Governor of California Recalled

[Cerbaho-WG]

Spiff, be real.

 

Every state in the country has severe econoimic problems.

 

California had all those years of republican governors.

 

There is a lot of politics at work here which I laid out, which you will not discuss or respond to other than to blame the Democrats.

 

Wah wah, those bad bad Dems.

 

Gees - that is why a Republican congressman is trying to front out Arnold in a special election less than year after the election?  ust eb the Dems.  Yeah that's right, that's the ticket.

 

In a Limbaugh-ized world, one liners are all that suffice.  No one compared you or your thinking to the actual Rush, just that one-liners are not an adequete response but America has gotten accustomed to the short sound byte.

Ya and during good times and bad Davis took over this state with the largest surplus in the country. Now they have a larger deficit then all of the other 49 states combined.

 

I'm sorry, but I hate higher taxes and the republicans have a balanced budget out there but the democrats won't agree to it. The democrats are still lost on getting the budget solved and the main thing is the programs that illegal aliens can use.

 

Is it all Davis fault, No, but I don't buy into this bulls*** raise taxes so they can raise more spending. Davis has jacked up registration in this state. I have to pay 400 freaking bucks a year to register my damn car and its not even a fancy car.

 

In any other state it would cost half of that at the least.

 

I'm sick of all this spending to aid people that don't pay any taxes and aren't citizens in California. I have nothing against people coming over here and having work visas and such, I realize the conditions suck in Mexico and a ton of other countries and I have nothing against programs where people can come over here and work and do jobs. And if they want our benefits then have them use a tax id number and pay some damn taxes.

Hate to break it to you, Jason, but Davis isn't the anti-christ you make him out to be. California got absolutely lambasted by Enron, which took hundreds of millions of dollars from California. And Ken Lay still roams around free as a bird. Also love that the "loophole" that enhabled businesses to avoid certain taxes by moving their "HQs" to, I believe Jamaica or something. That's been filled so admirably, Georgy! False promises rule.

 

Also, one reason for the deficit runs all the way back to the White House. Helllllo, Tax Cuts! Blow the State and National surplusses by renewing your faith in trickle-down economics! But hey, don't say I like Davis, because I don't. The guy is an idiot, but not THIS much of an idiot.

 

Also, explain to me one time any modern Republican has ever balanced a budget. Reagan and Bush sure did a swell job of driving the defecit through the rood. I'm sorry, but I don't trust a Republican with money, it never works out.

[Cerbaho-WG]

Also, Arianna Huffington announced she will run as Governor for California. I love that women to death.

[cwsox]

Of course Davis was re-elected in November 2002.

 

The Republicans lost. What has changed since then? Nothing but opportunism and a sickening sense that they know better than the people. The special recall/election will cost the state of California what, $30-$40 million for an election not even a year after the election - typical republican fiscal insanity - plus the millions of dollars spent on the campaigns and the time not spent solving problems but in campaigning. Yeah, real smart.

 

They tried to undo the 1996 national election. Now they go for it in California - undo an election.

 

They have no shame.

 

They lost - but they can't take it.

 

Whine babies - and arrogant beyond belief.

[Chisoxfn]

The people recalled Davis. It wasn't just republicans that combined to get him out. If it was just a few pissed of republicans then the recall wouldn't of be on the ballot.

 

They got their signatures. The whole reason they have the recall out there is for times like this.

 

Also, it would cost that much if there wasn't an election already being held in November. Since there is already an election all they have to do is add that portion to the ballot.

[SI1020]

If Arnold ran their is an excellent chance he'd win.  Arnold was going to run this past election, but Davis has so much campaign money and he just bashes the heck out of anyone that even throws their name in the pot. 

 

I actually think Arnold being married to a liberal makes him an even better candidate.  He obviously gets along with her, so I think he could do a good job of getting support from both parties and rallying to get things done that need to be done in California. 

 

The Democrats and Republicans are at war here.  Democrats want to raise taxes and keep increasing the spending while the Republicans want to cut spending and raise taxes a minimal amount. 

 

Its ridiculous.  The state has a ton of bills that are not only state funded but also federal laws. 

 

The problem is the federal laws require you to be a citizen and the state of California doesn't want that to be in effect.  So the state made their own and you don't have to be a citizen to take advantage of it. 

 

Its obvious that its done so the democrats can get the minority vote, but I feel its a bunch of BS for taxpayers to provide money that gets taken by others.  I don't go to some other country and welch off their tax payers. 

 

Basically in short, California is all screwed up.

This is a perfect example of why I rarely if ever vote for Democrats. The party as its now constituted needs to go extinct. I've been doing such a good job of avoiding most things political here for several months.

[SI1020]

Since I already screwed everything up by making a political post why not carry it a little further. I see tax cuts lambasted here. What the hell do they teach these days? You know I've seen the pendulum swing from left to right and back to left again among the youth of this country. It's swung hard left again at least among college age kids in the North, Great Lakes Midwest and West (left) coast. But I digress. Repeat after me. TAXES ARE NOT A ZERO SUM GAME. When you lower income tax rates the result is usually job creation and a major increase in government revenues. It happened in the 20's under Republicans, in the 60's under Democrats. Hell it was one of JFK's most important planks in his platform. Of course the Democrats weren't the fractured schizophrenic politically correct emasculated debating society that they are now. It was a party that catered to the lower middle class and middle class and those that aspired to become that. It was a powerhouse that won elections at all levels. I'm getting carried away, I'm just so tired of the knee jerk cliches. It worked under Reagan when rates were lowered and government revenues almost doubled under his watch. It's not happening so far this time. There are a number of reasons why the economy is not rebounding, but when it does the tax cuts will spur additional revenues. Liberals want my money. They want it all. I don't want to give it to them. It's one of the main reasons the Democrats have had so much trouble the last 35 years or so. People don't trust them with their condescending social engineering ways. California is the extreme example of this. Gray Davis is a disaster. Many Democrats will admit as much, but not for publication because they don't want to give any ammo to the opposition. I'm sorry, even if Bush is the anti christ and Republicans eat babies for breakfast like their enemies would have you believe, the left in this country is brain dead. I don't know who if anybody pays attention to what I post, but for the record I'm a registered Independent who votes Republican about half the time and Liberterian the other half, with the occasional Dem or Reform Party person thrown in. If I'm not completely enamored with the Republicans I recoil in horror at the left and again, taxes are not a zero sum game.

[Chisoxfn]

SI, I agree with you on the most part.

 

I never understand how people always complain about tax cuts. I think its ridiculous all the things the government pisses tax payers money away on.

 

Tax Cuts can be used as great stimulants to the economy. In a sense isn't that what FDR did to make things better. He didn't do tax cuts, but he simply provided jobs paid for by the government. The key is to put more money in the people's hands because in the US people save like 8 cents for every dollar they earn.

 

So if they are getting extra money (via tax cuts; and I'm not saying tax cuts are always the way to go) then people will take the majority of the extra money and be consumers. That money will go to companies and it will create a supply for work, which gets more people employed and things spinning again.

 

This is kind of how economist see things, and of course things aren't that cut and dry in the real world.

[Cerbaho-WG]

Tax cuts aren't bad at all, only when they're aimed at the right people. Giving more than 50% of a tax cut to the richest 1% who will not spend the money, just store it in an account, is just idiotic. Reagan proved that trickle-down economics doesn't work, but George didn't get the memo. If you want to stimulate the economy, gear the tax cut to the people who need it the most; the lower and middle classes. Also, tax the wealthy more, and eliminate all the damn loopholes businesses have to dodge taxes.

 

Bush's tax policy is so backwards it baffles me how anyone can think the dolt is accomplishing something.

[Chisoxfn]

Mental Note: Make sure Cerb becomes a GM, cause I don't want him running my country. Just what I want to do pay more taxes

[Cerbaho-WG]

Mental Note: Make sure Cerb becomes a GM, cause I don't want him running my country.  Just what I want to do pay more taxes

Look at Europe, they do fairly well with higher tax rates, because, OH MY f***ING GOD, they actually believe in some ideals of Socialism! God forbid Health Insurance is a right not a priviledge, God forbid we actually look out for the little guy once in a while.

 

But, in the great land called America, we say f*** the poor. Welfare is evil, and health care should not be for everyone. The rich should be able to get large amounts of money they will do nothing with, and corporation should be provided with every loophole necessary to dodge taxation. What a great land we live in.

[southsider2k5]

Since I already screwed everything up by making a political post why not carry it a little further. I see tax cuts lambasted here. What the hell do they teach these days? You know I've seen the pendulum swing from left to right and back to left again among the youth of this country. It's swung hard left again at least among college age kids in the North, Great Lakes Midwest and West (left) coast. But I digress. Repeat after me. TAXES ARE NOT A ZERO SUM GAME. When you lower income tax rates the result is usually job creation and a major increase in government revenues.  It happened in the 20's under Republicans, in the 60's under Democrats. Hell it was one of JFK's most important planks in his platform. Of course the Democrats weren't the fractured schizophrenic politically correct emasculated debating society that they are now. It was a party that catered to the lower middle class and middle class and those that aspired to become that. It was a powerhouse that won elections at all levels. I'm getting carried away, I'm just so tired of the knee jerk cliches. It worked under Reagan when rates were lowered and government revenues almost doubled under his watch. It's not happening so far this time. There are a number of reasons why the economy is not rebounding, but when it does the tax cuts will spur additional revenues.  Liberals want my money. They want it all. I don't want to give it to them. It's one of the main reasons the Democrats have had so much trouble the last 35 years or so. People don't trust them with their condescending social engineering ways. California is the extreme example of this. Gray Davis is a disaster. Many Democrats will admit as much, but not for publication because they don't want to give any ammo to the opposition. I'm sorry, even if Bush is the anti christ and Republicans eat babies for breakfast like their enemies would have you believe, the left in this country is brain dead. I don't know who if anybody pays attention to what I post, but for the record I'm a registered Independent who votes Republican about half the time and Liberterian the other half, with the occasional Dem or Reform Party person thrown in. If I'm not completely enamored with the Republicans I recoil in horror at the left and again, taxes are not a zero sum game.

Being a real live economist, I can say that yes your post is right, BUT there are key things that are left out. Investment is the biggest key to the mulitplier when it comes to the business/rich sector as it relates to how much affect a tax cut has on a certian economy. Because the tax cuts for the most part have been directed at the rich and at business, if they don't reinvest all we are doing is lining their pockets. Businesses reinvest by buying more capital goods, expanding operations, hiring more people etc. Tell me, how many businesses have used any of the money to hire people and expand operations? Practically none. Essentially they have used that money to steady up their battered bottom lines and shore up stock prices. IMO that is the sole reason that we have seen an increase in profits and stock prices, isn't because of sales increases, but from cost savings both from lower tax rates, and from savings realized by FEWER employees. This economy isn't going to expand appreciably until companies start to hire. If people don't work, people can't spend. It is that simple. And until the rich brackets start to spend the tax breaks they have gotten, this economy will stay in the toliet.

[SI1020]

Southsider- Thanks for reading and considering my opinions. Like I said in my post, there are number of reasons why these tax cuts have not "worked" just yet and you obviously mentioned some good ones. A real live economist on Soxnet. That's pretty allright if you ask me. If you have the time or inclination what would you do if it was in your hands. How do you propose we get this economy out of the dumper? I'm one of those out of work professionals at the moment. Thankfully for me, my wife is doing OK and she's not pitching me out the door. I can't afford to give her a four million dollar ring to show my appreciation either.

[southsider2k5]

Southsider- Thanks for reading and considering my opinions. Like I said in my post, there are number of reasons why these tax cuts have not "worked" just yet and you obviously mentioned some good ones. A real live economist on Soxnet. That's pretty allright if you ask me. If you have the time or inclination what would you do if it was in your hands. How do you propose we get this economy out of the dumper? I'm one of those out of work professionals at the moment. Thankfully for me, my wife is doing OK and she's not pitching me out the door. I can't afford to give her a four million dollar ring to show my appreciation either.

Thanks for the kind words. I am going to think about the question and give you a long winded answer, if you are interested. I hope you don't feel bad about work, because I was out of work for about 5 months last year, and took a 25% paycut to get another job, and in my industry, I am considered lucky

 

The simple answer IMO is the middle class. By and large we are the ones out of work, and are the majority of this economy. So much of the middle class has lost good paying jobs, and has either had to substitute crappy jobs, or no job at all. Spending money on discressionary stuff is the fartherest thing from so many peoples minds, yet that spending is the key to getting the economy started again. Until business starts hiring for decent median salary wages, the economy is going to putt along at best, if not stagger between stagnation and recession. Expansion just isn't possible with the biggest population class, suffering so greatly.

[cwsox]

The people recalled Davis.

no one has recalled Davis.

 

the issue is being put to a vote - if the vote is yes, davis is recalled, not until then.

 

petitions to have a recall election is all that people signed.

 

the recall will lose.

[SI1020]

Southsider - I agree with your latest post. Let me add this. From 1946 to about 1973 the US economy was on a roll the likes of which the world has never seen. Real incomes, even adjusting for inflation more than doubled. The great middle class was the center of gravity. Since that time nothing but trouble. Manufacturing has declined drastically, the entire Northern tier Rust Belt is dying a slow and painful death. The upper middle class and rich are greatly expanded, the poor are still with us (although poverty rates are much lower than in 1960) but most important of all the middle class is being squeezed to death. Both parties give the middle class the middle finger. The Democrats are controlled by their left wing, which becomes more Stalinistic by the day. The Republicans, at least on economic issues ignore the plight of the middle class and even on occasion promote policies that are poison for American business, particularly small businesses, which create most of the jobs. That is why I often vote for Liberterian candidates. I don't buy in to the totality of their philosophy, on some issues what they believe is a recipe for chaos. It is just my way of protesting the lack of choice among the two major parties. The Democrats could put the GOP out of business quickly if they'd go back to the basics of what made them a national and local powerhouse from FDR to LBJ. They catered to a growing middle class that often looked to the Democrats as the reason for their newly found prosperity. Today they sneer at people like me, and wonder why we sneer right back and they lose elections.

 

As far as my own personal situation, I'm OK. I know I'm good at what I like to do, but unfortunately I'm firmly in age discrimination territory now. I'm also looking for and have the most experience in a type of job with very few good opportunities. Nothing to do but tough it out and hope my wife remains attached to my presence.

 

Lastly, the topic at hand. California like the rest of the country is grappling with a host of difficult economic problems. That being said it would be hard to find a state more disastrously managed from an economic standpoint. California is textbook for why people like me have abandoned the Democrats while not being totally comfortable with the GOP across the board. Davis is a disaster and deserves to be recalled. The California Democrats remind me of 18th Century doctors who used to attach leeches to critically ill patients, hastening their demise. I hope the recall passes. Based on what I know I give it an even chance as of right now. The California GOP is known for shooting itself in the foot at crucial moments. Davis would never have been elected in the first place if not for the major problems of his GOP opponent.

[Steff]

California has a tradition of electing Hollywood types, so I guess it's possible. I hear that Arnolds wife is dead set against him running because of privacy concerns. I wonder if she'd vote for him. She's a liberal Democrat.

And a Kennedy

[southsider2k5]

Hey SI, This was in the Chi Trib today. This is a good sign.

 

 

Microsoft Corp. flipped a switch amid the darkness of a jobless economic recovery Thursday.

 

The beam of light--the software giant's plans to add 5,000 jobs--represents a nearly 9 percent increase in the Redmond, Wash.-based company's employment.

 

More important, it's a sign of confidence from a leader in an industry that's spilled hundreds of thousands of workers onto the unemployment rolls since the tech-heavy Nasdaq collapsed three years ago and helped plunge the larger economy into recession.

 

Increased hiring--the last step in any recovery--is what will lift the U.S. economy out of its slump, but businesses have been timid about taking the risk of adding workers.

 

Microsoft's decision to add jobs despite slowing annual sales growth is one of the first such major moves.

 

"Psychology can mean everything," said LaSalle Bank chief economist Carl Tannenbaum. Businesses "need to go from looking at investment in human resources as costs" to seeing them as long-term investments.

 

Ironically, among the reasons Microsoft is staffing up is to sell more software that helps businesses cut costs and, in some cases, eliminate jobs.

 

That's been part of the paradox in an economy where businesses continued to rack up productivity gains even during the recession of 2001. Businesses still are focused more on cost cutting than growth initiatives.

 

"It's still a difficult climate [in which] to win business," said Michael Gorriaran, general manager of Microsoft's Midwest District, which includes Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin.

 

Clients want technology that returns their cost of investment quickly--within three months to nine months, he added.

 

Gorriaran expects only "incremental benefit" to the Midwest region from Microsoft's plans to add 5,000 jobs worldwide during the current fiscal year, which started in July.

 

All but 1,000 of the 3,000 to 3,500 new jobs slated for the United States will be in the Puget Sound area, where most of Microsoft's research and development is based. Another 1,500 jobs will be added abroad, likely in sales, analysts said.

 

The hiring announcement came at the company's daylong annual meeting with analysts, where Microsoft said it planned to boost research and development spending 8 percent, to as much as $6.9 billion, including the cost of equity compensation to employees.

 

Microsoft's R&D spending increase puts the figure within its historic range when measured as a percentage of estimated sales, or about 20 percent--the same percentage as last year.

 

The decision to ramp up R&D is likely to provide a dash of cheer to the high-tech sector. Since late 2000, tech companies have struggled with the devastating economic fallout caused by the bursting of the dot-com bubble, the drop-off in telecom investment and the slowdown that eventually widened to the U.S. economy as a whole.

 

But because Microsoft's situation is unusual in a number of ways, it's far from clear whether the move holds implications for the broader economy.

 

Not only is it tethered to the boom-and-bust technology sector, but Microsoft enjoys near-monopoly market share in a broad swatch of the market for operating software.

 

As the Federal Reserve Board has tried to spark the economy through repeated interest rate cuts, consumers have responded by maintaining spending on everything from big-ticket appliances to little luxuries.

 

Corporations, by contrast, have largely remained on the sidelines, cautiously refraining from expanding production capacity or upgrading equipment. And it is those large-scale capital expenditures, rather than the less-concentrated spending of consumers, that are considered key for a real upsurge.

 

The nation's capital stock--the value of all equipment, factories, warehouses and stores--grew by $100 billion in the 12 months through the first quarter, or about 1 percent of gross domestic product--the slowest rate since before World War II, said economist Mark Zandi of Economy.com.

 

The net value of all information technology equipment still is declining because businesses are not replacing old equipment quickly enough.

 

"Businesses will start to invest [in equipment] again before they begin to hire in any significant way" because hiring adds fixed costs such as health-care benefits, Zandi said.

 

Investment should accelerate by early next year in response to the recently enacted bonus depreciation allowance, which allows businesses to write off their equipment faster.

 

Rob Enderle, analyst at Forrester Research, said Microsoft is smart to beginning hiring in advance of a recovery, when talent is cheaper. "One of the risks is having too few people when the market starts to come back," he said. "The only way to know what's going on in the market is to have more people out there."

 

Zandi said Microsoft's hiring announcement may prove to be "one of those first baby steps by businesses toward growth."

 

"There's a complete lack of confidence," he said, "almost a mirror image of three years ago" during the boom.

 

"It takes one company in each industry to say, `It's time to step up and expand and grow and I'm going to take the risk,'" he said. "It's like a light switch going on.