I do not intend to spend a great deal of time and energy here today analyzing the details of the Governor’s plan which calls for massive government borrowing and spending. I will note that the public employee unions should be gleeful - $225 billion in spending on public works will line their pockets well for the next 20 years. And, because Prop. 75 failed, the public employee union bosses (who have undue influence in running this state) will continue to confiscate the earnings of public employees and send their money to extremely liberal Democrats in the legislature. 
The gravy train departed yesterday evening just after 5:00 pm.
Normally, I find very little common ground with Democrats like the two mighty Lilliputians. But, I think any analysis of the Governor’s plan can start with quotes from the left…
Phil Angelides, “It sounds like George W. Bush to me: spend spend spend, borrow borrow borrow. There are some major problems. He hasn't said how he would pay for it.” (Note: if Phil “partisan hack” Angelides actually reported facts, he’d acknowledge that the federal debt-to-GDP ratio last year only grew by 0.2% – surprisingly low - given the Bush-era spending spree. And, if projections on the federal deficit are correct, the debt-to-GDP ratio will actually decline over the next five years – thanks to the booming economy.)
Steve Westly, "I stood with him two years ago when he said he was going to cut up the credit cards. I think he has just applied for a bunch of new ones. The governor is going to have to explain."
Senate Pro Tempore, Don Perata, “…the governor is proposing a lot more spending than we are; it's unclear how he plans to pay for it.”
Yes, the mighty Lilliputians and Democrat leadership are pretending to balk at the massive spending plan proposed by the Governor. The truth is, they are not really concerned about the enormity of the spending (Democrats love to spend your money). Instead, they are complaining that the Governor hasn’t said how he will pay for the spending. They are setting up the debate to force a tax increase on Californians. If there is any doubt about where they are actually headed, consider this State of the State reaction…
“The Governor's proposal to rebuild California's crumbling infrastructure - highways, roads, ports, hospitals, and schools - is a positive step to grow our economy and improve our quality of life. But, we must diversify and expand our tax base to avoid saddling our children and grandchildren with insurmountable debt.” Art Pulaski, California Labor Federation.
A translation of what Mr. Pulaski said: we must extend (diversify) sales tax to services (that will excite the software community) and increase (expand) taxes on everyone else (or maybe just the “wealthy” again).
We have a problem in California - runaway spending on a social welfare state which has supplanted appropriate spending on infrastructure. We are now in a hole. It might be wise to mix some bonded debt with pay-as-you-go infrastructure spending. Given the growth in revenues that California has experienced at the current rate of taxation, it is apparent that we do not need to raise tax rates or impose new taxes at this time in order to meet our obligations. We can solve the infrastructure problem without incurring massive debt and bootstrapping future generations with higher taxes to pay for that debt. There are options; for starters Assemblyman Chuck DeVore offered some “out of the box” thinking yesterday before the speech.
I am confident that the subject of the state budget, spending, taxes and infrastructure will be a regular subject on OAF Blog over the next few days, weeks, months and years. I welcome the thoughts of OAF Blog readers – let’s be creative, positive and solution oriented.
The gravy train departed yesterday evening just after 5:00 pm.Normally, I find very little common ground with Democrats like the two mighty Lilliputians. But, I think any analysis of the Governor’s plan can start with quotes from the left…
Phil Angelides, “It sounds like George W. Bush to me: spend spend spend, borrow borrow borrow. There are some major problems. He hasn't said how he would pay for it.” (Note: if Phil “partisan hack” Angelides actually reported facts, he’d acknowledge that the federal debt-to-GDP ratio last year only grew by 0.2% – surprisingly low - given the Bush-era spending spree. And, if projections on the federal deficit are correct, the debt-to-GDP ratio will actually decline over the next five years – thanks to the booming economy.)
Steve Westly, "I stood with him two years ago when he said he was going to cut up the credit cards. I think he has just applied for a bunch of new ones. The governor is going to have to explain."
Senate Pro Tempore, Don Perata, “…the governor is proposing a lot more spending than we are; it's unclear how he plans to pay for it.”
Yes, the mighty Lilliputians and Democrat leadership are pretending to balk at the massive spending plan proposed by the Governor. The truth is, they are not really concerned about the enormity of the spending (Democrats love to spend your money). Instead, they are complaining that the Governor hasn’t said how he will pay for the spending. They are setting up the debate to force a tax increase on Californians. If there is any doubt about where they are actually headed, consider this State of the State reaction…
“The Governor's proposal to rebuild California's crumbling infrastructure - highways, roads, ports, hospitals, and schools - is a positive step to grow our economy and improve our quality of life. But, we must diversify and expand our tax base to avoid saddling our children and grandchildren with insurmountable debt.” Art Pulaski, California Labor Federation.A translation of what Mr. Pulaski said: we must extend (diversify) sales tax to services (that will excite the software community) and increase (expand) taxes on everyone else (or maybe just the “wealthy” again).
We have a problem in California - runaway spending on a social welfare state which has supplanted appropriate spending on infrastructure. We are now in a hole. It might be wise to mix some bonded debt with pay-as-you-go infrastructure spending. Given the growth in revenues that California has experienced at the current rate of taxation, it is apparent that we do not need to raise tax rates or impose new taxes at this time in order to meet our obligations. We can solve the infrastructure problem without incurring massive debt and bootstrapping future generations with higher taxes to pay for that debt. There are options; for starters Assemblyman Chuck DeVore offered some “out of the box” thinking yesterday before the speech.
I am confident that the subject of the state budget, spending, taxes and infrastructure will be a regular subject on OAF Blog over the next few days, weeks, months and years. I welcome the thoughts of OAF Blog readers – let’s be creative, positive and solution oriented.
No comments:
Post a Comment