• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Fleeing California

disneydude said:
I would respectfully disagree. Northern California is a beautiful place to visit, but Southern California is a better place to live....and we actually do have water, now. Our reservoirs are almost back to pre-drought levels.
Click to expand...

Well, SoCal ain't bad. It's nicer than Cleveland...l kid. SoCal is very nice. But the terrain and forests are different up here. The land seems to change around Santa Barbara. We have green mountains rising out of the ocean covered with Redwood trees. We have fifty thousand elephant seals hauled up on the beach thirty miles north of me. Hawaii is the only place that can compare with NorCal.
 
Cali has Jerry Brown one of the most creative and out of the box solution makers ever in politics. Big business will come back to our beautiful state with his leadership.:2razz:
 
Awesome! said:
Cali has Jerry Brown one of the most creative and out of the box solution makers ever in politics. Big business will come back to our beautiful state with his leadership.:2razz:
Click to expand...

I hope you're right. But there is zero tolerance for failure. This is now a case of strict liability for any mistakes.
 
Albert Di Salvo said:
Wikipedia? I don't accept that as a source for the proposition you are advancing.

Silicon Valley isn't what it used to be. That's what audit managers will tell you.

Silicon Valley is pinning its hopes on Cleantech. Won't happen. Cleantech needs subsidies that it won't receive from the federal govt. because there's a new sheriff in town. Cleantech won't be cost effective without subsidies.
Click to expand...

I read about this before. Wiki was just the first link I grabbed. Here's another source for you. This one from Small Business Trends last month:

"California has been the number-one state for venture investing for more than 30 years. It doesn’t matter whether you measure VC activity in dollars, deals done, or capital under management. Actually, based on certain measures, California today accounts for a larger slice of the venture capital pie than it did 30 years ago."
California Rules the Venture Capital Ecosystem

Do you have a source that refutes this?
 
Last edited:
Catawba said:
I read about this before. Wiki was just the first link I grabbed. Here's another source for you. This one from Small Business Trends last month:

"California has been the number-one state for venture investing for more than 30 years. It doesn’t matter whether you measure VC activity in dollars, deals done, or capital under management. Actually, based on certain measures, California today accounts for a larger slice of the venture capital pie than it did 30 years ago."
California Rules the Venture Capital Ecosystem

Do you have a source that refutes this?
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info. I lived in Santa Clara County when it was just beginning to be known as Silicon Valley. The manufacturing jobs have been slashed and moved elsewhere. Much of the lab work is done elsewhere. What remains are brains and headquarters. That doesn't produce enough jobs. Rich and poor is not a formula for a healthy society. My younger son is an audit manager with a Big Four firm. I believe him and my eyes.
 
reefedjib said:
Yeah, traffic is really bad. Luckily I am 15 minutes from work and it is against traffic each way, so I am golden for that. A co-worker lives in Dupont Circle, DC and has to drive all the way out here in NoVa, but he leaves at 9:30 after rush hours and it takes him 45 min one way. Fridays going out of town SUCK. I am actually going to Philly this weekend and my g/f and I plan to leave at 3. It will still SUCK then too.
Click to expand...

And really the traffic is only a fraction of VA. Northern VA traffic is atrocious, and Hampton Roads bridge traffic is bad as well. Outside of that, there's no extremely horrendous traffic areas in Virginia that I've experienced.

I get cursed routinely by friends up here though that my commute technically has gotten "Longer" with each new job I've gotten...but those commutes were 8 minutes, then 15 minutes, and now 20 minutes.
 
Zyphlin said:
And really the traffic is only a fraction of VA. Northern VA traffic is atrocious, and Hampton Roads bridge traffic is bad as well. Outside of that, there's no extremely horrendous traffic areas in Virginia that I've experienced.

I get cursed routinely by friends up here though that my commute technically has gotten "Longer" with each new job I've gotten...but those commutes were 8 minutes, then 15 minutes, and now 20 minutes.
Click to expand...

Yep, us Southerners try to avoid driving up through NOVA as much as possible!
 
Albert Di Salvo said:
Thanks for the info. I lived in Santa Clara County when it was just beginning to be known as Silicon Valley. The manufacturing jobs have been slashed and moved elsewhere. Much of the lab work is done elsewhere. What remains are brains and headquarters. That doesn't produce enough jobs. Rich and poor is not a formula for a healthy society. My younger son is an audit manager with a Big Four firm. I believe him and my eyes.
Click to expand...

Well, sounds like you have the inside scoop there, so we'll go with that. Just going by what I read. Since I live 3,000 miles away, you get the benefit of doubt. Hope things get better!
 
SE102 said:
As a NoVA resident I pretend I live in another state :).
Click to expand...

LOL! I thought it was difficult just for us up there because we Southerners drive so slowly down here.

BTW, my son went to WM. Good school!
 
disneydude said:
Actually....not really. The latest census simply showed that for the first time California did not "grow". …
Click to expand...

So the California 9.1% population increase between 2000 and 2009 that the U.S. Census Bureau reported is incorrect? California has grown quite a bit in this decade, but, that 9.1% population increase matches the national average and places like Nevada (32%), Arizona (28%), Texas (18%), Florida (16%) grew faster.

California has had its problems, mostly related to the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression and issues created by direct democracy, state office term limits and insane super majority budgetary rules.

Having lived in New York, upstate and downstate, various parts of New England and Arizona, I can comfortably say California is good living and San Francisco is the best of all.

Sure California has its problems, natural and self inflicted, but, we'll get through it and the future looks as bright as the Californian Sun.
 
Chappy said:
So the California 9.1% population increase between 2000 and 2009 that the U.S. Census Bureau reported is incorrect? California has grown quite a bit in this decade, but, that 9.1% population increase matches the national average and places like Nevada (32%), Arizona (28%), Texas (18%), Florida (16%) grew faster.

California has had its problems, mostly related to the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression and issues created by direct democracy, state office term limits and insane super majority budgetary rules.

Having lived in New York, upstate and downstate, various parts of New England and Arizona, I can comfortably say California is good living and San Francisco is the best of all.

Sure California has its problems, natural and self inflicted, but, we'll get through it and the future looks as bright as the Californian Sun.
Click to expand...

If the 'growth' statistics come from the Census then it tells of nothing important.

What is included in population numbers?

Illegal immigrants: they don't verify residency to claim 'person dwelling within a home'
Birth rate: Naturally - people have children . . the more children had by people - the more the population grows.

In order for the statistics to reflect the possible (possible - emphasis) appeal of living there - it would have to show the people who chose to MOVE there - and move there ONLY. . . not those living illegally and not those conceived and born there.
 
Chappy said:
So the California 9.1% population increase between 2000 and 2009 that the U.S. Census Bureau reported is incorrect? California has grown quite a bit in this decade, but, that 9.1% population increase matches the national average and places like Nevada (32%), Arizona (28%), Texas (18%), Florida (16%) grew faster.

California has had its problems, mostly related to the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression and issues created by direct democracy, state office term limits and insane super majority budgetary rules.

Having lived in New York, upstate and downstate, various parts of New England and Arizona, I can comfortably say California is good living and San Francisco is the best of all.

Sure California has its problems, natural and self inflicted, but, we'll get through it and the future looks as bright as the Californian Sun.
Click to expand...

I think what I was mistaken about was that it was the first time in a long time that California didn't grow enough to gain a new Congressional seat. I think is mistakenly spoke.
 
ksu_aviator said:
I don't need to assume, I have facts:
Click to expand...

I get it. It's wonderful to be pro business and anti-labor.

We can not afford to pay american workers a living wage because we are competing against slave labor nations. We must cut the pay of the over paid american union members.

It's okay for fat cats to make ten thousand dollars per hour though.

That's what the kings taught us. Must be so.:roll:
 
LiberalAvenger said:
I get it. It's wonderful to be pro business and anti-labor.

We can not afford to pay american workers a living wage because we are competing against slave labor nations. We must cut the pay of the over paid american union members.

It's okay for fat cats to make ten thousand dollars per hour though.

That's what the kings taught us. Must be so.:roll:
Click to expand...

Yeah - it's going to be much harder to bring production back to the USA - there are so many more affordable and profitable options for a business to look into.
If I had the world as my production playground I wouldn't really be considering the US, either if I was just considering my profit-margin.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
Yeah - it's going to be much harder to bring production back to the USA - there are so many more affordable and profitable options for a business to look into.
If I had the world as my production playground I wouldn't really be considering the US, either if I was just considering my profit-margin.
Click to expand...

That's the problem nowdays. There is no more "what can I do for my country?", left. It's only about instant profit with no humanism left in the work place. Humans are treated as robots.

It's the "goose who layed the golden egg".

At which point do we meet maxium profits? The end of mankind as we knew it?
 
LiberalAvenger said:
That's the problem nowdays. There is no more "what can I do for my country?", left. It's only about instant profit with no humanism left in the work place. Humans are treated as robots.

It's the "goose who layed the golden egg".

At which point do we meet maxium profits? The end of mankind as we knew it?
Click to expand...

We come form Smith economics in which the drive for personal profit WAS the cornerstone.

Adding in concerns 'for the country' is a new branch of said evolution - it came later.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
We come form Smith economics in which the drive for personal profit WAS the cornerstone.

Adding in concerns 'for the country' is a new branch of said evolution - it came later.
Click to expand...

Well, that does not make it right. What is right, anyway? Should we al;ways live right? How so? More profits? Do you think that will make everything right? Will the world become better with higher profits? Will we all have peace of mind, then.

How come?
 
LiberalAvenger said:
Well, that does not make it right. What is right, anyway? Should we al;ways live right? How so? More profits? Do you think that will make everything right? Will the world become better with higher profits? Will we all have peace of mind, then.

How come?
Click to expand...

I most certainly agree with you - It's a problem that we've been trying to sort through for decades and have yet to come to a solid solution - the goals of government, the goals of various political parties, the goals of unionists (etc) and the goals of busines clash often.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
I most certainly agree with you - It's a problem that we've been trying to sort through for decades and have yet to come to a solid solution - the goals of government, the goals of various political parties, the goals of unionists (etc) and the goals of busines clash often.
Click to expand...

I can only bury my head in my hands and cry out aaaarg! I need a twinkie. I must go. Toodles.:peace
 
LiberalAvenger said:
That's the problem nowdays. There is no more "what can I do for my country?", left. It's only about instant profit with no humanism left in the work place. Humans are treated as robots.

It's the "goose who layed the golden egg".

At which point do we meet maxium profits? The end of mankind as we knew it?
Click to expand...


Wait, you're seriously asking Businesses to be less profitable, less competitive via higher taxes and regulations out of patriotism? Seriously?
 
Aunt Spiker said:
I most certainly agree with you - It's a problem that we've been trying to sort through for decades and have yet to come to a solid solution - the goals of government, the goals of various political parties, the goals of unionists (etc) and the goals of busines clash often.
Click to expand...

We are a capitalist society. As such, the majority of jobs are provided by the private sector. To ensure low unemployment, states have to provide attractive business environments. Some government regulation is needed, I agree, as a business will cut corners for profits if allowed and that can threaten the safety of customers and the environment. However, the public sector providing jobs and pensions and health care have to be paid for by taxes. High taxes hurt the private sector and the economy. Unions demand benefits that cost the companies too much to be competitive. So the big three US automakers are a shell of what they once were. Public Unions, like teachers unions, increase public budgets and force deficits.

California is a fine example of how all of this can go terribly wrong, with companies relocating operations and well-educated professionals leaving the state. As the tax base shrinks, while the cost of services continue to rise (as there are more poor needing food, shelter, education and health care), Sacramento will find it harder and harder to balance the budget and they will have no choice but to lay off cops, firemen, teachers, etc, if this hasn't already happened. California needs to make their state attractive to businesses again.
 
LiberalAvenger said:
I get it. It's wonderful to be pro business and anti-labor.
Click to expand...

pro-business is pro-labor. as Abraham Lincoln put it, you can't help the wage earner by tearing down the wage payer.
 
MrVicchio said:
Wait, you're seriously asking Businesses to be less profitable, less competitive via higher taxes and regulations out of patriotism? Seriously?
Click to expand...

i think you meant to write "workers to remain unemployed" there. :)
 
Wasn't it Mark Twain who wrote "The rumors of my demise have been greatly exaggerated?"

You "Doomsdayers" are quite humorous.

California IS and always will be the crown jewel of America......despite your hysterics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom