• 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!

Fixing california

What should be done to fix California


  • Total voters
    21
If you don't like the American system, you can leave, but it's gotten us pretty well so far.

Bankruptcy, insolvency, eroded freedoms, limited right, interference, obstruction, and harassment.

It is what the founding fathers fought for- A representative republic.

It ceased being a republic with the 17th Amendment.

You could try figuring out what words mean, you know. The Senate ceased being the representatives of the moneyed classes when they became nothing but officials elected by the same people voting for Congressmen. Hence, no longer a Republic, and not coincidentally, the Wilson Presidency is the time when the nation started going to hell in a go-cart.

I'm all for a representational republic. When are we going to get one?

Why is it relevant that they wear jeans and steel toed shoes?

You're anti-common man?

They just have to have monied snobs telling them what to do?

That's worked well, hasn't it?

And how do you know you'll get that? For all you know, you'll get someone who wears a suit for a living.

Possible, but chances are he's not a lawyer, and chances are sound that he knows what a dollar is worth to the man who earned it.

What we need to dispose of is the class of people willing to spend my money to get others to vote for them.

The state was spending beyond their means. I'll be the first to admit it. And I've proposed the above as realistic solutions.

And I've proposed even more realistic solutions, almost all of which boil down to "you! Get a job, ya bum!".

You have a problem with that?

Welfare is a fairly insignificant part of the budget. I mean, we're at the point right now where we're thinking about closing state parks and schools.

I mean, we're at the point where the state is refusing to cut the nonessentials and is insisting on cutting the essential services, like testing the rape kits, because the calculating callous cynical politicians are lying their asses off and know damn good and well that the more the cut of what's actually needed, the more they can push for higher taxes, and so long as the lap dog media that helped them get the state in this condition in the first place refuses to point out the budget items that are being spared while rape kits go untested, the more then can convince the ignorant voters that they just have to pass those tax hikes and resupply the politicians with their heroin.

Only saps can't see what's going on right now.

Only saps can't see that it's what happens with every budget cycle.

I never said the state was ran well. And politicians do lie and steal, that's why we pass transparency laws. Better than your ridiculous system of picking people at random.

Yes, clearly the present method has worked just wonderfully.

:roll:

It's impossible to assume you're a reasonable, realistic person who genuinely wants to fix things.

Your personal inabilities aren't my problem, are they?

I'm perfectly reasonable.

Government in free societies exist to protect freedoms, not perform au pair services.

Eliminate the au pair functions of the California State Government and the financial problem becomes one of cutting taxes enough to prevent huge budget surpluses.

All I get is a list of things you hate,

No. You got a list of au pair services, and not a conclusive list at that.

and draconian measures you want to enact,

Nothing draconian with telling the indians to preserve their own culture, if they care about it, etc etc etc. I'm from New York, I don't know squat about the stone age civilization the preceded the Spanish conquest of California and see no point in being paid to preserve relics of it.

without any regard to how much it'd save. We're talking, last I checked, 24 billion. Your "solutions" would be a drop in the bucket to that.

Kicking the invading hordes back to Mexico will save 4-5 billion annually alone.

Canceling all the nickel and dime activities will save tons.

working up to the two-bit and four-bit articles will save even more.

What is the state supposed to provide from general funds?

State police, state courts, highways and roads, water management issues, some stuff like that.

Well, roads are paid for by gasoline taxes, there should never be a shortfall there. State police are paid for by state taxes, and aren't a huge budget matter, regardless.

Parks? If the state wants to run parks, that's fine. Raise the day-use fee to that level necessary to balance annual traffic against annual operating costs.

Welfare? Well, ain't no one got a right to demand someone else's money, let them beg on the streets or move away, I'm easy.

Water management? Paid for by....water use fees. Oh, these things are soooo difficult to figure out, aren't they?

It's not a government matter, but you trying to get unions banned or whatever you're pushing for is pretty totalitarian.

No, goonion influence over politicians is the principal reason the state is in the condition it's in. Welcome to the reality of California politics.

Unions brought us minimum wage

See how much trouble and damage they've caused?

and 40-hour weeks.

Which were coming into being because of the increased productivity of worker due to technlogical advancement and goonions are claiming credit for something that was evolving naturally anyway without their interference.

Work places that wont kill you.

Yawn.

As if anyone wanted to read an infinite progression of stale goonion praises again.

I believe that when they're in office, they do have immediate transparancy. But what would you define as a bribe?

Nope. Bribe is a sefl-evident word not requiring translation into english. Buy a dictionary.

Are you trying to say I'm racist?

If you can't take the truth, don't spray the paint.

It's nice in theory, but what are you going to do with them?

Tents work. We can set them up right against the Mexican border and leave the southern side unsecured, so they can leave any time they want to.

Our prisons are overcrowded as it is, and just dumping them in Mexico isn't a real solution.

Hmmm....gets them out of our prisons, gets them out of our state, gets them out of our country, and puts them in the country causing the problem, and you claim it isn't a solution?

hahahahahahaha...

Besides, most of them just want to be able to work and make money and get by

Illegally.

The people obeying the immigration laws only want to be able to work, make money, and get by, too.

Why are you discriminating against them in favor of law breakers?
 
Translation: they don't believe what I believe. Can I please try to get a realistic discussion here? Come on, folks.



Treason would be nice? That's sickening. God Bless America.

Open rebellion against the government of California is not "treason", since no citizen owes his allegiance to that state, but to the national government, assuming the national government itself is obeying the Constitution. (Which it isn't)
 
What makes you think that every single politician is corrupt and needs to go. there's some good people there, just trying to do what they think is right.

You're right.

Just give the Democrats the old heave-ho and see if the Republicans can figure out that they're next if they don't fix things.
 
By doing what, exactly?

By being stupid, of course.

That's what happens when you keep sending the same people, or their identical twins, to government to do the exact same things they've been doing that have been wreaking havoc on the state's finances.

I mean, the California Political Review wrote an article about the economic train wreck back when Wilson was messing things up. Just think, Wilson looks sane compared to the clowns we've had since, and he was a terrible, liberal, socialist governor.
 
The only way to fix California is to sink it into the ocean.

You see, Lex Luthor was really the good guy of Superman 1.
 
Open rebellion against the government of California is not "treason", since no citizen owes his allegiance to that state, but to the national government, assuming the national government itself is obeying the Constitution. (Which it isn't)

Better than my answer.
 
You're right.

Just give the Democrats the old heave-ho and see if the Republicans can figure out that they're next if they don't fix things.

The Republicans were the ones who betrayed us. They need to be thrown out first.
 
I do not believe that reasonable people could have seen through enough to neutralize Arnold's campaign rhetoric, nor do I believe that reasonable people could have done most of what was necessary to change the basic outcome of the political process for the last 5 years. It was a plain deception.

No. That wasn't it.

Reasonable people KNEW they didn't want Mexican Partisan, Socialist Activist Democrat Bustamante in the governor's mansion.

Reasonable people also so the iron fist the Democrats used to prevent anyone BUT MPSA Bustamante from running as a Democrat in that special election.

The special recall election came in two parts,

Ya wanna dump Doofus?

If that passed, the next question became valid:

Ya want which of these guys as Governor, and oh, by the way, a simple plurality determines the winner.

Busty Boy was the only Democrat.

Schwarzenegger and McClintock topped a list of nearly two hundred Republicans, including the comedian Gallagher, who I would have loved to seen smashing melons in the legislature....

So reasonable people had to decide, based on the bias of the LA Times and the other biased pro-Busty media, if McClintock, who was the only qualified candidate on the whole ballot, would pull in enough votes to halt MPSA Bustamante or if they should throw in with the completely inexperienced Kennedy candidate of dubious political savvy or ideology, simply to make sure that MPSA Bustamante didn't get in.

As it stands, The Kennedy Candidate recieved 4.2 million votes, MPSA Bustamante got 2.7 million, and McClintock recieved 1.2 million votes.

It would have been nice if the inexperienced hack actor had stayed out of the picture, since McClintock had the answers and the experience to do the job well. Since the bad actor was going to draw a hill of votes anyway, many reasonable people decided that splitting the GOP vote, which MPSA Bustamante and the slimy Democrats were depending on, was a the worst option, and thus many voted for the bad actor as a precaution.

Just think how bad California would be now if MPSA Bustamante had infected the governor's mansion in Sacramento.

Lots of reasonable people saw straight through Schwarzenegger, but they were also smart enough to figure the consequences. He was there, one had to deal with that fact.
 
While it's nice to talk about what should be done, the simple fact is that there isn't anything can be done. So much of the basic financial problems are untouchable, we have massive bond issues that have driven us into bankruptcy, we have ridiculous union contracts that are completely untouchable, we have an initiative process that lets a simple majority vote in massive new spending that cannot be undone by law. etc. While a lot of those ideas would be great once we get out from under the huge debt we're currently in, unless we can do that, they're all pointless. The damage is already done and cannot easily be undone. We need a bankruptcy of some sort that can free us from those obligations, even for a little while, so we can get the rest of our financial house in order.

The best thing we can do, to be honest, is to get serious redistricting done so that every district is in contention and the legislature can stop appealing to a tiny minority of voters on a minuscule number of issues because they know that their districts are entirely safe. Even now, when we're $26 billion in the hole, Democratic legislators want to spend another $30 billion frivilously and tax the hell out of voters to pay for it.

It's insane, but I don't think there's the will in the state to stop it. It's been a disaster for far too long. A real fix would require a Constitutional Convention to fix our inherently broken State Constitution and get rid of the ridiculous Initiative process. That won't happen either.


The people paying the taxes have on last response.

They vote with their feet and move out.
 
Cut spending back to match revenue.
The idea that certain spending cannot be cut or that certain services cannot denied is unsupportable.

Well, that's not true.

Most police functions are valid goverment functions, and should be funded.

But the state should eliminate seat belt laws, for example, so the cops can enforce laws that related to public safety, not public coffer filling.

As I said, the state budget should be published, and each item should be prioritized so that voters can ask why there's a priorty 8 item (neighborhood artistic enhancement) still on the budget when the legislators are cutting priority one, public safety, items first.
 
This is not a partisan game. Democrats did what they do. Republicans engaged in deception.

Right.

The Democrats never lied about thing.

The Republicans forced a stop to legislated tax increases, against the will of Mr. Kennedy, even.
 
Right.

The Democrats never lied about thing.

The Republicans forced a stop to legislated tax increases, against the will of Mr. Kennedy, even.

Who's Mr. Kennedy? When did Republicans put a stop to legislated tax increases?
 
Who's Mr. Kennedy?

California's governor.

Formally, he's Arnold Schwarzenegger-Shriver, but since "Shriver" is code for "descended from Kennedy scum on the maternal line", Arnie's a Kennedy.

He's sure acting like one, far left and illogical.
 
California's governor.

Formally, he's Arnold Schwarzenegger-Shriver, but since "Shriver" is code for "descended from Kennedy scum on the maternal line", Arnie's a Kennedy.

He's sure acting like one, far left and illogical.

When did Republicans stop legislated spending increases?
 
Who says they have?

The issue is that the state tax the crap out of the people just to spend money.

And because of the Republicans, California passed the largest tax increase by any state in United States history.
 
All by themselves, the Democrats didn't vote for it?

Amazing, since the Democrats hold the majority.

If it wasn't for them, the bill would not have passed. Taxes are Democrats' thing. It is a given that they would vote for it.
 
I voted "Other."

How about drastically reducing spending and taxation? California has far too many unConstitutional social-welfare programs as well as oppressive environmental and safety regulations.

Now "Atlas" is shrugging. Most people don't seem to understand.

So get rid of this crap, and California will once again become the sixth largest economy in the world
 
The first thing we have to do is destroy union power. THAT is the first thing we have to do. Second is we have to cut spending on all expenditures relating to illegal immigration.

Agreed, but like the bond issues, those are all entirely untouchable by law without bankruptcy. Those contracts can't be renegotiated without the agreement of the unions who, obviously, won't agree. Likewise, the illegals are untouchable even though we spend $13 billion a year supporting them. The whole system has to topple to fix the problem.
 
The people paying the taxes have on last response.

They vote with their feet and move out.

Which, in fact, has been happening, the state of California has had a shrinking population for quite a while. However, it's unrealistic to think that 36 million people are going to move, the rest of the country simply couldn't absorb that kind of mass migration.
 
I voted "Other."

How about drastically reducing spending and taxation? California has far too many unConstitutional social-welfare programs as well as oppressive environmental and safety regulations.

Now "Atlas" is shrugging. Most people don't seem to understand.

So get rid of this crap, and California will once again become the sixth largest economy in the world

1) The United States Constitution does not apply to spending decisions made by the legislature of the state of California, so long as the Bill of Rights is not violated. Hence "unconstitutional" would really only apply if it violated the state constitution, and I don't have a clue about that.

2) You're not allowed to even remotely suggest that cutting taxes might increase state revenues, the little socialists that have caused the problem don't want to hear the truth.
 
Which, in fact, has been happening, the state of California has had a shrinking population for quite a while. However, it's unrealistic to think that 36 million people are going to move, the rest of the country simply couldn't absorb that kind of mass migration.

Oh, they don't all have to go, but lose enough skilled workers, and pretty soon the state starts to look like Arkansas, or more likely, Chihuahua.
 
Back
Top Bottom