California deficit has soared to $16 billion, Gov. Jerry Brown says

reply to post by adigregorio


Great efforts to speak in defense of our state, Adi. I gave you a few stars for trying to converse with Mac, although as you've no doubt noticed, you can't have a debate with someone that does not think beyond the hate, and admits it.

And then you have to also contend with the bible thumpers that generalize 40,000,000 people as the devil's prodigy.

Not much to work with.

reply to post by SunnyDee


Oh I do not defend our situation, no way.

I defend our residence, I defend my countrymen. (Even the ones that hate me for being Californian...)

I do not defend the few in power who hold my countrymen as slaves.

EDIT (To fix, and to add)
Also, I thank you for your kindness

And the people who are upset have every right to be so, I just wish their anger would be directed at those causing the problems. Not the ones partaking in the aftermath...

reply to post by adigregorio

Actually you and macman are looking at different things and that has been the problem with this thread from the beginning. Both California and Texas have large and growing economies, although at different rates, and they are both also running budget deficits. They are not the same thing. In comparison Virginia has a balanced budget but its economy is a fraction of both California's and Texas'.

What this means to me is that thinking that a state is going to sink based on state budget is inaccurate and is really only used to sway popular perception. Politics as usual.

reply to post by daskakik


Aye, our budget is the least of our worries (in my opinion of course)

But budget is the topic of debate, so call me Qucken McBooks.

reply to post by adigregorio

True but the piece used in the OP is a charged piece. 2010-2011 budget deficit was 26 billion and 2011-2012 is 16 billion. How is that soaring? It is the opposite. It is in fact shrinking. The estimate of 9 billion was off, but just because the real deficit is greater than the estimate doesn't mean the deficit has grown.

There really is nothing to debate.

reply to post by daskakik


I noticed that right away myself as well, which is why I thought the same era Texas report would suffice...

Like I said this is all "us versus them" mental programming at work.

Where "us" equals anyone but Californians...

In sociology and social psychology, ingroups and outgroups are social groups to which an individual feels as though he or she belongs as a member, or (for outgroups) to which they feel contempt, opposition, or a desire to compete.

en.wikipedia.org...

Social stigma is the severe disapproval of, or discontent with, a person on the grounds of characteristics that distinguish them from other members of a society. Stigma may attach to a person, who differs from social or cultural norms. Erving Goffman defined stigma as 'the process by which the reaction of others spoils normal identity'.[1]

The three forms of stigma recognised by Goffman include: The fact of mental illness (or the imposition of such a diagnosis); a physical form of deformity or undesired differentness; and an association with a particular race, religion, belief, etc. (Goffman, 1990).

en.wikipedia.org...

I mean it is so obvious to me, but that's probably because I am on the recieving end. Also, this is non-topical so alas no fun...

This topic is ancient fiscial reviews, and the hatred that goes with them!

Originally posted by adigregorio


Beat ya to it pap!

Appealing to ridicule now, that's kinda low...

Under my username states I am a really nice savage, not a polite one.

Originally posted by adigregorio
As you can see, your claim of Texas doing better than California is true. However, I must also point out how we seem to be following the national average.

Dealing with businesses across the US, I see and hear of more companies leaving CA, and going to states more friendly to business. That is not a falsehood.
Even the poster child of Silicon Valley escapes most State and Fed taxes. If those loopholes did not exist, I would bet lunch and drinks they would not be there.

Originally posted by adigregorio
Again, let's remove the people that set up the faulty system. Not the people that follow said system, I mean if we are going for them. You better be ready for your cell, cause Obama is doing this crap on a national level and I don't see him being "ousted"

Ok I guess.

Originally posted by adigregorio
And the way that I am treated, everyone assumes that "ousting is easy". So, get to it! You work on Obama and crew, since that does involve you directly. I will handle California, since as you admit, it is a huge mess itself!

OR you can just sit there and accept your national reaming, while condemning my state poke.

Ok again, I guess.

As someone who is from a more conservative state, but who has indeed been to California on multiple occasions as a truck driver, I think I have a pretty unique view on this.

Any state is, at the core, a conglomeration of people. Theoretically, this conglomeration of people will act in their own best interests, however, theory does not always reflect reality. What I in see in California is simply a mass of people who are collectively acting in their own best self-interest.

In my household, if we do not have enough money to eat out, we do not eat out. If we do not have enough money to buy a new car, we drive the old car, and repair it if/as necessary. If we need more money, we have to work harder or smarter: take a new job, do something on the side, or sell something. A large part of this is also looking ahead. If I am running shy of money, my priorities become making sure I can get to and from work until payday. I fill up my gas tank, make sure I have food, etc.

In California, the problem is not just the politicians; that is a cop-out. It is that the majority of people in that state have decided that it is in their best interests to tell others what to do. Period. The concern over ecological madness (and please forgive me for that term; I know of no other which adequately describes it) takes precedence over the concern for income. Example: in California, which is greatly dependent on transportation to move its produce and imports to the rest of the country, someone who is doing just that is prohibited from having any sort of climate control or power for half of every day. That one restriction on idling a truck costs the state dearly in terms of transportation costs; I know a lot of drivers who refuse to enter California unless they are paid a premium, and several who will not enter for ny cost.

California ports of entry have fined drivers heavily for importing organic matter... not because of a load, but because they deemed the dust on the truck to be an illegal import.

California has ticketed drivers for smoking in the cab of their own trucks, because they consider it a workplace. That thankfully was thrown out after a few months.

California tried to enforce a ban on CB radios at one point, placing drivers unable to alert each other to safety concerns or to communicate with shipping docks. It took a massive drop in available trucks to get that repealed.

California placed the heaviest restrictions in the nation on exhaust fumes from trucks, implementing the Federal requirements years sooner than the Feds did, thereby restricting trucks in California to only those who would pay high prices for new engines... and thereby charge high prices to operate inside California.

The result? Higher transportation costs and longer delay times than anywhere else in the country. That means the cost of California produce is higher than it needs to be, meaning that less of it sells. No matter; California has their laws making truck drivers sleep without benefit of air conditioning or heat and making sure they pump out as little pollution as possible so the cars can pump out more. Less sales mean less taxes being paid in as well, but that can be fixed by increasing costs to those mean nasty truckers... ignore the part where this makes them even less anxious to do business in California and continues the cycle.

One example... just one. But across California, there are hundreds more. Regulation, more regulation, taxation, even more taxation... and the final result is what anyone versed in elementary economics could have foreseen: lack. Lack of income, lack of jobs, lack of freedom, lack of services, lack of businesses.

Someone is going to accuse me of hating everybody in California, I'm sure... but is it really the politicians' fault? Who gave them the power? The people of the state did! Ergo, whose responsibility is it when this power is continually abused? The people's fault.

California has its own culture now, and that culture is marked by a tendency toward positions on social issue that are considered 'liberal' across much of the US.It is so entrenched that 'conservative' positions in California are typically considered 'liberal' in other states. I am not talking of politicians views here; I am talking about the average person. And as long as the average person wants things the way they are, there will be politicians who will happily oblige.

So forget about specific issues being at cause; sure, illegal immigration may be costing a fortune, but that's a symptom of the root cause: the inability of the people of California to understand and apply sound economic principles and to maintain a responsive government. Some may call this bigoted, but that in itself shows the very attitude I am trying to show: it is more important to be sensitive to the least feeling of anyone possibly concerned than to fix the problems.

TheRedneck

reply to post by TheRedneck


Could not have said it any better.

Originally posted by macman
I am tired of seeing the escaping Cali people migrating to other states, only to bring their Socialist crap with them and force it down the throats of said state.

Indeed - the unintended consequence of the exodus is the negative effect that the people who have left California will have on the policies in the new counties, cities, and States to which they relocate.

There is some evidence of this in Colorado's politics and economy. According to a freind of mine who lives there people from California have been moving there in droves over the last 10 years.

Unfortunately, as people from California migrated there the programs they bring with them “for the good of the children, poor, minorities (insert supposed oppressed group), etc.”, were on the rise as well as, of course the taxes to go with them…

Now they are leaving again after they have imposed their agenda and made Colorado almost as liberal as Californa.

These people for the most part are like locusts – they come into a place and with their liberal ideology vote and support all manner of programs and politicians that spend money and necessitate in the raising of taxes.

Liberal laws are enacted and will never be changed….

However, when that tax burden finally hits their personal threshold of “too much” they leave for the next place - taking with them the money they use to buy influence from politicians. Rich liberals are the worst kind of person. They want all these "feel good" policies and when they get them and the tax rates are raised they leave.

Often not even associating their own behavior with the final consequence of excessive taxation. The cycle repeats...ad nauseum.

It’s like a plague of liberals.

All the while the little folks who can't move freely about are stuck with the end result. Then again it takes two to tango and without the votes from the little folks (who thought they'd be getting something for nothing in most cases) these policies would not have come to pass.

So - Californians can blame themselves and thier neighbors.

Originally posted by adigregorio

Actors as politicians? You mean like Regan?

man I knew someone would bring that up Ron was special though... the last in a line of true Americans.

sorry folks about my throwing fists in this thread. Doc adjusted my meds today... I was on the wrong stuff

...Eat the Rich!

Originally posted by Destinyone
reply to post by SisyphusRide

 

So, you've stooped to bible thumping to get your agenda out...it makes sense now. You'd prefer violence to negotiation in anything concerning a state you've written off as ungodly.....:Your words ring false like a tin bell. You have a dark heart, if you have one at all....

Des

no I'm better now really... promise

something does ring true about Cali being godless... possibly the most godless state in the union aside from being the most populous.

Originally posted by TheRedneck
In my household, if we do not have enough money to eat out, we do not eat out. If we do not have enough money to buy a new car, we drive the old car, and repair it if/as necessary. If we need more money, we have to work harder or smarter: take a new job, do something on the side, or sell something. A large part of this is also looking ahead. If I am running shy of money, my priorities become making sure I can get to and from work until payday. I fill up my gas tank, make sure I have food, etc.

In California, the problem is not just the politicians; that is a cop-out. It is that the majority of people in that state have decided that it is in their best interests to tell others what to do. Period.

This "magic majority" doesn't write laws. They may vote for laws, but they do not will them into existance somehow.

To say they do, well that is a cop out...

Furthermore, all of those things you listed in the first paragraph. Well me, and all of my family follow those rules. As well as our friends... (I say "all of my family" because I have a LARGE family. So they make up more than one household...)

Originally posted by TheRedneck
The concern over ecological madness (and please forgive me for that term; I know of no other which adequately describes it) takes precedence over the concern for income. Example: in California, which is greatly dependent on transportation to move its produce and imports to the rest of the country, someone who is doing just that is prohibited from having any sort of climate control or power for half of every day. That one restriction on idling a truck costs the state dearly in terms of transportation costs; I know a lot of drivers who refuse to enter California unless they are paid a premium, and several who will not enter for ny cost.

Again, you list things that are decided by people in power. And you seem to be using those things to attempt to blame the people that have to follow the list.

Get upset at the people writing the list...

I don't get mad at the truckers, I get mad at the rule makers...

California ports of entry have fined drivers...

Guess what, I am NOT a port of entry. Though by the reaming I recieve, you wouldn't know!
I don't fine drivers...

You know who does? The people in charge...The ones you should be "teaching a lesson" to. But no, I am now a Cap'n too, and should be held responsible!

California has ticketed drivers for smoking in the cab of their own trucks, because they consider it a workplace. That thankfully was thrown out after a few months.

If it was thrown out, then why list it? Since this list is showing how the populace is at fault...

Now, not only are we not at fault, but we are not at fault for a problem that isn't even real!

Strawmen burn so well because they are made of straw, since this is not an issue AT ALL. (It was thrown out )

California tried to enforce a ban on CB radios at one point...

Source? My father is an avid CB'er, my uncle HAM. Please, let all three of us know of this law that almost happened. Anyway, I NEED a source since that last example...

(Regardless, who made that law?)

One example... just one. But across California, there are hundreds more. Regulation, more regulation, taxation, even more taxation...

And you are trying to use this "example" to prove that the polititians are not at fault, but we the people are. I am still waiting for an example that implicates "the people" and not the slave drivers.

Someone is going to accuse me of hating everybody in California, I'm sure... but is it really the politicians' fault? Who gave them the power? The people of the state did! Ergo, whose responsibility is it when this power is continually abused? The people's fault.

If this is how you think the world works, then wow. Well, regardless you sir are a hypocrite. (Remember that mirror from earlier?)

Last I checked we are all in America. And, last I checked, we were all losing our rights at a steady pace. And, last I checked, you were just as complicit as the evil Californians as they were losing theirs.

So this is just as much your fault, as it is mine. For you allowed the bigger wigs to set my big wigs in motion. Also, how come Californians are the only ones expected to carry pitchforks? (Double standards!)

And as long as the average person wants things the way they are, there will be politicians who will happily oblige.

What??? Isn't this the reason for the whole Ron Paul mess, the FACT that politicians do NOT listen to the public? Well unless the public is a corporation...
Now, when it suits the argument, the government is all "people friendly" all of the sudded.

So forget about specific issues being at cause...

What you mean like "it's the peoples' fault" That sure seems like one specific issue, a false one.

Originally posted by Golf66

Originally posted by macman
I am tired of seeing the escaping Cali people migrating to other states, only to bring their Socialist crap with them and force it down the throats of said state.

Indeed - the unintended consequence of the exodus is the negative effect that the people who have left California will have on the policies in the new counties, cities, and States to which they relocate.

Here it comes, I bet it's going to be our fault for OTHER states issues now. Who wants in on this bet?

Originally posted by Golf66
There is some evidence of this in Colorado's politics and economy. According to a freind of mine who lives there people from California have been moving there in droves over the last 10 years.

Hearsay is not evidence, in fact it is considered the opposite. Care to provide some "real evidence" y'know, stuff that holds up in a court of law?

Originally posted by Golf66
Unfortunately, as people from California migrated there the programs they bring with them “for the good of the children, poor, minorities (insert supposed oppressed group), etc.”, were on the rise as well as, of course the taxes to go with them…

Here it comes!!!

Originally posted by Golf66
Now they are leaving again after they have imposed their agenda and made Colorado almost as liberal as Californa.

We made it!

It is now my fault that Colorado is having troubles too! Though, technically, isn't it thier fault? I mean it is their state Kommirado that is having the troubles. So it must be the Kommiradoians fault! Just the everyday people, not the ones in charge.

I swear, this is un-real! If a place starts to fail, just blame California! (Oh yeah, and don't source your claims, that way everyone will believe them at face value!)

Originally posted by Golf66
These people for the most part are like locusts – they come into a place and with their liberal ideology vote and support all manner of programs and politicians that spend money and necessitate in the raising of taxes.

You know if I said that about any other type of people, it would be deleted for the bigotry it is.

Try it, insert "Black" or "Asian" or "Jewish" into that paragraph and watch it shine. Furthermore, if I can only change one word of your thought and it beomes hateful ignorance. Well chances are it has to do with the thought and not the word.

Originally posted by Golf66
All the while the little folks who can't move freely about are stuck with the end result. Then again it takes two to tango and without the votes from the little folks (who thought they'd be getting something for nothing in most cases) these policies would not have come to pass.

Well using your logic, it is the "little peoples" fault and not the liberals.

Since the liberals make the laws (according to you) and the little people have to follow them.

(Wow, sounds EXACTLY like my defense. )
EDIT (To update)
Well I had alot to read, and I misunderstood this section.

SO! Yes, I do shoulder SOME blame. But looking around, we are getting ALL the blame. I mean (*#*@ people are wishing death on humans, just cause they live here.

Originally posted by Golf66
So - Californians can blame themselves and thier neighbors.

Howdy, neighbor!

EDIT (To question)
How come we never hear of Kommiesota?

When it comes down to what states pay what, the red states are the welfare queens, and the blue states are paying for their survival.

GDP in the blues states is higher that the reds states who have always been the bottom feeders, receiving more in fed revenue than they pay.

The red states should be made to pay back all that money they have been getting from the blue states all these years. That would be fair, which means CA has a lot of money that should be coming from the fed.

reply to post by adigregorio

I am glad you responded to me, sir. Let me address your concerns:

This "magic majority" doesn't write laws. They may vote for laws, but they do not will them into existance somehow.

Politicians come into power by acquiring votes from people, not by show of force or magic. Those votes are personal decisions made by each and every individual who is a legal voter. If no one votes for a particular politician, that politician cannot write laws or influence public policy.

I place blame for a poor politician getting elected on the system, i.e. the media and the political powers already in office. But when the same politician is elected again and again, or when politicians are continually elected who support the same general philosophy, the blame moves back toward those who voted them in: the people. Without the compliance of the population, politicians have no power. Ergo, blaming politicians for their actions while absolving those who voted them into power is a cop-out.

Never in the history of mankind has there been a positive societal change that happened in spite of the people's will or without assistance of the people's will.

Furthermore, all of those things you listed in the first paragraph. Well me, and all of my family follow those rules.

Congratulations. My family does as well. The problem is that your government is not following them, and the majority of voters seem to be OK with this.

Again, you list things that are decided by people in power. And you seem to be using those things to attempt to blame the people that have to follow the list.

Get upset at the people writing the list...

Who chose to place these list-writers in power?

Guess what, I am NOT a port of entry. Though by the reaming I recieve, you wouldn't know!
I don't fine drivers...

You know who does? The people in charge...The ones you should be "teaching a lesson" to. But no, I am now a Cap'n too, and should be held responsible!

Firstly, I do not believe I have implicated you directly in anything. I have stated (quite clearly I believe) that it is the majority of the individuals that make up the state who are responsible. You, sir, are not a majority; you are an individual.

Offense is a good point in this discussion, however. The offense you obviously feel at this time was not instigated by me, nor intended by me, nor directed by me. You read personal insult into a post addressing an overall social observation; you felt offense; you chose to believe that some sort of improper observation was leveled at you personally. I did not; I cannot do so as I have absolutely no control of your mental processes (nor do I desire such).

And that is the very heart of the problem. I have stated personal observations on the mentality of the general population of California. Because you make a conscious decision to choose to acknowledge those observations as something they were not intended, you then make the logical leap that my observation is somehow flawed.

What you have done here is demonstrate how political correctness works. I thank you for that demonstration, as I believe it reinforces my point.

If it was thrown out, then why list it?

Because it demonstrates the general mentality of the population of California.

Source? My father is an avid CB'er, my uncle HAM. Please, let all three of us know of this law that almost happened. Anyway, I NEED a source since that last example...

Not law, bill only.

I'm sorry; I know it is considered a debate trump card to insist on more and more sources, but I have better things to do than spend my days trying to prove a thing to someone who should have been right on top of any such attempt. Believe me or no; your choice. Belief does not affect history.

If this is how you think the world works, then wow. Well, regardless you sir are a hypocrite.

This is how the USA works. Leaders are voted into power by people. Is this not still taught in California schools as it is in Alabama?

Also, how come Californians are the only ones expected to carry pitchforks? (Double standards!)

Nope, no double standards. I hold my state and local officials' feet to the fire regularly. This last election I spent quite a bit of time organizing and advertising for County Commission candidates. Two years ago I was concentrating on the county School Board (and made quite a difference). I carry my pitchfork proudly, sir, and use it regularly.

It is not, however, my place to lead your charge on your officials... just as I do not expect you to lead the charge on mine. Besides, it would be a futile effort; if stating the problem brings such a response, how would you react should someone actually try to fix something?

No one can fix your mess except you.

TheRedneck

Originally posted by TheRedneck
I am glad you responded to me, sir. Let me address your concerns:

I figured you wanted me to respond due to the "People will say I am hating California" comment. Considering I am the only one in here saying that sentence...

Originally posted by TheRedneck

Originally posted by adigregorio
This "magic majority" doesn't write laws. They may vote for laws, but they do not will them into existance somehow.

Politicians come into power by acquiring votes from people, not by show of force or magic. Those votes are personal decisions made by each and every individual who is a legal voter. If no one votes for a particular politician, that politician cannot write laws or influence public policy.

What so now there isn't rampant voter fraud in the US, not to mention California? (I can source the claim, but there has been so much as of late I don't think I need to.)
Anyway, am I at fault for the fraud too?
Furthermore, due to this being a democratic republic what you list is bound to happen. Majority rule is a crappy way to live, even moreso when you get to throw the corporations in as the majority. Oops! Forgot about that part!
Anyway, can we at least say that the politicians are MORE at fault? And since that IS for sure the case, well they still deserve MORE of this hatred.
Lastly, we do know that Kennedy beat out Nixon in the popular vote right? (IE People voted for Nixon, and Kennedy won. OR No one voted for a particular politician, but they STILL influenced laws and public policy.

Originally posted by TheRedneck
I place blame for a poor politician getting elected on the system, i.e. the media and the political powers already in office. But when the same politician is elected again and again, or when politicians are continually elected who support the same general philosophy, the blame moves back toward those who voted them in: the people. Without the compliance of the population, politicians have no power. Ergo, blaming politicians for their actions while absolving those who voted them into power is a cop-out.

Wait, now we have a massive party system? Instead of a two-party one?
How many times have I seen republicans, or democrats REFUSE to pick a different canidate. Why? Well because of their party! "I can't vote for that guy, he's liberal!!111!" "What? ME vote for a conservative?!?!111one!1"
Honestly, Ron Paul (I hate that name too) is the first time I have seen this behavior slapped in the face.
Anyway, couple the party problem with ignorance (similar to the stuff in this thread) and voting doesn't happen properly. Throw in a bias media industry, and you have the fixin's for a foibled country.
For dessert, hating on your countrymen!

Originally posted by TheRedneck
Never in the history of mankind has there been a positive societal change that happened in spite of the people's will or without assistance of the people's will.

The inquisition, here we go.

But aside from that, I am sure I can pick even more. The Catholics loved that inquisition, back in the day. Jews, not so much. HEY! That's like Americans loving this "hate on" California, and the Californians, well, not so much...
Of course we know why strawmen burn so well...
Regardless, I have offered an example to back my claim. Also, who gets to decide positive and negative?

Originally posted by TheRedneck

Originally posted by adigregorio
Furthermore, all of those things you listed in the first paragraph. Well me, and all of my family follow those rules.

Congratulations. My family does as well. The problem is that your government is not following them, and the majority of voters seem to be OK with this.

You are close to what the problem is:
"The problem is that your government is not following them, and the majority of voters seem to be okay with this."
I bolded the part that is the problem. "Seem" requires assumtions, and personal opinion. Which as we ALL know are both faulty forms of information gathering. They are good if you want your back patted by fellow "US'es" to show how much better you are to "THEMs"
Or, you could actually do something to change the situation. Like I do! (Already listed some of the things, I am about to make a full list...)

(continued)

Originally posted by TheRedneck

Originally posted by adigregorio
Again, you list things that are decided by people in power. And you seem to be using those things to attempt to blame the people that have to follow the list.
Get upset at the people writing the list...

Who chose to place these list-writers in power?

Before I answer this, I want to make sure my assumption is correct:
You are saying that voting works 100% as intended, and there is no voter fraud? You are also saying that there is nothing shifty about corporations that are involved in the process, and that the public (minus corporations) decides what is going on?
Exactly.
"Get upset at the people writing the list."

Originally posted by TheRedneck

Originally posted by adigregorio
Guess what, I am NOT a port of entry. Though by the reaming I recieve, you wouldn't know!
I don't fine drivers...
You know who does? The people in charge...The ones you should be "teaching a lesson" to. But no, I am now a Cap'n too, and should be held responsible!

Firstly, I do not believe I have implicated you directly in anything. I have stated (quite clearly I believe) that it is the majority of the individuals that make up the state who are responsible. You, sir, are not a majority; you are an individual.

What makes up the majority? You know a similar sentence I hear all the time?
"(insert race/creed) people are fine when you have one, or two of them. It's as a whole that they are bad."
If you can change only one word of a thought, and that thought seems bigoted. Chances are it is the entire thought, and not the word.
I am an individual, and since I am part of the majority I find these attacks hateful. Cherry coated, or not.

Originally posted by TheRedneck
And that is the very heart of the problem. I have stated personal observations on the mentality of the general population of California. Because you make a conscious decision to choose to acknowledge those observations as something they were not intended, you then make the logical leap that my observation is somehow flawed.

Nay, not flawed. I call it hypocritical.
Obama is still in office, Bush made it his full EIGHT years. (What was that about folks getting back into power, time-and-again?)
The only reason I talked to your post is because of your instigation. I was the only one claiming people were "hating Californians". So you threw that into your post, knowing that I would "take the bait".
Though I don't think you could have realized that I would "See what you did there"

Originally posted by TheRedneck
What you have done here is demonstrate how political correctness works. I thank you for that demonstration, as I believe it reinforces my point.

You primed the pump for this demostration. And now I have turned it into something uncomfortable, because "I saw what you did there".
Or were you referencing someone else with that comment? "I will be accused of hating Californians"

Originally posted by TheRedneck

Source? My father is an avid CB'er, my uncle HAM. Please, let all three of us know of this law that almost happened. Anyway, I NEED a source since that last example...

Not law, bill only.

And it was overturned, when the Californians do something right. Well it is played down, isn't it! Such sillyness...

Originally posted by TheRedneck

Originally posted by adigregorio
If this is how you think the world works, then wow. Well, regardless you sir are a hypocrite.

This is how the USA works. Leaders are voted into power by people. Is this not still taught in California schools as it is in Alabama?

Take a look at the Electoral College, though you seem like you would know of it. So that begs the question, are you playing on the fact that most are unaware of its function? I really hope not...

Originally posted by TheRedneck

Originally posted by adigregorio
Also, how come Californians are the only ones expected to carry pitchforks? (Double standards!)

Nope, no double standards. I hold my state and local officials' feet to the fire regularly...

I apologize for this one, this was a general question to the thread. You have to admit the majority of "haters" do nothing but type. And vanish when they realize I DO do more than just type.
So again, apologies for not clarifying that point in the begining.

Originally posted by TheRedneck
It is not, however, my place to lead your charge on your officials... just as I do not expect you to lead the charge on mine. Besides, it would be a futile effort; if stating the problem brings such a response, how would you react should someone actually try to fix something?

So if you do not plan on changing that which you complain about, then why complain about it? Again, I reference the "back patting" from above.

EDIT (To Inform)
I am ultra busy moving. Bought my first house! (Guess there is some good to this housing deficit after all!) So my responses will be erratic, and huge when made.

And, as per PM promise: If my posts come off as being "assy" here is my official apology. I fight "fire with fire" in discussions such as this, so any hostility from my end is just a reciprocation of that which was recieved. Unfortunatly, being human, I will misfire!

Lastly, try to remember folks:
1) I am neither Liberal nor Conservative
2) I disagree with OWS
3) I, like MANY OTHERS, just live here.
4) I shouldn't have to leave, telling me to do so is very un-American.
Life, liberty, and the persuit of happyness.

reply to post by adigregorio

What so now there isn't rampant voter fraud in the US, not to mention California? (I can source the claim, but there has been so much as of late I don't think I need to.)
Anyway, am I at fault for the fraud too?

Yes, there is surely voter fraud, and no, neither you nor any other individual not directly involved are responsible for that. You do hold a certain amount of responsibility for allowing known fraud to continue, however. If I knew for a fact that fraud were occurring in my area, I would be raising a stink to high heaven about it using every legal and social recourse I could muster. Do you? Would you?

Majority rule is a crappy way to live, even moreso when you get to throw the corporations in as the majority.

First of all, corporations do not vote; all a corporation can do to influence an election is contribute funds.

Second of all, what alternatives are there to majority rule? Minority rule? Dictatorship?

Wait, now we have a massive party system? Instead of a two-party one?
How many times have I seen republicans, or democrats REFUSE to pick a different canidate. Why? Well because of their party! "I can't vote for that guy, he's liberal!!111!" "What? ME vote for a conservative?!?!111one!1"

And that is the mark of a democratic system. The population decides, on the basis of majority rule, who their leaders will be. If the population decides to elect someone who does a poor job, then the population has only themselves to blame.

The drawback, as you so well illustrate, is that it is very easy to separate oneself from the process. It's obviously not me, because my one little vote cannot possibly have made a difference when everyone else voted for this guy. But the sad truth is that it is you... just as it is me, just as it is everyone reading this post. We have some pretty lousy politicians in Alabama as well, but people like me are busily working behind the scenes to educate the population on what they are doing. When we get a decent politician, we do the same thing to present them in a good light. It takes time... but no one else is going to clean up Alabama except Alabamians.

And no one is going to clean up California except Californians. Are you a Californian?

The inquisition, here we go.

Not sure I understand your reference here?

That's like Americans loving this "hate on" California, and the Californians, well, not so much...

Er, you ever hear how some folks talk about Alabama? Apparently, the difference is that you care what others think and I don't. I am happy in Alabama. Are you happy in California?

Also, who gets to decide positive and negative?

The people who live there. Majority rules.

You are close to what the problem is:

I purposely used the word "seem" because I am aware of how political agendas get spun into something they are not. I frequently say that bills are titled the exact opposite of what they do. "Patriot Act" = anti-everything that I consider patriotic. "No Child Left Behind" = no child can get ahead. "Transportation Security Act" = hassle people while ignoring bombs. The list goes on.

I believe this so strongly I would lobby for a bill titled "Destroy The USA", because it would cause an unprecedented era of prosperity and safety.

But I digress...

We have a saying here: "Don't let the bear bite you in the same place twice." That means that it's not a problem if you make a mistake, but it is a problem when you continually make the same mistake over and over. Take Nancy Pelosi. She was elected by Californians, and re-elected by Californians many times. That means that Californians either agree with her policies and actions, are too stupid to realize what she's doing, or have no control of their own voting process. I don't think Californians are that stupid, so either they agree with her or they are completely out of control. If they are that far out of control, then they are not paying attention to their local politics where the elections are handled. It's not a compliment any way I look at it, unless they agree with her.

And you should understand there are a lot of people across the nation who vehemently disagree with her.

I am an individual, and since I am part of the majority I find these attacks hateful.

I am a citizen of the United States of America, and I find the fact that my tax dollars in Alabama are quite probably going to be used to bail out a state that has more money than we do and squanders it offensive and hateful.

~continued~

reply to post by adigregorio

~continued~

Here's a little info:

Alabama 2010 population (2010 US Census) = 4,779,736
California 2010 population (2010 US Census) = 37,253,956

Alabama 2012 Budget = $13,467,506,257 = $2817.62/person.
California 2012 Budget = $141,899,526,000 = $3808.98/person.

California spends 35% more per person than we do, and while both states are operating in the red at the present time, California is much further in the hole. The end result will be that California will be bailed out by the Federal government at some point, using funds partly obtained from Alabamians. I personally wouldn't mind this nearly so much if there was some sense coming from California that they were trying to get their financial house in order; but I am hearing the reverse!

Bottom line: govern how you choose, based on the desires of your population, but don't come crying to me because you messed up while refusing to acknowledge you messed up.

Nay, not flawed. I call it hypocritical.
Obama is still in office, Bush made it his full EIGHT years. (What was that about folks getting back into power, time-and-again?)

Obama was elected once, and yes, with my personal vote. He will have to accomplish this next election without me, however, because I will not vote for him again. I voted for Bush the first time as well, but not the second; I felt he was going too far. But a lot of people did vote for him twice, while bemoaning his policies... I completely understand that dynamic. But while I can blame Bush for his policies, I cannot blame him for having the ability to implement them; that part I blame on the people.

I blame myself for being fooled into voting for them as well. That is not hypocritical. Hypocritical would include not accepting blame for Obama, despite his biggest voting block being one's own state.

You primed the pump for this demostration. And now I have turned it into something uncomfortable, because "I saw what you did there".

Perhaps I did "prime the pump". But I assure you I am far from uncomfortable. Self-expression is not difficult for me.

And it was overturned, when the Californians do something right. Well it is played down, isn't it!

No, they get credit for overturning it... but it was not a easy overturning and it did not happen because of California. It happened because truckers refused to enter the state in sufficient numbers to force the overturning.

Let's give credit where credit is due.

Take a look at the Electoral College

Speaking of credit where credit is due...

The Electoral College only applies to one lone office: the US Presidency. It does not apply to state offices or US Legislative offices. The President has limited power without the compliance of those.

You have to admit the majority of "haters" do nothing but type. And vanish when they realize I DO do more than just type.

Agreed.

So if you do not plan on changing that which you complain about, then why complain about it?

Because by maintaining policies that will likely cause me to have to help bail you out, and by not even addressing the issues that caused the problems in the first place, YOUR governmental policies begin to directly affect ME. I have no power to change what happens in California, nor do I want such, but YOU do. All I am asking for is for California to stand on their own feet and not use the rest of the nation as a crutch.

When those bailouts come, understand that there are strings attached. If I pay for it, I get to say how to fix it.

TheRedneck