Skip to comments.
CA: Human cost of GOP cuts called high (BARF Alert)
Sac Bee ^
| 7/3/03
| John Hill
Posted on 07/03/2003 9:53:58 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
Edited on 04/12/2004 5:52:13 PM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-23 next last
When the media marches lock step with the regime... What a hit piece.
Of course, no mention of the word, illegals
Advocates for state programs say the proposals would make disease more common, delay 100,000 children's entry into kindergarten and force vulnerable people onto the streets.
Advocates for state programs .. delay kids entries into k-garden .. force vulnerable people into the streets.
Yup.. The old school of journalism that bashed Reagan for shutting down the mental institutions, when , in fact, the previous Gub (Pat Brown) did the deed by signing the bills.
Shame , shame ,, Sac Bee..
2
posted on
07/03/2003 9:57:57 AM PDT
by
NormsRevenge
(Semper Fi..Support FR . "California-Fighting the rising tide of socialism" . http://www.DRAFTTom.com)
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Ping
3
posted on
07/03/2003 9:58:21 AM PDT
by
NormsRevenge
(Semper Fi..Support FR . "California-Fighting the rising tide of socialism" . http://www.DRAFTTom.com)
To: NormsRevenge
"They're not connecting the lives of people to the dollars."What damn dollars?
Hey, NormsRevenge, what illegal aliens? I don't see no steekin' illegal aliens!
To: NormsRevenge; *calgov2002; PeoplesRep_of_LA; Canticle_of_Deborah; snopercod; Grampa Dave; ...
Thanks for the post and ping!
You are so right!
calgov2002:
5
posted on
07/03/2003 10:01:05 AM PDT
by
Ernest_at_the_Beach
(Recall Gray Davis and then start on the other Democrats)
To: NormsRevenge
I have been reading about the problems with the budget in California. I just got a magazine (Governing 2003 Resource Book) that has a number of measures and rankings for the 50 states. This information was taken from the published state budgets.
1. The total revenue (mostly taxes) raised by the State per capita #6
(note that personal income is ranked #1)
Lets see how that is being spent.
1. The number of public employees/10,000 population #3
2. The average salary of public employees #1
3. The average pension of public employees #13
4. The amount spent on the environment #6
(note that the 4 worst cities for air quality are in California
and the water quality is ranked #34)
5. The amount spent on law enforcement #5
(note that the incarceration rate is ranked #16)
6. The amount of welfare recipients/10,000 population #2
7. The amount spent on health care #11
8. The amount spent on education #22
9. The amount spent on highways #50
It doesnt look to me like they are getting very much bang for the buck (except for the public employees).
6
posted on
07/03/2003 10:01:05 AM PDT
by
jim_trent
To: NormsRevenge
"They're only looking at the dollars," said Angela Gilliard, a legislative advocate at the Western Center on Law and Poverty. "They're not connecting the lives of people to the dollars." Angela Gilliard, who has a cushy foundation job, doesn't understand that what she so glibly says cuts both ways. Dollars are neutral instruments of exchange. They aren't good when they're spent but bad when they're earned. She's the one who really fails to connect the lives of people to the dollars. Every dollar of tax money represents somebody's hard work and sweat. Every tax increase means less money for honest working people to buy food, pay rent, and support their families.
7
posted on
07/03/2003 10:01:52 AM PDT
by
Cicero
(Marcus Tullius)
To: NormsRevenge
"They're only looking at the dollars," said Angela Gilliard, a legislative advocate at the Western Center on Law and Poverty. "They're not connecting the lives of people to the dollars." Kind of like how leftists never connect the lives of people with dollars when pushing for tax increases?
"There were an awful lot of instances when we were more on the compassionate side of things than the governor," Campbell said.
Ugh. A Republican should never say something like this.
8
posted on
07/03/2003 10:10:14 AM PDT
by
timm22
To: NormsRevenge
What about the cost of the liberal welfare state? In funding the welfare state, libs stunted economic growth and caused the lay-offs of countless thousands. That's liberal compassion for you.
As someone once said: Republicans define compassion by how many people they get off social welfare. Democrats define compassion by how many people they can put on social welfare.
9
posted on
07/03/2003 10:16:58 AM PDT
by
htjyang
To: NormsRevenge
10
posted on
07/03/2003 11:04:03 AM PDT
by
ElkGroveDan
(Fighting for Freedom and Having Fun)
To: jim_trent
Even though you didn't specify it, I assume that all these rankings are based on dollars per capita.
A few comments:
1. It is shocking that, although CA is #1 in personal income, it is also #2 in the number of welfare recipients per capita. A lot of "anchor" babies are getting welfare, even if their parents "technically" are not. This is part of the reason why CA ranks #3 in public employees per capita. Another reason is the California Teachers' Association which fought Prop 187 because they saw an endless stream of jobs for themselves.
2. Although CA has the four dirtiest cities in terms of air quality, the air quality over the last 30 years has tremendously improved. This is largely as a result of Federal Standards for vehicles and stationary ("smokestack") emissions. There is a tremendous amount of money wasted on fads and gimmickery (I know: I was involved in some of the grant-writing there). Take a look at the SoCal Air Quality Management District's Headquarters and the grants awarded.
3. In a state like CA, it is unconcionable that spending on highways is #50 per capita. This was supposed to be corrected by a proposition which passed (Don't remember the number) which required that taxes generated at the fuel pump were to be reserved for transportation improvements. One would think that this would be the intended purpose anyway, but in CA those monies were not reserved for the roads but spent on non-transportation items. This proposition was to correct this, but I believe that the CA catastrophe has caused the legislature to delegate these monies for other purposes again.
4. Keep in mind that all of the states received windfall tobacco litigation money, which, I believe, precipitated the spending binge by the state. Just as lottery winners often mortgage their futures and then go bankrupt, these monies prompted the states to enact programs which were not viable long term. Those monies should have been spent on capital improvements (AND NOT BONDED), not permanent programs. Incidentally, most of that money is gone, gone, gone....
11
posted on
07/03/2003 11:11:18 AM PDT
by
happygrl
To: A CA Guy; Adder; AEMILIUS PAULUS; alancarp; Always Right; amexmike; Arpege92; Bahbah; blackbart1; ..
Rat Rhetoric Hits Rock Bottom PING
4th in the series.
12
posted on
07/03/2003 11:19:08 AM PDT
by
ElkGroveDan
(Fighting for Freedom and Having Fun)
To: ElkGroveDan
Republicans making children sick
To: I_Love_My_Husband
Forgot to put my LOL. Dan I love your series! Thank you!
In the article it states that the age for kindergarten would be raised--does anyone know what the date for attaining age five would be? It is currently December 2, an archaic notion of sending children age four to kindergarten.
15
posted on
07/03/2003 11:52:20 AM PDT
by
kmiller1k
(remain calm)
To: happygrl
> Even though you didn't specify it, I assume that all these rankings
> are based on dollars per capita.
In most cases, yes. In other cases, it was based on population (number of employees/population), etc. It was not just raw numbers. On raw numbers, the Gross State Product of California is FAR above any other state in the Union and about 13% of the entire country.
> 3. In a state like CA, it is unconcionable that spending on highways
> is #50 per capita.
We agree there. As a Civil Engineer (structural major), the raiding of highway money by California for STUPID projects is well known and has been published in engineering magazines for years. Unfortunately, although California may be backing away from that, several other states (including my own) are just starting to raid the highway money for other things. A bad omen, I think.
I only listed a few of the measures in the Governing booklet. Most of them were not illuminating or indicative of a trend. However, it struck me about how much they were spending on employees and how little they were spending on infastructure.
To: ElkGroveDan
FOUR PERCENT CUTS!!! You inhuman bas-tards! Ohhhh the humanity! Ohhhh the poor cheeldrunses!
17
posted on
07/03/2003 12:25:44 PM PDT
by
Adder
To: NormsRevenge
Obviously some of this HAS to be responded to:"They're only looking at the dollars," said Angela Gilliard, a legislative advocate at the Western Center on Law and Poverty. "They're not connecting the lives of people to the dollars."
So, tripling the Vehicle License Fee doesnt mean that the RATS are only looking at the dollars? And of course, such a huge fee increase is their way of benignly connecting to the lives of the people who have to PAY those dollars?
"Inaction is unacceptable," Davis said.
Well, so are you ya Jackass, as is your whole taxing, squandering Jackass party.
Democrats say the budget already has been cut to the bare bones.
(Insert picture of a huge stinking pile of bulls..t here)
To: NormsRevenge
Go, Republicans. If they fold, we're dead.
19
posted on
07/03/2003 1:04:49 PM PDT
by
Saundra Duffy
(For victory & freedom!!!)
To: All
20
posted on
07/03/2003 1:43:49 PM PDT
by
ElkGroveDan
(Fighting for Freedom and Having Fun)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-23 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson