California shows how to balance budget

[Oldguy]

California, the favorite whipping boy for some Nutter's, is showing how to move from billions in deficit spending to a balanced budget with the prospect of surpluses in the near future. And that in just 2 years.

How did Gov. Brown and the Democrat-controlled legislature do it so fast? Spending cuts, higher taxes and an improved economy, a three-pronged attack on the deficit. Unlike the mantra of the right which advocates only cuts in spending, the Governor and the Legislature realized it takes much more than that to produce a healthy economy and budget.

Can California be a template for Washington? Not so long as the Nutter's in the House cling to their Grover Norquist pledge.




http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/11/u....html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20130111

 

[Mac1958]

.

Wow. I'd have a couple of questions based on one part of the Times story: "The change in fortunes reflected cuts that were imposed over the past two years, a temporary tax surcharge approved by voters in November that expires in seven years, and a general improvement in the state’s economy."

... How much is that "temporary tax surcharge", and what are the anticipated effects when that puppy drops off in seven years?

... Is his budget based on static scoring or dynamic scoring - in other words, does it account for negative effects of their increased taxes, or does it assume that there will be no negative effects?

It's a surprise and a hopeful sign either way, at least in that the thought of having the feds bail out the whole freakin' state makes my blood boil. But that's too much government for my tastes.

.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Perhaps the Op could explain to us how the dems in Congress and the President have suggested cuts?

 

[Oldguy]

.

Wow. I'd have a couple of questions based on one part of the Times story: "The change in fortunes reflected cuts that were imposed over the past two years, a temporary tax surcharge approved by voters in November that expires in seven years, and a general improvement in the state’s economy."

... How much is that "temporary tax surcharge", and what are the anticipated effects when that puppy drops off in seven years?

... Is his budget based on static scoring or dynamic scoring - in other words, does it account for negative effects of their increased taxes, or does it assume that there will be no negative effects?

It's a surprise and a hopeful sign either way, at least in that the thought of having the feds bail out the whole freakin' state makes my blood boil. But that's too much government for my tastes.

.

Here's some more on the Governor's budget, but it doesn't specifically answer your questions.

Through new budget, Brown maps out sweeping change in California - Los Angeles Times

What strikes me the most about it is how it attacks the deficit on so many fronts simultaneously. Brown recognizes that there are no easy, quick fixes and that creating a healthy economy and budget takes action across the board.

Of course, two things have to be noted:

1. The projections about balancing the budget and future surpluses are from the Governor's office, which has an incentive to present the figures in the very best possible light. Others disagree with his conclusions, though apparently not by much.

2. His party has a super-majority in both Houses of the Legislature, something Barack Obama does not have in Washington and which truly does hinder taking the myriad steps necessary to fix our national budget crisis. Brown isn't saddled with a bunch of Republican troglodytes who think the answer to every problem is to simply cut spending and nothing else.

If California succeeds in this budget balancing effort, it will reveal the paucity of the GOP's economic policies and refute their constant assertion that Democrat = liberal =European style Socialism.

 

[Oldguy]

Perhaps the Op could explain to us how the dems in Congress and the President have suggested cuts?

Perhaps you could explain to us how the GOP in the House has suggested increases in taxes.

The point is that so long as the debate is about the GOP's either/or position of spending cuts and no new taxes, rather than a combination of many things, not much will get done in Washington. It's going to take talking seriously about everything before the nation can move forward, but the ideological recalcitrance of the Grover Norquist Republican's is short-circuiting the whole process.

The President has repeatedly said nothing is off the table and he's offered nearly a trillion dollars in spending cuts, but the GOP isn't interested in negotiating with him.

 

[007]

Nothing but "PROJECTIONS." I'll believe a California surplus when it's real.

Until then, this is just a dog and pony show.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Perhaps the Op could explain to us how the dems in Congress and the President have suggested cuts?

Again? You want this question answered again?

If I answer it for you....again....wil you promise to never ask it again? Will you also take on the responsibility of answering it.....accurately.....whenever one of your intentionally obtuse friends asks it?

Do we have a deal?

 

[Euroconservativ]

California now "enjoys" a top marginal income tax rate of 50%

 

[Wry Catcher]

Perhaps the Op could explain to us how the dems in Congress and the President have suggested cuts?

In other words you're experiencing cognitive dissonance and denial. As California goes, so goes the nation - When the Democrats hold a sufficient majority in the Congress, and the Senate changes some archaic rules, then and only then will our nation begin to fix its problems.

The GOP, the party of wedge politics - gays, guns, abortion - and magical thinking have been exposed for what they are: incompetent and self serving bigots, Intolerant of any but white, Anglo-Saxon protestant males and focused on the past not the future.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Perhaps the Op could explain to us how the dems in Congress and the President have suggested cuts?

Perhaps you could explain to us how the GOP in the House has suggested increases in taxes.

The point is that so long as the debate is about the GOP's either/or position of spending cuts and no new taxes, rather than a combination of many things, not much will get done in Washington. It's going to take talking seriously about everything before the nation can move forward, but the ideological recalcitrance of the Grover Norquist Republican's is short-circuiting the whole process.

The President has repeatedly said nothing is off the table and he's offered nearly a trillion dollars in spending cuts, but the GOP isn't interested in negotiating with him.

Last I checked the House did in fact approve new taxes. Care to tell us where the cuts are?

 

[007]

Perhaps the Op could explain to us how the dems in Congress and the President have suggested cuts?

Perhaps you could explain to us how the GOP in the House has suggested increases in taxes.

The point is that so long as the debate is about the GOP's either/or position of spending cuts and no new taxes, rather than a combination of many things, not much will get done in Washington. It's going to take talking seriously about everything before the nation can move forward, but the ideological recalcitrance of the Grover Norquist Republican's is short-circuiting the whole process.

The President has repeatedly said nothing is off the table and he's offered nearly a trillion dollars in spending cuts, but the GOP isn't interested in negotiating with him.

Last I checked the House did in fact approve new taxes. Care to tell us where the cuts are?

There aren't any, and everybody knows it.

And there's no surplus in California either, it's all just projections.

When California can show an actual cash in the bank surplus, this will be news. Until then, it's hog wash.

 

[Freewill]

From your linked article:

Now, Mr. Brown said, he wanted the nation to look to California, and to his example. He promised a combination of “fiscal discipline and imaginative investment” to complete the state’s restoration.

The change in fortunes reflected cuts that were imposed over the past two years, a temporary tax surcharge approved by voters in November that expires in seven years, and a general improvement in the state’s economy.

So, for the exception of the surcharge, which the amount is not given, the supposed turn around happened mostly because of spending cuts and improved economy. Certainly that is exactly what the right thinks should spur government. The House has proposed many income creating ideas, maybe not straight income tax increase but in the form of closing loop holes and such. Beside all of our taxes have gone up on New Years day. So 1/3 of the three things that Brown crows about has happened to the federal government. So now where are the REAL spending cuts, or any at all? What the right held out for, and then finally caved, was to tie spending cuts to tax increases. Obviously this is what CA did and what the federal government should do. But what did the majority party hold out for? Tax increases and a pork filled bill, and they got it.

To now blame the minority party for the lies fed to you by the majority party is not surprising if no one would want to work with the left. They name call and are disingenuous.

Besides, in the article a watch dog group predicts a 1.8 Billion dollar deficit.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Obama got his tax increases, where are the spending cuts? When will the economy improve?

 

[Dubya]

California, the favorite whipping boy for some Nutter's, is showing how to move from billions in deficit spending to a balanced budget with the prospect of surpluses in the near future. And that in just 2 years.

How did Gov. Brown and the Democrat-controlled legislature do it so fast? Spending cuts, higher taxes and an improved economy, a three-pronged attack on the deficit. Unlike the mantra of the right which advocates only cuts in spending, the Governor and the Legislature realized it takes much more than that to produce a healthy economy and budget.

Can California be a template for Washington? Not so long as the Nutter's in the House cling to their Grover Norquist pledge.




http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/11/u....html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20130111

Let me ask you a question, Oldguy and don't take it the wrong way! When you listen to Obama is that man smart and I don't want to call some other Presidents dumb? I think Clinton was the smartest modern President and I grew up since Truman. Nixon isn't far behind, but how smart is Obama? Obama definitely has a better personality, but it's hard to tell how smart they are.

I'm just asking your opinion.

 

[LoneLaugher]

California, the favorite whipping boy for some Nutter's, is showing how to move from billions in deficit spending to a balanced budget with the prospect of surpluses in the near future. And that in just 2 years.

How did Gov. Brown and the Democrat-controlled legislature do it so fast? Spending cuts, higher taxes and an improved economy, a three-pronged attack on the deficit. Unlike the mantra of the right which advocates only cuts in spending, the Governor and the Legislature realized it takes much more than that to produce a healthy economy and budget.

Can California be a template for Washington? Not so long as the Nutter's in the House cling to their Grover Norquist pledge.




http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/11/u....html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20130111

Let me ask you a question, Oldguy and don't take it the wrong way! When you listen to Obama is that man smart and I don't want to call some other Presidents dumb? I think Clinton was the smartest modern President and I grew up since Truman. Nixon isn't far behind, but how smart is Obama? Obama definitely has a better personality, but it's hard to tell how smart they are.

I'm just asking your opinion.

I'll answer that.

Absolutely. President Obama is very, very smart. There is no question about it.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

If only Brown were in the White House instead of the ideologue there today

“We have to live within the means we have; otherwise we get to that situation where you get red ink and you go back to cuts,” he said. “I want to avoid the booms and the bust, the borrow and the spend, where we make the promise and then we take back.” -- Jerry Brown, grown up

 

[Freewill]

If only Brown were in the White House instead of the ideologue there today

“We have to live within the means we have; otherwise we get to that situation where you get red ink and you go back to cuts,” he said. “I want to avoid the booms and the bust, the borrow and the spend, where we make the promise and then we take back.” -- Jerry Brown, grown up

It is always amusing that when democrats start acting like republicans how they deny the same.

 

[007]

California, the favorite whipping boy for some Nutter's, is showing how to move from billions in deficit spending to a balanced budget with the prospect of surpluses in the near future. And that in just 2 years.

How did Gov. Brown and the Democrat-controlled legislature do it so fast? Spending cuts, higher taxes and an improved economy, a three-pronged attack on the deficit. Unlike the mantra of the right which advocates only cuts in spending, the Governor and the Legislature realized it takes much more than that to produce a healthy economy and budget.

Can California be a template for Washington? Not so long as the Nutter's in the House cling to their Grover Norquist pledge.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/11/u....html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20130111

Let me ask you a question, Oldguy and don't take it the wrong way! When you listen to Obama is that man smart and I don't want to call some other Presidents dumb? I think Clinton was the smartest modern President and I grew up since Truman. Nixon isn't far behind, but how smart is Obama? Obama definitely has a better personality, but it's hard to tell how smart they are.

I'm just asking your opinion.

I'll answer that.

Absolutely. President Obama is very, very smart. There is no question about it.

OH MY GOD...

... WAY TO LICK ASS, MORON...

 

[Freewill]

California, the favorite whipping boy for some Nutter's, is showing how to move from billions in deficit spending to a balanced budget with the prospect of surpluses in the near future. And that in just 2 years.

How did Gov. Brown and the Democrat-controlled legislature do it so fast? Spending cuts, higher taxes and an improved economy, a three-pronged attack on the deficit. Unlike the mantra of the right which advocates only cuts in spending, the Governor and the Legislature realized it takes much more than that to produce a healthy economy and budget.

Can California be a template for Washington? Not so long as the Nutter's in the House cling to their Grover Norquist pledge.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/11/u....html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20130111

Let me ask you a question, Oldguy and don't take it the wrong way! When you listen to Obama is that man smart and I don't want to call some other Presidents dumb? I think Clinton was the smartest modern President and I grew up since Truman. Nixon isn't far behind, but how smart is Obama? Obama definitely has a better personality, but it's hard to tell how smart they are.

I'm just asking your opinion.

I'll answer that.

Absolutely. President Obama is very, very smart. There is no question about it.

What evidence do you use?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Why can't Obama be a grown up like Jerry Brown?