! California is also the money maker, the innovator(Genetics, software, hardware), which benefit the rest of the states. Therefore it is not surprising to see such a debt. So when you see Utah with a 1 billion dollar deficit.. THAT is OUTRAGEOUS.. Utahs population is about 1/92 than that of Californias.

By: Maria

Maria — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 18:05:33 +0000

The reason businesses left California partly was driven by high house prices which would require them to pay workers more so they could afford a basic house.
Lots of areas didn’t have a bubble in the US. I think that the most intense bubble areas were those that were within driving distance of areas with high-wage tech jobs. The median in San Jose was at $800k for a while. Likewise in Orange county, San Francisco, north of LA. Then, when speculation took hold, people in these places started flipping houses in nearby working class suburbs or valley towns such as San Bernardino, Stockton, merced, Vallejo – and these areas now have insane 1-5% foreclosure rates.
What ended up happening is that ordinary hard working people could no longer afford to live in the humble areas of the state. Graduating students who wanted to start their lives could never afford to get married and get apartments or houses, unless they did irresponsible things like sign up for adjustable mortgages. So the only option for them and many businesses to do was leave the state. If regulation of business was the factor that drives relocation, everyone would be in Wyoming long ago

By: kevin

kevin — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 04:09:33 +0000

Government spending can be beneficial but irresponsible, inefficient, and unbridled use of taxpayer monies is always catastrophic.
The unfortunate part is that much of our spending in California is approved and allocated not by our legislators but by us through ballot propositions and measures. If a special interest group can’t get funding it turns to the people and gets a ballot measure. If people think it sounds good they often vote for it. They simply fail to realize that there is a cost.
Certain government spending, even big spending like building an airport and providing infrastructure for goods and services benefit everyone. The ultimate question though that should be answered when spending that money is, What will this do for California? If it doesn’t help business or stimulate growth then it is a bad idea, and we have a lot of bad ideas that have gotten funding in California.

By: michaelt

michaelt — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 18:10:05 +0000

Making a point about Prop 2 as an argument either for or against Mr. Root’s point here is rather like arguing that the Titanic ought not try to disengage from the iceberg until it is determined that doing so would not endanger aquatic life.

California is a “FAILED STATE”. Look it up.
I am wrapping things up in this state where I have lived all my life and moving out. Now, there are many here who will say “good riddance” because I have not approved of the insanely liberal and corrupt state of politics here. There is a difference though. I have paid many hundreds of thousands of dollars in state taxes over my lifetime. The ones who will say “good riddance” to me are more often than not the recipiants of my generosity. That has come to an end.

By: Eric von Schonberg

Eric von Schonberg — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 05:48:18 +0000

I happen to agree that the animals should not be mistreated, but that’s just one issue, and not worth my writing anything beyond this dismisal of the topic.

Unfortunately, the problems here are unsolvable by a democratic government. I can only see these problems solved in a benevolent dictatorship. But, since that’s not likely to happen, and since most dictatorships aren’t benevolent anyway, the problems here are not solvable. Since these problems are not solvable, all anyone can do is protect one’s own assets and plan to bail from the state ASAP.
Eric von Schonberg

By: Andy

Andy — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 01:38:44 +0000

“Had California followed the Colorado model of the 90s, they would not be in this mess at all!”

Yes, California would be much much better off if they had passed something like TABOR (Tax Payers Bill Of Rights) which was passed in Colorado back in the ’90s (which Colorado voters foolishly voted to suspend for a few years in 2006).

By: Andy

Andy — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 01:35:17 +0000

How about the people who favor bigger animal pens donate money to farmers to build bigger animal pens instead of making it a law?

By: Michael Seebeck

Michael Seebeck — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 18:39:14 +0000

Paul, Prop 2 was about ending meat agriculture in California, plain and simple. It was fostered by the domestic-terrorist-loving PETA fools. If you knew ANYTHING about farming you would understand why the whole idea was insane. It got a boost from the Chino Hills video, which was taken out-of-context and overhyped, and passed by a majority of clueless California voters (but I repeat myself).

As crazy as it may sound, Root is correct. California does have a spending addiction, and the biggest culprits are the prison guard unions, the Democrats in the Assembly with their automatic increases every year, and the Teacher Screecher Unions.

Had California followed the Colorado model of the 90s, they would not be in this mess at all!