Wednesday, 20 May 2009


California earthquake

Glenn Beck:

Other than you paying for California’s long-standing stupidity, what's their plan to turn the state around?  Governor Schwarzenegger proposed $15 billion in cuts and warned that if his propositions fail, California would need to release 40,000 prisoners, lay off more than 50,000 teachers and close down dozens of fire stations.
How many times do we have to hear this fraudulent argument?  When you have literally no government structure whatsoever, then I’ll believe you have nothing less important to cut than fire fighters and prisons.  You can’t make that argument when you’re still spending: $1.5 million for nontoxic dry cleaning; or $40.5 million for migrant day care; or the estimated $13 billion for education, health care and other services for the state’s 3.2 million illegal immigrants.
Of course, the press is already pulling out the meme it tried to paste on the TeaParty folks:  Anyone who voted against the propositions is a hypocrite who “wants” all those “services,” but doesn’t want to pay for them.
By rejecting five budget measures, Californians also brought into stark relief the fact that they, too, share blame for the political dysfunction that has brought California to the brink of insolvency.
“They clearly want more in services than they’re willing to pay for in taxes,” said Ethan Rarick, director of the Robert T. Matsui Center for Politics and Public Service at UC Berkeley.
We all want a free lunch, but unfortunately that doesn’t exist,” said former Gov. Gray Davis...
On Tuesday, Californians showed they were unwilling to scale back their demands in tight times: Voters turned down propositions that would have freed up money that they set aside years ago for mental-health and children’s programs.
Which ignores two points:  First, every line in California’s budget has a constituency that “wants” it, and each constituency has its pet legislators who would be glad to give it to them.

But there will never be enough money.  Even if the government takes 100% of everyone’s income, it still won’t be enough.  Because “wants” are infinitely expansible.  Meaning the job of government isn’t just giving people stuff, it’s also telling people no.  Which California’s politicians have failed to do... miserably.
I want a 23-room mansion, with an Olympic-sized pool, a golf course, and an amusement park.  I am not, however, willing to pay for it.  By Sacramento logic, the only conclusion would be to provide it for me.
- commenter “Underpants Gnomes Publishing, Inc.” at Ace
And the second point:  Amid all the special-interest log-rolling, what about the average taxpayer?  You know, the person for whom projects such as artist grants and sea otter conservation are “nice, if we can afford them,” but whose first priority is for someone to answer the phone when they dial 9-1-1.

When these people feel neglected:
When they find themselves paying a ton of taxes as their roads fall apart, their schools rot, and the public payroll skyrockets–
When the people they elect– regardless of party– only have time for the “we-want-a-handout” blocs–
When their government seems to have plenty of time to hassle them about cigarette smoking, plastic bags, and wearing seatbelts, but just can’t quite manage to get the gangbangers off the streets, stop the “taggers” from vandalizing their property, and catch the crooks who break into their homes–
When, in short, citizens begin to believe that they’re not getting their money’s worth and that there is no prospect of getting it

Is it any wonder they start getting fractious?

The Rhetorican:  Media displeased at California results  (via: IP)

HT:  “momma” (Beck), Ace (Times)

Posted by: Old Grouch in Rants at 17:25:06 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 611 words, total size 7 kb.

<< Page 1 of 1 >>
68kb generated in CPU 0.12, elapsed 0.3203 seconds.
55 queries taking 0.2416 seconds, 148 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.