California Is Now World's 5th Largest Economy, Surpasses UK

I never like these comparisons (native Californians love them,) because California isn't a fully realized nation.

They don't have to fund a military, for example. Consider the navy that California would need if it was independent.

While I've heard CA contributes more than it consumes at the national level, they benefit plenty from the functions of our federal government.

I've been out here for over 15 years, and I still think the best things they have is nice weather and plenty of jobs for folks who want to work (at least when the national economy isn't tanking.)

In exchange you have to deal with some of the highest taxes in the nation, endless city blight, and choosing between living on the freeway 2-3 hours a day or living in high density apartments\condos.

This is before you get to the absolutely unsound governing from the state legislature and some of the largest cities, with little hope of change in sight.

As it happens, I drove through downtown LA today, and parts of it look like they'd fit right into Somalia or Haiti.

This is how the 5th largest economy in the world manages itself.

truthatallcost said:

Any list that purports to measure poverty rate that doesn't adjust for cost of living is useless.



Of course California is preferable to Mississippi or Louisiana, if you can afford to live well in CA. That's a no-brainer. However, palm trees and beaches are of little use to people can't afford rent, food, and utilities.

Many liberals who once supported the Occupy Wall St movement couldn't care less about the fact that California is becoming a haven for the rich, who are pushing the poor (mostly minorities) off into the less desirable, polluted areas of the state.

Click to expand...

Every state pushes the poor to the less desirable polluted areas of the state.

truthatallcost said:

Any list that purports to measure poverty rate that doesn't adjust for cost of living is useless.



Of course California is preferable to Mississippi or Louisiana, if you can afford to live well in CA. That's a no-brainer. However, palm trees and beaches are of little use to people can't afford rent, food, and utilities.

Many liberals who once supported the Occupy Wall St movement couldn't care less about the fact that California is becoming a haven for the rich, who are pushing the poor (mostly minorities) off into the less desirable, polluted areas of the state.

Click to expand...

I can guarantee you this much, California was on the verge of declaring bankruptcy until the Dems took the state house away from the GOP.
That's just a fact.
We have issues and we have problems, but on the whole, things are improving now.
The California GOP was in control for decades, they failed, it's just that simple.
And the ideas they insisted on trying are now being put to the test in Kansas, and Kansas is failing the same way California was failing.

Failure is failure is failure...but it is worse when those who fail refuse to admit it.

truthatallcost said:

Many liberals who once supported the Occupy Wall St movement couldn't care less about the fact that California is becoming a haven for the rich, who are pushing the poor (mostly minorities) off into the less desirable, polluted areas of the state.

Click to expand...

I saw Occupy as a bunch of well meaning hippies who refused to elect a leader or deliver a singular and focused statement, thus ripe for takeover by anarchists, who DID just that.

Moving on, am I really supposed to buy your empathy for the poor?
Having a wee bit of a tough time of it, doesn't sound sincere at all.

In any case, poverty sucks, but in some parts of the world, poverty is a death sentence or death on the installment plan.
Less desirable and more polluted areas of the state? Hey, at least we're not filling our kids with lead like Flint-Michigan's libertarian city manager did when he "saved Michigan money" by switching water sources.

Yeah right, we should open up Westwood to the poor, what in Hell is your point? Poor people don't get to be as picky about where they live, were it ever so all down through time.

Checkerboard Strangler said:

I can guarantee you this much, California was on the verge of declaring bankruptcy until the Dems took the state house away from the GOP.
That's just a fact.
We have issues and we have problems, but on the whole, things are improving now.
The California GOP was in control for decades, they failed, it's just that simple.

Click to expand...

I can't comment on the time period of when the GOP controlled the state, as that's before my time, and I haven't researched it. But California is not by any means "improving now" due to the one party stranglehold.

And the ideas they insisted on trying are now being put to the test in Kansas, and Kansas is failing the same way California was failing.

Failure is failure is failure...but it is worse when those who fail refuse to admit it.

Click to expand...

That describes Jerry Brown's legacy perfectly.

WillyPete said:

I never like these comparisons (native Californians love them,) because California isn't a fully realized nation.

They don't have to fund a military, for example. Consider the navy that California would need if it was independent.

While I've heard CA contributes more than it consumes at the national level, they benefit plenty from the functions of our federal government.

I've been out here for over 15 years, and I still think the best things they have is nice weather and plenty of jobs for folks who want to work (at least when the national economy isn't tanking.)

In exchange you have to deal with some of the highest taxes in the nation, endless city blight, and choosing between living on the freeway 2-3 hours a day or living in high density apartments\condos.

This is before you get to the absolutely unsound governing from the state legislature and some of the largest cities, with little hope of change in sight.

As it happens, I drove through downtown LA today, and parts of it look like they'd fit right into Somalia or Haiti.

This is how the 5th largest economy in the world manages itself.

Click to expand...

They do fund a navy. And lots of other federal stuff. California's share of the US Navy is more than enough to protect it's coastline.
And they have lots (and I mean lots) of really great rural places. If you live in the blight of the city, that's your choice and you'd probably make the same choice no matter what state you lived in.

Checkerboard Strangler said:

I saw Occupy as a bunch of well meaning hippies who refused to elect a leader or deliver a singular and focused statement, thus ripe for takeover by anarchists, who DID just that.

Moving on, am I really supposed to buy your empathy for the poor?
Having a wee bit of a tough time of it, doesn't sound sincere at all.

In any case, poverty sucks, but in some parts of the world, poverty is a death sentence or death on the installment plan.
Less desirable and more polluted areas of the state? Hey, at least we're not filling our kids with lead like Flint-Michigan's libertarian city manager did when he "saved Michigan money" by switching water sources.

Yeah right, we should open up Westwood to the poor, what in Hell is your point? Poor people don't get to be as picky about where they live, were it ever so all down through time.

Click to expand...

Aren't many older Democrats of the hippy generation? Funny, they were full of idealistic concern for the poor once, but now their attitude is, 'I got mine, **** everyone else'.

My overall impression is that California has been actively involved in creating a permanent underclass for the past several decades now. Jerry Brown doesn't care about the poor any more than Rush Limbaugh does. But Brown, and the D party see the poor as being useful to their bottom line, so they're courted here, with zero concern given to what it means for the future of the state.

Didn't Argentina already take this route, many years before us? And today, gigantic gated communities are the norm around Buenos Aires. These gated communities are cities within cities, containing homes, stores, and workspaces all within the confines of a guarded, gated perimeter. Meanwhile, the poor live in shantytowns. California, this is your future.

Checkerboard Strangler said:

I saw Occupy as a bunch of well meaning hippies who refused to elect a leader or deliver a singular and focused statement, thus ripe for takeover by anarchists, who DID just that.

Click to expand...

I'm fairly certain economic injustice and inequality, and the undue influence of the rich were _the_ unifying messages if any ("We are the 99%"? c'mon man), though you can certainly be forgiven for thinking otherwise as the media desperately tried to marginalize the movement as being hopelessly incoherent and having no real message.

Check out the wiki as a refresher:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_Wall_Street

Hardly surprising given the need for more certainty in relation to a Brexit deal, whilst parts of California are the tech capital of the world.

The British economy will bounce back after a Brexit deal is done, and we can get back to trading rather than listening to politicians.

truthatallcost said:

California has the distinction of being the state with;

- the highest poverty rate of any state
- the highest poverty rate among children of any state
- 33% of the country's poor live in California, despite California only accounting for 12% of the total population of the country.



You're wrong.

55% of immigrant families in the state get some kind of means-tested benefits, compared with just 30% of natives.

Further contributing to the poverty problem is California's housing crisis. More than four in 10 households spent more than 30% of their income on housing in 2015.

Looking to help poor and low-income residents, California lawmakers recently passed a measure raising the minimum wage from $10 an hour to $15 an hour by 2022 — but a higher minimum wage will do nothing for the 60% of Californians who live in poverty and don't have jobs. And research indicates that it could cause many who do have jobs to lose them.

California energy costs are as much as 50% higher than the national average.

All this only reinforces the rest of America's perception of an out-of-touch Left Coast. With a permanent majority in the state Senate and the Assembly, a prolonged dominance in the executive branch and a weak opposition, California Democrats have long been free to indulge blue-state ideology while paying little or no political price. The state's poverty problem is unlikely to improve while policymakers remain unwilling to unleash the engines of economic prosperity that drove California to its golden years.

Why is liberal California the poverty capital of America?

Click to expand...

Unleash the engines of economic prosperity? For a state that has the fifth largest economy in the world, this despite the numbers of poor who immigrate from disadvantaged places like Mexico and some of the red states? Seems like the the engines of economic prosperity are humming along pretty well, but perhaps more need to be included.

Grand Mal said:

He's bull****ing you.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_poverty_rate

Click to expand...

I figured as much.
Must be some of those "alt facts" from Trumpistan.

JMR said:

Geez, I guess people just have to decide whether they'd rather live in Mississippi with the highest poverty rate, or Louisiana, or Oklahoma, or Texas....or 10 states higher on the list California that has an "adjusted" poverty rate. Hmmm. very hard decision

Click to expand...

Well, the cost of living may be less in those nice red states, but the economy just isn't going to be the same.

truthatallcost said:

Ask yourself why the world's 5th largest economy has the highest real poverty rate of any state in the US, before you take a bow.

Click to expand...

Any comparison should be made against the 4 higher world economies to be fair.

Dittohead not! said:

[h=1]California Is Now World's 5th Largest Economy, Surpasses UK[/h]


The demise of the Golden State has because of its illegals and its liberal politics has been highly exaggerated.

Click to expand...

There are huge problems though especially on the ag and oil side of things. Sacramento will not add any more water storage and keeps withholding the water the farmers bought, not to mention vast swaths of agricultural land is being converted to housing. Oil is barely hanging on because there is no support for drilling in Sacramento. The money, that is supposed to go to roads is being used for everything but. The roads are so bad its getting to the point on certain stretches of highway its better to take alternate routes because of the potential damage to your vehicle. Then there is CARB and that whole fiasco.

truthatallcost said:

Ask yourself why the world's 5th largest economy has the highest real poverty rate of any state in the US, before you take a bow.

Click to expand...

Then ask yourself why the world's largest economy also has one of the most acute problems with income disparity, the most people without healthcare and the most people in prison. Guess what, the answer to your question and mine will be the same.....

California's poverty is not unique to California; income disparity is a national problem. It starts with our tax structure.

truthatallcost said:

Ask yourself why the world's 5th largest economy has the highest real poverty rate of any state in the US, before you take a bow.

Click to expand...

Simple. the people of California have no problem exploiting the legal immigrants and illegal aliens. The South did real well with their slaves. The North East did real well when they had their slaves and later when they were exploiting the immigrants. After the unions and people finally start to make a decent wage thanks to the unions and the citizens who supported them the rich and powerful bring in more slave labor to drive down wages and force the people back into poverty. Same game different century and area of the country.

PirateMk1 said:

There are huge problems though especially on the ag and oil side of things. Sacramento will not add any more water storage and keeps withholding the water the farmers bought, not to mention vast swaths of agricultural land is being converted to housing. Oil is barely hanging on because there is no support for drilling in Sacramento. The money, that is supposed to go to roads is being used for everything but. The roads are so bad its getting to the point on certain stretches of highway its better to take alternate routes because of the potential damage to your vehicle. Then there is CARB and that whole fiasco.

Click to expand...

I can't really argue with any of that. Water is an issue, and has been for a long time. There simply isn't enough water for all of the needs of all of the people without "mining" underground water by continuing to pump from the aquifer. That aquifer keeps getting smaller and smaller, and no one knows how much is really down there. Water use is not sustainable over the long term. The biggest freshwater lake in the US outside of the great lakes used to be near Bakersfield. That lake is now dry. It should be refilled to add to the ground water that is being depleted.

But, actually that issue isn't peculiar to California. It is a problem wherever food is being produced.

Roads do need some attention. There are more and more cars and trucks, but not so many more roads. Many of the existing roads need maintenance. They do get it, as witnessed by the number of delays due to road construction, but keeping ahead of the number of vehicles is a challenge.

PIPEWRENCH said:

Simple. the people of California have no problem exploiting the legal immigrants and illegal aliens. The South did real well with their slaves. The North East did real well when they had their slaves and later when they were exploiting the immigrants. After the unions and people finally start to make a decent wage thanks to the unions and the citizens who supported them the rich and powerful bring in more slave labor to drive down wages and force the people back into poverty. Same game different century and area of the country.

Click to expand...

To be fair, said rich and powerful also bribed politicos to clamp down on and defang unions, and though the Democrats aren't innocent of that at all, the Republicans are certainly more guilty.

Dittohead not! said:

I can't really argue with any of that. Water is an issue, and has been for a long time. There simply isn't enough water for all of the needs of all of the people without "mining" underground water by continuing to pump from the aquifer. That aquifer keeps getting smaller and smaller, and no one knows how much is really down there. Water use is not sustainable over the long term. The biggest freshwater lake in the US outside of the great lakes used to be near Bakersfield. That lake is now dry. It should be refilled to add to the ground water that is being depleted.

But, actually that issue isn't peculiar to California. It is a problem wherever food is being produced.

Roads do need some attention. There are more and more cars and trucks, but not so many more roads. Many of the existing roads need maintenance. They do get it, as witnessed by the number of delays due to road construction, but keeping ahead of the number of vehicles is a challenge.

Click to expand...

This is a very good case for desalination research and development (and also infrastructure spending/Bernie's govt job guarantees).

truthatallcost said:

I can't comment on the time period of when the GOP controlled the state, as that's before my time, and I haven't researched it. But California is not by any means "improving now" due to the one party stranglehold.

Click to expand...

Interesting choice of words, calling the will of the voters a "stranglehold". What do you call the Republican trifecta +1 in Washington, where they control the House, Senate, White House AND the Supreme Court?
Wanna know what I call it? Stupid Democrats who either stayed home and sulked, or voted for stupid third party folks who only serve to siphon victories to the GOP.
In other words, I take FULL responsibility for the fact that the GOP owns the whole ball game right now. We the liberals were so stupid and obstinate that we couldn't even maintain our slim Senate majority in 2016, thus the will of the voters prevailed.

And if you can't comment on the time period when the GOP controlled California, maybe just this once....MAYBE, just think that maybe I don't have an agenda, but am simply telling you how it was back then because it was IN MY TIME.

We were laying off police and fire, schools were closing despite record enrollments, we were laying off crucial infrastructure engineers, our bridges were collapsing, our roads were like a war zone, gangs were running sections of the city, and you couldn't see to the end of the block because of the air pollution.
Millions of people were subjected to massive insurance fraud after the 1994 Northridge Quake, and the only reason Republican Insurance Commissioner Chuck Quackenbush didn't end up in a federal penitentiary is because he had a sympathetic ear in the judiciary and he got a subordinate named George Grays to fall on his sword to protect him.
And millions more were stuck in a merry go round fueled by cruel and unusual court fees and bail costs for the most minor infractions, so instead of paying their fines and moving on with life, they were winding up being incarcerated for MONTHS for something as small as a minor traffic ticket.

You weren't there? Before your time?
Well sorry but that means you don't have a frame of reference.

truthatallcost said:

Aren't many older Democrats of the hippy generation? Funny, they were full of idealistic concern for the poor once, but now their attitude is, 'I got mine, **** everyone else'.

My overall impression is that California has been actively involved in creating a permanent underclass for the past several decades now. Jerry Brown doesn't care about the poor any more than Rush Limbaugh does. But Brown, and the D party see the poor as being useful to their bottom line, so they're courted here, with zero concern given to what it means for the future of the state.

Didn't Argentina already take this route, many years before us? And today, gigantic gated communities are the norm around Buenos Aires. These gated communities are cities within cities, containing homes, stores, and workspaces all within the confines of a guarded, gated perimeter. Meanwhile, the poor live in shantytowns. California, this is your future.

Click to expand...

If you can't even spell "hippie" then you're commenting once again with no frame of reference, and made up folklore for a guide.
So once again, a Righty is attempting to control the messaging on BOTH sides of the dialogue.
The chronically poor in California are dealing with something created in part by the Republicans, massive income inequality, but the fact is, California always HAS BEEN and always WILL BE a place where it is tough to make it if you're poor.
Republicans just made it worse, that's all.
It is amazing to see you craft a lame piece of propaganda that sounds like a veiled reference to sympathy for poor people while at the same time accusing the Democratic governor of "courting them because they are good for his bottom line".
I hate to have to school you on this but ANYTIME a leader courts the poor, it's not only good for his bottom line, it's good for theirs too, because they get better opportunities. Your PHONY play acting at faux-liberalism is transparent.

And comparing California to Argentina is a lame argument because Argentina suffered several military coups, so no, Argentina did not "take this route", Argentina took Argentina's route, which was due to a variety of factors which do not exist in California.
You seem to have a real problem with respecting the democratic process, comparing democratic elections to overthrows, and liberal political parties to Marxists and Peronists.

And as far as those gated communities go, the majority of them exist in the almost exclusively WHITE and REPUBLICAN enclaves of Orange County, along with the ridiculously expensive toll roads, so to your hasty pronouncement in which you inveigh against praetorian guards and gated valhallas, I can only say, "Take a look in the mirror, we don't have those gated communities up in L.A. County, YOU do down in your part of the woods.
That is how the RIGHT deals with poor people.

Surrealistik said:

I'm fairly certain economic injustice and inequality, and the undue influence of the rich were _the_ unifying messages if any ("We are the 99%"? c'mon man), though you can certainly be forgiven for thinking otherwise as the media desperately tried to marginalize the movement as being hopelessly incoherent and having no real message.

Check out the wiki as a refresher:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_Wall_Street

Click to expand...

I am specifically taking issue with the EXECUTION, not the ideology, okay?
Specifically, their insistence that they were "a leaderless movement"...that and ONLY that is the reason why Occupy had so much trouble.
There is NO SUCH THING as a "leaderless movement"...

Checkerboard Strangler said:

If you can't even spell "hippie" then you're commenting once again with no frame of reference, and made up folklore for a guide.
So once again, a Righty is attempting to control the messaging on BOTH sides of the dialogue.
The chronically poor in California are dealing with something created in part by the Republicans, massive income inequality, but the fact is, California always HAS BEEN and always WILL BE a place where it is tough to make it if you're poor. Republicans just made it worse, that's all.

Click to expand...

Wait, what? How many Republicans have held state office in California in the last decade or two. And you're gonna blame then for income inequality? It may surprise to find the biggest Dem supporters in California are the ones on the top end of that very inequality - Entertainers, business execs, high tech moguls - all staunch dem boosters.

Checkerboard Strangler said:

It is amazing to see you craft a lame piece of propaganda that sounds like a veiled reference to sympathy for poor people while at the same time accusing the Democratic governor of "courting them because they are good for his bottom line".
I hate to have to school you on this but ANYTIME a leader courts the poor, it's not only good for his bottom line, it's good for theirs too, because they get better opportunities. Your PHONY play acting at faux-liberalism is transparent.

And comparing California to Argentina is a lame argument because Argentina suffered several military coups, so no, Argentina did not "take this route", Argentina took Argentina's route, which was due to a variety of factors which do not exist in California.
You seem to have a real problem with respecting the democratic process, comparing democratic elections to overthrows, and liberal political parties to Marxists and Peronists.

And as far as those gated communities go, the majority of them exist in the almost exclusively WHITE and REPUBLICAN enclaves of Orange County, along with the ridiculously expensive toll roads, so to your hasty pronouncement in which you inveigh against praetorian guards and gated valhallas, I can only say, "Take a look in the mirror, we don't have those gated communities up in L.A. County, YOU do down in your part of the woods.
That is how the RIGHT deals with poor people.

Click to expand...

Talk about lame propaganda. Wow! It's all Organ County's fault, eh? Check you facts a bit. California's top 1% are predominantly Dems.

California is a threat to Global stability. It must be dealt with.

Bullseye said:

Wait, what? How many Republicans have held state office in California in the last decade or two. And you're gonna blame then for income inequality? It may surprise to find the biggest Dem supporters in California are the ones on the top end of that very inequality - Entertainers, business execs, high tech moguls - all staunch dem boosters.

Talk about lame propaganda. Wow! It's all Organ County's fault, eh? Check you facts a bit. California's top 1% are predominantly Dems.

Click to expand...

You didn't read the whole thread and just decided to jump in at the last minute.
And when you misquote me, you're only harming yourself.

In response to TAAC's accusation that "hippies were now in favor of Argentinian gated communities[sic]" I said:

Checkerboard Strangler said:

And as far as those gated communities go, the majority of them exist in the almost exclusively WHITE and REPUBLICAN enclaves of Orange County, along with the ridiculously expensive toll roads, so to your hasty pronouncement in which you inveigh against praetorian guards and gated valhallas, I can only say, "Take a look in the mirror, we don't have those gated communities up in L.A. County, YOU do down in your part of the woods.
That is how the RIGHT deals with poor people.

Click to expand...

The Republicans were the overwhelming majority in California until around 1996.
You might not remember, but Proposition 13 held residential property taxes at 1975 levels.

Negative effects included:

Disincentive to SELL residential properties

Constrained mobility

Higher rents

Reduced property tax revenue for municipalities in California.
They are forced to rely more on state funding and therefore may lose autonomy and control.

Local governments in California had to start to use imaginative strategies to maintain or increase revenue due to Proposition 13 and the attendant loss of property tax revenue.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_13_(1978)#Negative_effects

Prop 13 and its cousin, Prop 218, are still on the books and still having the same negative effects on revenues.

If you're wondering WHY real estate prices are so high, this might be one factor:

Affluent coastal cities with high home value appreciation and long resident tenure benefited the most, with San Francisco property owners paying an effective tax rate of 0.6%.[57] That year, Palo Alto, California property owners' effective tax rate of 0.42% was the lowest in the nation.[56]

Click to expand...

Checkerboard Strangler said:

You didn't read the whole thread and just decided to jump in at the last minute.
And when you misquote me, you're only harming yourself.

In response to TAAC's accusation that "hippies were now in favor of Argentinian gated communities[sic]" I said:



The Republicans were the overwhelming majority in California until around 1996.
You might not remember, but Proposition 13 held residential property taxes at 1975 levels.

Negative effects included:

Disincentive to SELL residential properties

Constrained mobility

Higher rents

Reduced property tax revenue for municipalities in California.
They are forced to rely more on state funding and therefore may lose autonomy and control.

Local governments in California had to start to use imaginative strategies to maintain or increase revenue due to Proposition 13 and the attendant loss of property tax revenue.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_13_(1978)#Negative_effects

Prop 13 and its cousin, Prop 218, are still on the books and still having the same negative effects on revenues.

If you're wondering WHY real estate prices are so high, this might be one factor:

Click to expand...

Wow, so Republicans are responsible for all California's problems even though they've been out of power for 22 years? Prop 13 saved millions from being taxed out of their homes to feed the insatiable demand for money coming from Sacramento. Maybe if local governments hadn't made deals with public employee unions for outrageous benefits and retirement programs they would have been so strapped for cash.