Conquer Club

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/07/san-bernardino-bankruptcy-only-150k-bank-accounts.html

The San Bernardino City Council's decision to file for municipal bankruptcy came days after the city learned it had just $150,000 in its bank accounts, barely enough to make payroll June 15, city officials said.

Shortly before the council's vote Tuesday night, City Atty. James Penman warned the city would "shut down," including public safety agencies, if it didn't have enough money to pay its employees.

"People are not going to work if they do not get paid,'' Penman said

Serially, great work San Berny. How many treasurers and what not are you paying to tell you that you just hit 150k. Shouldn't they have mentioned it declining at a very rapid rate? Wowzers.

There are a couple more in California that went bankrupt too.

Stockton, the Northern California city of nearly 300,000, became the biggest when it filed for Chapter 9 on June 28. The much smaller city of Mammoth Lakes voted for bankruptcy July 3.

I really don't get it. Didn't California just "raise revenues"? They should have more revenues now!

kentington wrote:http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/07/san-bernardino-bankruptcy-only-150k-bank-accounts.html

The San Bernardino City Council's decision to file for municipal bankruptcy came days after the city learned it had just $150,000 in its bank accounts, barely enough to make payroll June 15, city officials said.

Shortly before the council's vote Tuesday night, City Atty. James Penman warned the city would "shut down," including public safety agencies, if it didn't have enough money to pay its employees.

"People are not going to work if they do not get paid,'' Penman said

Serially, great work San Berny. How many treasurers and what not are you paying to tell you that you just hit 150k. Shouldn't they have mentioned it declining at a very rapid rate? Wowzers.

No kidding! Either EVERYONE was oblivious (in which case, many people need to be held responsible) or someone was intentionally NOT making it known for whatever reason (in which case that person or persons needs to be held responsible).

kentington wrote:

The San Bernardino City Council's decision to file for municipal bankruptcy came days after the city learned it had just $150,000 in its bank accounts, barely enough to make payroll June 15, city officials said.

Scranton is jealous.

Gary Lewis, a financial consultant living in Scranton who follows the developments closely, said that last Thursday, July 5, the city had only $5,000 on hand.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/11/us/un ... -wage.html

saxitoxin wrote:

kentington wrote:

The San Bernardino City Council's decision to file for municipal bankruptcy came days after the city learned it had just $150,000 in its bank accounts, barely enough to make payroll June 15, city officials said.

Scranton is jealous.

Gary Lewis, a financial consultant living in Scranton who follows the developments closely, said that last Thursday, July 5, the city had only $5,000 on hand.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/11/us/un ... -wage.html

That's great maybe they can have an ice cream party for the top government officials with that.

Phatscotty wrote:There are a couple more in California that went bankrupt too.

Stockton, the Northern California city of nearly 300,000, became the biggest when it filed for Chapter 9 on June 28. The much smaller city of Mammoth Lakes voted for bankruptcy July 3.

I really don't get it. Didn't California just "raise revenues"? They should have more revenues now!

Yeah, but even more importantly the county has been adding regulations to businesses that cost quite a bit. A lot of my customers and vendors are in the area. They moved business from LA County to San Berny for the lower cost. San Berny got greedy with all the new business and thought let's make money. Now a lot of businesses have been moving to other counties.
I knew Stockton had gone under. But San Berny is something I am familiar with and it is one of the biggest to go bankrupt.

Woodruff wrote:

kentington wrote:http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/07/san-bernardino-bankruptcy-only-150k-bank-accounts.html

The San Bernardino City Council's decision to file for municipal bankruptcy came days after the city learned it had just $150,000 in its bank accounts, barely enough to make payroll June 15, city officials said.

Shortly before the council's vote Tuesday night, City Atty. James Penman warned the city would "shut down," including public safety agencies, if it didn't have enough money to pay its employees.

"People are not going to work if they do not get paid,'' Penman said

Serially, great work San Berny. How many treasurers and what not are you paying to tell you that you just hit 150k. Shouldn't they have mentioned it declining at a very rapid rate? Wowzers.

No kidding! Either EVERYONE was oblivious (in which case, many people need to be held responsible) or someone was intentionally NOT making it known for whatever reason (in which case that person or persons needs to be held responsible).

Is castration good enough?

Think about all of the local businesses that have rendered services now trying to collect their payment and the county says, "Oops, we spent all of our money already. We filed bankruptcy, so now we owe you nothing."

kentington wrote:

Woodruff wrote:

kentington wrote:http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/07/san-bernardino-bankruptcy-only-150k-bank-accounts.html

The San Bernardino City Council's decision to file for municipal bankruptcy came days after the city learned it had just $150,000 in its bank accounts, barely enough to make payroll June 15, city officials said.

Shortly before the council's vote Tuesday night, City Atty. James Penman warned the city would "shut down," including public safety agencies, if it didn't have enough money to pay its employees.

"People are not going to work if they do not get paid,'' Penman said

Serially, great work San Berny. How many treasurers and what not are you paying to tell you that you just hit 150k. Shouldn't they have mentioned it declining at a very rapid rate? Wowzers.

No kidding! Either EVERYONE was oblivious (in which case, many people need to be held responsible) or someone was intentionally NOT making it known for whatever reason (in which case that person or persons needs to be held responsible).

Is castration good enough?

Think about all of the local businesses that have rendered services now trying to collect their payment and the county says, "Oops, we spent all of our money already. We filed bankruptcy, so now we owe you nothing."

Indeed. That's a pile of shit.

Oh hell, this only the third Californian city to declare bankruptcy. The Golden State still has a ton of other cities. Of course, I'd be feeling a bit nervous right about now if I was a creditor to some of those cities right about now......

In all seriousness though, there will be more.

kentington wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:There are a couple more in California that went bankrupt too.

Stockton, the Northern California city of nearly 300,000, became the biggest when it filed for Chapter 9 on June 28. The much smaller city of Mammoth Lakes voted for bankruptcy July 3.

I really don't get it. Didn't California just "raise revenues"? They should have more revenues now!

Yeah, but even more importantly the county has been adding regulations to businesses that cost quite a bit. A lot of my customers and vendors are in the area. They moved business from LA County to San Berny for the lower cost. San Berny got greedy with all the new business and thought let's make money. Now a lot of businesses have been moving to other counties.
I knew Stockton had gone under. But San Berny is something I am familiar with and it is one of the biggest to go bankrupt.

That's easy though. Just raise revenues. The balanced approach that Cali has already been doing will continue to work better and better.

patches70 wrote:Oh hell, this only the third Californian city to declare bankruptcy. The Golden State still has a ton of other cities. Of course, I'd be feeling a bit nervous right about now if I was a creditor to some of those cities right about now......

In all seriousness though, there will be more.

It sure the hell aint the golden state no more! What should we call California now? And anyone who says "the dependent on Texas state" is gonna get smacked!

patches70 wrote:Oh hell, this only the third Californian city to declare bankruptcy. The Golden State still has a ton of other cities. Of course, I'd be feeling a bit nervous right about now if I was a creditor to some of those cities right about now......

In all seriousness though, there will be more.

Yes, because CA thought it would continue to benefit from the housing bubble.. and literally banked on it continuing ad infinitum.

That, and they invested in other ways poorly.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

patches70 wrote:Oh hell, this only the third Californian city to declare bankruptcy. The Golden State still has a ton of other cities. Of course, I'd be feeling a bit nervous right about now if I was a creditor to some of those cities right about now......

In all seriousness though, there will be more.

Yes, because CA thought it would continue to benefit from the housing bubble.. and literally banked on it continuing ad infinitum.

That, and they invested in other ways poorly.

Like paying state employees too much for doing nothing? Pensions?
You realize these bankruptcies are coming right after tax increases, right?
There are so many things that CA did and is doing wrong, Jerry Brown, Boxer, Frankenstein.

California has been bleeding jobs since long before the housing bubble popped. Perhaps it has something to do with unfriendly tax rates on job providers that only get more unfriendly, or CA being 1 of only a handful of states that does not have a constitutional requirement to balance their budget every cycle? People just don't respect deficits anymore, and it's going to bite Cali in the ass by swallowing the recovery. A recovery may not happen for a very, very long time.

We as a people have got to understand the serious dangers of debt and deficits. Don't spend more than we take in, and don't give into all the greedy demands of the greedy people and corporations for more entitlements and privileges and handouts, and we won't have to close down our fucking schools and hospitals!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.

The reality that we are robbing the next generation is starting to become horribly clear. This insanity MUST stop. The longer we wait to deal with the problem, the worse it's going to be, and if you ask me, we have not yet even begun to start dealing with the problem. The debt must be liquidated. I know people are not going to like it, but that is the consequence of not dealing with the debt earlier. The pain will be much worse now than it would have been 2 or 4 years ago, but the pain 2 or 4 years from now will be exponentially worse compared to today.

Debt is like fire, and that is how it needs to be treated. It needs our constant attention and our respect. If handled responsibly, the fire can be controlled. If handled irresponsibly, it will consume us and everything in it's sight. We are completely the opposite of responsible, and I cannot believe that the calls for more spending and borrowing seem now to be louder than ever.

We need to get a grip.

kentington wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:

patches70 wrote:Oh hell, this only the third Californian city to declare bankruptcy. The Golden State still has a ton of other cities. Of course, I'd be feeling a bit nervous right about now if I was a creditor to some of those cities right about now......

In all seriousness though, there will be more.

Yes, because CA thought it would continue to benefit from the housing bubble.. and literally banked on it continuing ad infinitum.

That, and they invested in other ways poorly.

Like paying state employees too much for doing nothing? Pensions?

Pensions were money people worked for, just delayed until retirement. You know, that thing that our wonderful economic leaders have ensured will rarely happen for future generations?

Pensions were supposed to be funded and managed such that they were self-sustaining. BUT, when so much investment money is (to make the long complicated story short) is based on what wind up being faulty mortgages... and industry that can no longer expand as it once did, THEN things fail.

The problem was not offering pensions, though some benefits were inappropriately increased during the "boom" years under the mis-asssumption that the boom times would continue, instead of cycling that money into savings or for "rainy days". (and in some cases, money was set aside, but the downturns were just well beyond what people expected).

So, it was very much about overpriced houses, not pensions.

kentington wrote:You realize these bankruptcies are coming right after tax increases, right?
There are so many things that CA did and is doing wrong, Jerry Brown, Boxer, Frankenstein.

Concurrence does not equal cause. The problems in California resulted primarily from taking the boom times in the 80's and acting as if those kinds of gains would continue ad infinitum, instead of recognizing that things would, eventually change. That, and even those who did see the future that would be wound up being caught by the securitized mortgage fiasco and other stupidities of the banks and corporations.

But sure, companies are happy to blame everything on a slightly higher tax rate. After all, they usually don't live in these communities. Why should they care if the schools are failing and roads going to pot (hmm... except schools do tend to attract good workers.. but then, the top folks can just send their kids to private schools ...).