Replies

Billy, if you REALLY believe that the US government (thus the taxpayers coast to coast) will not assist California with BILLIONS AND BILLIONS of dollars to bail them out, then I have some beach property in Arizonia with YOUR name on it....In fact, we would HAVE to help bail them out, as we HAD to bail out Chrysler some years ago because the ripple effects to the economy as a whole would have been drastic, and California is a hell of lot bigger than Chrysler....we also had to help bail out New York once....you are living in a dream world if you think that the Congress will sit back and say, "Tough, you idiots got yourselves into this, now we are going to just sit here while millions a laid off, companies go under, social services are halted, and millions are added to the welfare rolls.

Impeach the Boy said: "...we also had to help bail out New York once ..."

Chrysler should have been allowed to fail. Then the other auto companies would have had greater understanding that their decisions have consequences.

As for New York, you will have to remind me of the nature of the federal bailout. I remember the joke "will the last person to leave NY please turn out the lights".

Perhaps it was on another thread that I described the bankruptcy scenario I expect. Various courts will decide where the $60 billion dollars in revenue that we do have will go. Our budget, even under the circumstances of a court controlled bankruptcy, will still exceed probably any other state.

Let's say that you are correct. Are you suggesting that the feds are going to just provide $38 billion dollars? Will this include money to subsidize sex change operations as mandated by San Francisco? Will it include money to pay off unauthorized "deficit" bonds? Will it include money to help businesses permit "family leave" for up to ten weeks or whatever it is that Kalifornia is mandating?

There is nothing wrong with Kalifornia except that it is expecting to spend more money than it has, more money than it should, and more money than prudent people will allow.

There is also no solution to Kalifornia's problems which does not include massive reductions in spending. Federal intervention may delay the inevitable, but you can't get milk and steak from the same cow.

I can't even imagine how the Feds would provide some kind of aid. Could you describe what that would look like? Would Congress vote on it? Would it be an outright gift to Kalifornia that Wyoming, Texas, and Tennessee would have to help repay? Would it simply be tacked on to the national debt? And how much will they send next year? Will it be any amount Bustamonte cares to name or will there be a limit?

I don't see Federal intervention at all. The only reason to expect massive layoffs is among public workers. If the teachers want to leave the Coastal Commission in place, then more teachers will be laid off. If the teachers want to permit prison guards to retire at 50 with 90 percent pay, then more teachers will be laid off.

I recently retired from an international company whose sales are only half from the US. They are already burdened by high expenses for workers comp and family leave. As long as no new taxes are passed, they can continue their business here but new jobs will probably not be created here. It just wouldn't make business sense.