Replies

My analogy was simply trying to say that any source of money for Sacramento to spend is just feeding the addiction. Also, as this article points out, the prior $10.7 billion deficit amount has actually decreased to $8.6 Billion. So... instead of just 'refinancing', the $15 Billion Bond proposal is almost double the amount of the deficit that existed at the end of this past fiscal year and extends it over a much longer period. Doubling the amount can hardly be called a "debt reduction", as quoted in the article.

In the meantime, there is no action in Sacramento on current year budget reductions. The proposed budget for next year is also structurally out of balance, further increasing the deficit. The saga continues.

The proposed budget for next year is also structurally out of balance,

Also fractionally larger than the current Davis and friends budget.

Of course, the net sum zero crowd will point out that a budget that isn't substantially increase from last year is "really" a cut in spending because it doesn't allow for the inevitable spending increases that result from higher populations and the God given right for governments to grow but I'm too old to buy that nonsense.