Illinois Governor - Let's borrow $15bn to balance our -$12bn budget shortfall."

IL will beat CA in the race to be the first state in the 21st century to default or declare bankruptcy.

CA has the healthiest economy in the Americas besides Canada. But we will prolly need to declare bankruptcy to challenge our employee union obligations. Pretty much a formality. We may need to revisit prop 13 too.

But don't worry about us. The other 49 states are are in far worse condition as is the federal government.

Yes...well CA has the highest debt to spending ratio in the nation.
It will have to be bailed out by the rest of the states or you will bo bankrupt.

Yeah...loose...healthy economy..:eusa_hand:

each Californian if billed for their share of CA's current shortfalls would have to pay $771 to balance the state budget.

each Californian if billed for their share of the federal debt would have to pay $46,000 to balance the federal debt, or $4,600 just to balance this year's Federal Deficit.
 
CA is a rather minor problem all things considered. The serious problems are in the rustbelt where for nearly a century of uninterrupted relative decline problems have been ignored. The assembly line bubble has burst, the education bubble is busting, the mass media bubble is busting and with the internet the physical concentration bubble is busting. None of the economic reasons that made NYC great still exists:

The Erie canal no longer carries Great Lakes traffic to New York City for transshipment.

Because of union opposition to containerization NYC is no longer a great sea port and its docks are rotting.

Therefore it is ceasing to be a major freight rail terminal.

The internet is making IT diversified and that includes banking, TV and lots of other industries.

The concentration of people in the northeast quarter will continue to decline for decades and the losses will be disproportionately from higher tax brackets.

Going to be lots of defaults/bankruptcies.
 
CA has the healthiest economy in the Americas besides Canada. But we will prolly need to declare bankruptcy to challenge our employee union obligations. Pretty much a formality. We may need to revisit prop 13 too.

But don't worry about us. The other 49 states are are in far worse condition as is the federal government.

Serious? CA has lost a lot of businesses that have moved to other states. These aren't businesses going dying, these are relatively healthy businesses saying to hell with CA business unfriendly environment. That trend is going to continue, since CA continues to put big government, big spending, illegal immigrant loving, business unfriendly politicians into their state government.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/3122800-post1.html

In 1990 CA real estate lost 50% of it's value in one year, 20% of the people moved out of state.......

But ten years later we were roaring forward again

As soon as we figure out how to forcefully restructure our obligations to our employees and break the gridlock in the legislature we will be fine. IF there is a state in the nation that can be an engine of growth it is CA.

Is soneone else posting for loosecannon...what the?
Your not this clueless.
Jesus loosecannon...ANY economy can temporarily "roar forward" when you spend $billions that you didn't have. I don't care what state it is, that kind of spending is going to create a false economy.
Problem was...and now IS...the piper has come calling. And that "roaring" economy was an absolute mirage.
 
we only spent money that we don't have for a few years, like 3. And we floated a small volume of bonds earlier in Arnie's term.

We could balance our state budget by doubling the personal income tax for just one year.

But the longer term and much larger problem is the contracts we have with current and former employees. We can't fire them, we can't furrlough them, we can't restructure their pensions unless we reach a breaking point or unless they agree to it.

That is perhaps a $600 billion set of problems compared to the measly $27 billion we need to balance next year's budget.
 
Obama decided to partially underwrite muni. bonds in the 2009 "whatever we can spend money on" act. the spreads on CDS's have been growing along with the dollar amounts in CDS muni's= the market is being shorted.get ready to bend over.
 
You know they said that about Greece, and Portugal, and Ireland and Spain and even Iceland and so far it hasn't been too big a deal.

In fact Greece has been in default more than half the time since it was founded. It doesn't seem to be that big a deal.
 
You know they said that about Greece, and Portugal, and Ireland and Spain and even Iceland and so far it hasn't been too big a deal.

In fact Greece has been in default more than half the time since it was founded. It doesn't seem to be that big a deal.

Those are small potatoes. Bigger potatoes bailed them out.

Who bails out the US?
 
we aren't talking about the US, we are talking about IL, CA, MI etc.

CA doesn't need a bailout. We need a mean and nasty judge. One who despises socialism.

I am wondering tho>...

Are ya'll more worried about what happens to the:

>Bondholders who may get bilked
>the states themselves
>or the folks whose pensions may get raided coast to coast
>the overall effect on the economy
?
 
Last edited:
we aren't talking about the US, we are talking about IL, CA, MI etc.

CA doesn't need a bailout. We need a mean and nasty judge. One who despises socialism.

we have bailed out how many? and for how much? We simply cannot roll on another 3- 500 Billion dollars for another one.

I am worried about D. If that market erupts int. any 'recovery' is postponed for how long....?
 
Last edited:
we aren't talking about the US, we are talking about IL, CA, MI etc.

CA doesn't need a bailout. We need a mean and nasty judge. One who despises socialism.

I am wondering tho>...

Are ya'll more worried about what happens to the:

>Bondholders who may get bilked
>the states themselves
>or the folks whose pensions may get raided coast to coast
>the overall effect on the economy
?

There is nobody big enough to bail out California except the US.

That won't happen.

Jerry Brown doesn't have the balls to do anything but try and tax his way out of this.
 
we aren't talking about the US, we are talking about IL, CA, MI etc.

CA doesn't need a bailout. We need a mean and nasty judge. One who despises socialism.

I am wondering tho>...

Are ya'll more worried about what happens to the:

>Bondholders who may get bilked
>the states themselves
>or the folks whose pensions may get raided coast to coast
>the overall effect on the economy
?

There is nobody big enough to bail out California except the US.

That won't happen.

Jerry Brown doesn't have the balls to do anything but try and tax his way out of this.

good luck to him on that.
 
A CA bailout much less an IL or MI bailout will not be funded by the house. With IL already at the plate the GOP would love to see the Dems destroy their base through back stabbing the public service unions. CA and MI are next up for passing through the default/bankruptcy sausage machine.
 
we aren't talking about the US, we are talking about IL, CA, MI etc.

CA doesn't need a bailout. We need a mean and nasty judge. One who despises socialism.

we have bailed out how many? and for how much? We simply cannot roll on another 3- 500 Billion dollars for another one.

I am worried about D. If that market erupts int. any 'recovery' is postponed for how long....?

I tend to think "recovery" is gonna be flat for at least a decade maybe many decades.

I don't worry about the bond holders. They essentially insure their investments anyway with derivatives.

The pensions might be a huge problem depending on how they get restructured, but we have to face that down regardless.

I think the states will be fine, bruised and forced into austerity, but mostly fine.

The greater economy.......I think most of us can kiss good bye the American dream. Look forward to a few generations that look a lot more like the Mexican Dream.

For 50 years our biggest export has been $. And that won't last too much longer.
 
A CA bailout much less an IL or MI bailout will not be funded by the house. With IL already at the plate the GOP would love to see the Dems destroy their base through back stabbing the public service unions. CA and MI are next up for passing through the default/bankruptcy sausage machine.

Fine with me. I can't wait till we start restructuring pensions. The whole of the developed world is gonna be doing the same dance. I esp can't wait to see 60 and 70 yo's rioting! This is gonna make the teatardy look like a dress rehearsal.
 
Age and propensity to vote are very highly correlated therefore the GOP is going to let the disproportionately D and higher aged states walk the plank. Plausable deniability at it finest.
 
CA, like IL, NJ, and MI has some very serious problems. Lots of links at site:

The Valley That Jobs Forgot Hot Air

The Valley That Jobs Forgot
Share121
posted at 11:35 am on December 31, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

If one had to guess where unemployment is highest in the US, most would probably suggest Detroit or Michigan as a whole. Others who paid attention to the midterm elections would know that Nevada surpassed Michigan as the state with the highest unemployment rate about mid-year. Others might guess Florida. However, in terms of metropolitan areas with the highest levels of joblessness, a new survey by the Birmingham Business Journal shows that California’s Central Valley is the epicenter for unemployment.

Verum Serum discovered this while analyzing the data and noting the incredible concentration of joblessness in the country:

The first thing that strikes me is how heavily concentrated the worst unemployment is. 22 of the 35 metro areas with the worst unemployment are either in California or Florida. Three of the remaining 13 are in Michigan.​

But the concentration within the concentration clearly shows the Central Valley as the worst area for jobs. Nine of the top 10 metro jobless rates in the nation are California, and seven are in California’s Central Valley:

* El Centro, CA – 29.3% (east of San Diego near border with Mexico)
* Yuma, AZ – 26.7%
* Yuba City, CA – 17.8%
* Merced, CA – 16.3%
* Stockton, CA – 16.3%
* Modesto, CA – 16.2%
* Visalia-Porterville, CA – 15.9%
* Fresno, CA – 15.7%
* Palm Coast, FL – 15.5%
* Hanford – Corcoran, CA – 15.0%
Four of the next five after that are in central California as well, with #15 being the Riverside-San Bernardino area, not necessarily considered a Central Valley locale but also an area of significant agricultural production in normal times.

Why has California become the epicenter of unemployment? While Michigan and Florida have a mix of problems, including (in Michigan’s case) a history of bad management decisions on labor contracts, California’s Central Valley woes are entirely a government creation. As I wrote yesterday, the decision by a federal judge to cut off water supplies to an area that literally fed the world turned the Central Valley from an agricultural export powerhouse to a center of starvation within two years. Congress has refused to act to reverse this decision, and as a result, almost a quarter of the families in the area now need government assistance to feed themselves while living on some of the most productive land in the world.

John at VS concludes that the federal government can take just three actions to address these concentrations of chronic joblessness: “Control the border, turn on the water in the central valley, and prevent unions from negotiating any more devastating contracts like the ones that almost destroyed the nation’s auto industry.” Turning the water back on to the Central Valley is the easiest and quickest of the three, and unlike the labor-management relationship in (what used to be) a private industry, falls entirely within the purview of the federal government, thanks to the much-abused Endangered Species Act. Until Congress turns the water back on to this breadbasket to the nation, nothing they do on joblessness can be taken seriously.
 
I was thinking about this.

Why would they borrow $3billion more than they need?

Then it hit me.

They KNOW they will wast $3 Billion just trying, and failing, to pay it off. They know they will waste it, so they are borrowing more to cover the waste.

I'm 100% certain they will end up owing WAY more than they will let on.
 
I was thinking about this.

Why would they borrow $3billion more than they need?

Then it hit me.

They KNOW they will wast $3 Billion just trying, and failing, to pay it off. They know they will waste it, so they are borrowing more to cover the waste.

I'm 100% certain they will end up owing WAY more than they will let on.
Why do they want more?

To line their pockets and to buy votes. Those are what Democrats think are the purpose of tax dollars.
 

Forum List

Back
Top