Commentsview comments in forum Page 1 You need to be a member of CKA and be logged into the site, to comment on news. |
Share
|
Mobile
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2025 by Canadaka.net
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2025 by Canadaka.net
Who knows, maybe bill will pass because of this.
It's over stretched and it has a ridiculous set up for passing budgets so it is held hostage by a minority with a two-thirds vote. Something HAS to give and I don't think it will be the Republicans, ever. They would rather the state fall apart and the state might have to split up as a result. Taxes MUST go up as there has been far to much growth and not nearly enough investment ergo living beyond their means has caught up to them. However, the only fix is what Arnold tried to do and the people said no to every option. They wanted this bed now they get to lie in it.
Who knows, maybe bill will pass because of this.
Yup. The best example of how not to do Direct Democracy and the folly of Rigid Limitations on Government. If you give the Electorate the Power to Demand Services, you can't take away the Governments Power to raise Funds(aka Taxes/Fees) to cover those Services.
Well the first thing that went wrong is constantly electing actors as politicians. Problem solved?
But he married a Kennedy!
Well the first thing that went wrong is constantly electing actors as politicians. Problem solved?
But he married a Kennedy!
And became a RINO.
With the ease of getting ballot initiatives on the ballot and with such a low threshold to recall a politician, this was bound to happen. I understand the historical and political reasons California is the way it is, but, I'm sure you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who doesn't think it's ridiculous to run a state this way.
good thing if it is a matter of choosing the most suitable site for a village fountain, but when the most important interests of a people arc at stake, even ultra-democratic governments take great care not to entrust those interests to the judgment of the people themselves....
-Mussolini (Apologies for quoting a fascist pig)
If you want to trim government spending, you have to pick the right places to cut. If you get it wrong, as the Governator has, you'd better have a contingency. Say it in your best Austrian accent: "What's a contingency?"
Republican policy at its finest. Cut essential services to reduce taxes and buy votes. Then OOOOOPPPPS, I guess we need to hire back all those forest-fire fighters we didn't think we needed. Oh wait, how are we going to pay them?
If you want to trim government spending, you have to pick the right places to cut. If you get it wrong, as the Governator has, you'd better have a contingency. Say it in your best Austrian accent: "What's a contingency?"
To say California's problems are because of one party or another is bull. State budget does not fund firefighters. They do have the emergency fund for the wildfires though. Neither side was willing to contribute (it was a nonissue in the budget) for it.
California has a structural problem. Spending requires only a majority vote. Tax raising requires 2/3 of the vote. Sure, Califoria got around that with fees, but even then, the population passed things like Prop 13 to stop spending. So you have this horriable mess where the legislature can only control 3/4 of the money and the rest is mandated through ballot initiatives.
Quite sad to see, but they have done this to themselves. And no amount of financial assistance is going to change that.
Hear hear. Honestly, the only way it looks like things will change in California is if the politicians there grow some balls (not gonna happen) or they rip up the state's constitution and start from scratch and create a framework that's more manageable.
They really do need to start fresh. Changing the voting for taxes down to 50% will help. As much as I think the constant tax raises is ultimatly bad for the state, running deficits is much worse.