I read the headline and thought "what, is somebody finally making "Conan, the King"? And then clicked through. And then lol'd.

Epic, smitty. Epic.

Well played subby, well played.

These are the headlines that I keep reading fark for. Cheers subby.

I didn't see that one coming, nice.

The car keeps going faster & faster toward the cliff. I just don't know what to do!!!

/ I won't be back

Good Headline subby

Hai guyz - we messed up a little on the spending this year, and, well, the few years before that. Who knew that handing out favors to all our union buddies, a few entitlements here & there, would add up so high? And after it happened once, who really thought it would happen five more times in a row? I mean what are the odds? We promise to do better. Well, to try to do better. Or at least try to try. So you'll help out a state down on its luck, wontcha???

/yes I am from the sunny state

I was totally going to say Denzel Washington was the black sidekick.
Then i RTFA.

Well played, subby.

Zo, zis is de problem. Ve haff passed an initiative zat prevents us from zolving our own problems. Zerefore, ze feds haff to solve our problems for us.

Ze Aristocrats.

I lol'd submitter, well done.

on a side note, I understand it is probably cold and heartless of me to say but didn't California residents kinda have this coming, you know from the whole Hollywood lifestyle on a pauper's budget?


Disclaimer: I know this is a mass generalization and does not apply to EVERYONE there...

Usually can guess what the headline is going to lead to but this was perfect.

Maybe not HOTY but a strong contender.

Owh Noo! We muzz do zometing befwore za machinez tawke ovah our ztate of Caleefornyia!

+ 0.5 subby not bad

So instead of actually reforming the social welfare system and making cuts, they are going to ask the Feds for a hand-out?

Who do you blame? The politicians for not attempting to cut social services, or the people who think those systems can be paid for without raising taxes?

I know you're tired of hearing this subby but that really was a funny headline.

The girl?



Yeah... about that.

PainInTheASP: *Sigh* If only there were some naturally-occurring asset that could be capitalized on. One that could be taxed and regulated. One that might even be used to promote tourism to the area, thus doubling the financial impact of this asset.

they're working on it, aren't they?

PainInTheASP: *Sigh* If only there were some naturally-occurring asset that could be capitalized on. One that could be taxed and regulated. One that might even be used to promote tourism to the area, thus doubling the financial impact of this asset.

Use the green to bring in the green? I like the way you think. Wonder why no one's done that yet.

allthebetter: on a side note, I understand it is probably cold and heartless of me to say but didn't California residents kinda have this coming, you know from the whole Hollywood lifestyle on a pauper's budget?

Well, to be fair, when they started into the Hollywood lifestyle they could afford it. They got hit harder by the Dot Bomb and the housing collapse than anybody. It's always harder to tighten the belt than to simply not-spend-the-money in the first place, and it's not like Ahnode was in charge during the good times.

You know, when I got way in credit card debt 3 years ago due to my and the ex-wife's spending habits, I had to do the following things to avoid bankruptcy (making my last payment in January):

1) divorce wife (for a number of reasons, not just debt and her refusal to work, etc)
2) cut up credit cards
3) ASSUME NO NEW DEBT
4) Pay off existing debts w/o allowing a debt reduction that would have trashed my credit
5) Put myself on a strict budget, paying off ahead of time.
6) CHANGE MY SPENDING HABITS so it doesn't happen again

All of the above involved cutting back on things. Why cant other entities see it the same way? Oh, I forgot, I can't just go take more money from others. Seems its' time to pay the piper, Ahnold.

/27k in debt
//things wont change till the enabling stops

"Where do you go to cut that doesn't permanently compromise the level of public services that this state needs to remain economically competitive and to have some semblances of a safety net left for vulnerable populations."

I love this quote from the article. When I am a major corporation looking to move my business to a State, this is my top priority. No wonder people are leaving CA in droves.

"The problem is that there are no easy solutions left," said Jean Ross
Good thing they they've at least been able to get to this point with easy solutions. I think she means the problem is there is "no" solution. Most jobs requiring labor have either been sub contracted to the 3rd world or replaced by machines. This Economy can not sustain itself on just the sevice, medical,entertainment, education and construction industries. Without a manufacturing base we all go down.

/Merry Christmas

Not news: Subby submits. News: Original headline idea. Fark: I lol'ed

still no cure for cancer

I like you, Barry. You're a funny guy. That's why I'm going to bankrupt you last.

Californians (and California businesses) don't move to Arizona, New Mexico, and Nevada for the weather. Maybe the government of California should try to figure out what makes their state different from those other ones and try to fix it.

ununcle: Without a manufacturing base we all go down.

Arizona Bay?

improvius: I like you, Barry. You're a funny guy. That's why I'm going to bankrupt you last.

He lied.

subby +1 and winner of today's interwebsies awards.

This: allthebetter: on a side note, I understand it is probably cold and heartless of me to say but didn't California residents kinda have this coming, you know from the whole Hollywood lifestyle on a pauper's budget?

Well, to be fair, when they started into the Hollywood lifestyle they could afford it. They got hit harder by the Dot Bomb and the housing collapse than anybody. It's always harder to tighten the belt than to simply not-spend-the-money in the first place, and it's not like Ahnode was in charge during the good times.

I can understand they did get hit harder with the dot com crash, but that was a risk that they took. just as with any other investment it was a risk and they knew what the consequences were. If it had gone the other way would they have shared all that newlly acquired wealth with taxpayers (more than they had to of course)...but now that it is the flip side of the coin they are wanting others around the country to help bail them out of their own mistake?

I guess if the situation were reversed, would California citizens be willing to share their good fortune with others...

"If it had gone the other way would they have shared all that newlly acquired wealth with taxpayers"

LOL

nice, subby, totally had me wondering WTF?

Schwarzenegger, a Republican, plans to ask for relief totaling as much as $8 billion,

SEE this is just pure BS right there......
$8 B is a gargantuan amount of $$ for us mortals BUT I think just a few folks in Cali can pool together their resources and help out their own state in this time of dire needs.....

I would say the richest 1000 Californians can easily pull together $8 Bil to help out their fellow friends and neighbors and will have very little to no impact to their lifestyle at all....

Hellz the combine networth of Larry Page, Larry Ellison, Lucas, David Geffen, Sergey Brin are worth many many times that amount just by themselves!

Not amused, so he will shoot you now...

Crazyfornians are claiming that they've exhausted all their options. Well, if they weren't insane, they'd have some pretty clear options on the table.

1) Allow local jurisdictions to raise property taxes to fund local government activities. That's what the rest of the country does, but California passed a state constitutional amendment to prohibit it, which means all the locals have been broke for decades and rely on handouts from the state, which can't afford it anymore.

2) Raise state income taxes. That's what the rest of the country does, but California passed a state constitutional amendment to require a 3/4 super-majority in the legislature to raise taxes - and there's enough insane Republicans who actually want to destroy the state government in the legislature to prevent that from ever happening

3) Stop allowing statewide ballot initiatives for spending. Nobody else allows citizens to directly vote on spending initiatives because they're morons. California's boundless ballot initiatives ensures that citizens can vote for and demand a multi-billion-$ high-speed-rail network and the legislature not only is required to fund it, but they can't raise taxes to do so.

So no, California shouldn't get any help whatsoever until it straightens out its act. The simplest of fund-raising activities would be a good start. To give them more $$ right now while they've taken no rational steps to improve themselves would be like giving $50 to a crack whore in the hopes that she'll spend it on groceries.

California is also switching to a new, far more stable currency with a much higher inherent value than their current state bonds can offer:

PainInTheASP: *Sigh* If only there were some naturally-occurring asset that could be capitalized on. One that could be taxed and regulated. One that might even be used to promote tourism to the area, thus doubling the financial impact of this asset.

It wouldn't matter. Here's how it would play out...

1. Become the first state to legalize pot and tax it. Because you're the only state, everyone flocks to you. Great! You've generated $1 billion in revenue!

2. Within days, Sacramento manages to allocate those funds into $1.2 billion in new and expanded long-term obligations. Before long, those funding obligations increase to $2.1 billion based on expected increases in pot tax revenue based on current growth rates.

3. Uh oh... other states are picking up on this idea as well and are doing the same thing, and not as many people are coming to CA. Revenues decline. Also, those expected increases don't come to fruition because demand quickly plateaued.

Now you're stuck with $2.1 billion in obligations relying a revenue source that only generates $837 million.

/Same as it ever was.

Harvey Manfrenjensenjen Quote 2009-12-24 11:20:45 AM

Wow.......couldn't have put it better.

cefm: Crazyfornians are claiming that they've exhausted all their options. Well, if they weren't insane, they'd have some pretty clear options on the table.

1) Allow local jurisdictions to raise property taxes to fund local government activities. That's what the rest of the country does, but California passed a state constitutional amendment to prohibit it, which means all the locals have been broke for decades and rely on handouts from the state, which can't afford it anymore.

2) Raise state income taxes. That's what the rest of the country does, but California passed a state constitutional amendment to require a 3/4 super-majority in the legislature to raise taxes - and there's enough insane Republicans who actually want to destroy the state government in the legislature to prevent that from ever happening

3) Stop allowing statewide ballot initiatives for spending. Nobody else allows citizens to directly vote on spending initiatives because they're morons. California's boundless ballot initiatives ensures that citizens can vote for and demand a multi-billion-$ high-speed-rail network and the legislature not only is required to fund it, but they can't raise taxes to do so.

So no, California shouldn't get any help whatsoever until it straightens out its act. The simplest of fund-raising activities would be a good start. To give them more $$ right now while they've taken no rational steps to improve themselves would be like giving $50 to a crack whore in the hopes that she'll spend it on groceries.

Wow, you've REALLY thought about this.

Harvey Manfrenjensenjen: PainInTheASP: *Sigh* If only there were some naturally-occurring asset that could be capitalized on. One that could be taxed and regulated. One that might even be used to promote tourism to the area, thus doubling the financial impact of this asset.

It wouldn't matter. Here's how it would play out...

1. Become the first state to legalize pot and tax it. Because you're the only state, everyone flocks to you. Great! You've generated $1 billion in revenue!

2. Within days, Sacramento manages to allocate those funds into $1.2 billion in new and expanded long-term obligations. Before long, those funding obligations increase to $2.1 billion based on expected increases in pot tax revenue based on current growth rates.

3. Uh oh... other states are picking up on this idea as well and are doing the same thing, and not as many people are coming to CA. Revenues decline. Also, those expected increases don't come to fruition because demand quickly plateaued.

Now you're stuck with $2.1 billion in obligations relying a revenue source that only generates $837 million.

/Same as it ever was.

well wouldn't it make sense then in that type of situation for an entity to not be so liberal with their assumptions? If they would anticipate other states jumping on the wagon before too long then it shouldn't be too prudent to lag demand with the "new obligations"...

Hey Ahnuld, remember Proposition 187, the one that stopped the state from giving all the illegal aliens a free ride, the one that got you into office when Gray Davis got recalled because he wouldn't fight it through the courts and then you got elected and immediately decided not to pursue it either. Yeah, that one. By the calculations of the incredibly left wing state government it would have saved Kal Lee 4 Knee Ya 10 billion dollars per year since it got passed and we wouldn't be in the current mess. Maybe we could run it through the courts, enforce it, save the money, save the government and save the state...or not...your choice. Maybe we need another recall election. And maybe we could get rid of the Mexican voter fraud thing too. After seeing Proposition 8 pass so handily because the illegals voted against the maricon marriage thing the left wingnuts would even support voter security too.

I was sure this was going to be another one of those "Avatar is really racist junk" articles.

Well played subby.

Once liberal economics have bankrupted one area, they look to rob somewhere else to make the difference. That is, until everyplace is bankrupt, then you just...

In a way, I hope the Republicans in California lose a few more seats and the Democrats get the taxation power in full control. Other states could use the businesses California has, and they would flee the state when the Democrats crank up the taxes on them.

I think Texas will be ascending while California continues to circle the drain. That's why it is all the more important the Democrats control the federal government; they can simply rob Texas to feed more cash back to California to spend.

jpbreon: Once liberal economics have bankrupted one area, they look to rob somewhere else to make the difference. That is, until everyplace is bankrupt, then you just...

In a way, I hope the Republicans in California lose a few more seats and the Democrats get the taxation power in full control. Other states could use the businesses California has, and they would flee the state when the Democrats crank up the taxes on them.

I think Texas will be ascending while California continues to circle the drain. That's why it is all the more important the Democrats control the federal government; they can simply rob Texas to feed more cash back to California to spend.

Did you just make all that up because you're biased?

nytmare:
Did you just make all that up because you're biased?

Only parts of it. It's a fact that California is losing business due to high tax burdens, screaming high real estate costs, and the fact that the best and brightest workers (meaning not actors but engineers and MBAs) would rather live in a place with low property taxes and no state income tax.

The socialist republics in Europe during the 80s and 90s failed because their economies dumped as business fled to more friendly countries; thus the EU was born to make sure there was no place for them to run off to. China has the FTZ, and so on. The same principle applies to states that are hostile to business, except we already have a government that controls our states (federal government is the EU of our union of states) and can make sure that businesses that flee from high taxes and stagnant communities pay for daring to escape their tax obligations.

allthebetter:
I guess if the situation were reversed, would California citizens be willing to share their good fortune with others...

We "share" every time we pay taxes... we get back only $0.78 in federal spending for every dollar we pay out, while other states like Tennessee, Kentucky, Louisiana, Alaska and Arkansas get up to $1.80 back for their buck in the federal pot.

The situation's been reversed for a long, long time.