Conquer Club

Why States Must Compete: New Jersey vs California

\\OFF-TOPIC// conversations about everything that has nothing to do with Conquer Club.

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Why States Must Compete: New Jersey vs California

Postby Night Strike on Tue May 15, 2012 10:23 pm

In his January 2011 inaugural address, California Gov. Jerry Brown declared it a "time to honestly assess our financial condition and make the tough choices." Plainly the choices weren't tough enough: Mr. Brown has just announced that he faces a state budget deficit of $16 billion—nearly twice the $9.2 billion he predicted in January. In Sacramento Monday, he coupled a new round of spending cuts with a call for some hefty new tax hikes.

In his own inaugural address back in January 2010, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie also spoke of making tough choices for the people of his state. For his first full budget, Mr. Christie faced a deficit of $10.7 billion—one-third of projected revenues. Not only did Mr. Christie close that deficit without raising taxes, he is now plumping for a 10% across-the-board tax cut.

It's not just looks that make Mr. Brown Laurel to Mr. Christie's Hardy. It's also their political choices.

When the Obama administration's Transportation Department called on California to cough up billions for a high-speed bullet train or lose federal dollars, Mr. Brown went along. In sharp contrast, when the feds delivered a similar ultimatum to Mr. Christie over a proposed commuter rail tunnel between New York and New Jersey, he nixed the project, saying his state just couldn't afford it.

On the "millionaire's" tax, Mr. Brown says that California desperately needs to approve one if the state is to recover. The one on California's November ballot kicks in at income of $250,000 and would raise the top rate to 13.3% from 10.3% on incomes above $1 million. Again in sharp contrast, when New Jersey Democrats attempted to embarrass Mr. Christie by sending a millionaire's tax to his desk, he called their bluff and promptly vetoed it.

On public-employee unions, Mr. Brown can talk a good game—at Monday's press conference, he announced a 5% pay cut for state workers, and he has proposed pension reform. Yet for all his pull with unions (the last time he was governor, he gave California's public-sector unions collective-bargaining rights), Gov. Brown, a Democrat, has not been able to accomplish what Republican Gov. Christie has: persuade a Democratic legislature to require government workers to kick in more for their health care and pensions.

Now, no one will confuse New Jersey with free-market Hong Kong. Still, because the challenges facing the Golden and Garden States are so similar, the different paths taken by their respective governors are all the more striking. And these two men are by no means alone.

Our states today are conducting a profound and contentious rethink about the right level of taxes, spending and government. Most obvious is the battle for Wisconsin. There Republican Gov. Scott Walker finds himself pitted against public-sector unions that successfully forced a recall election for June 5 after the legislature adopted the governor's package of labor reforms last spring.

Amid the turmoil—Democratic legislators fled the state to prevent a vote, while union-backed protesters occupied the Capitol—Mr. Walker looked weakened. Now he has taken the lead in polls. More than that, voters have taken the lesson: A recent Marquette University Law School poll showed only 12% of Wisconsin voters listing "restoring collective bargaining rights for public employees" as their priority.

Indeed, the American Midwest today is home to some of the biggest experiments in government. Republicans now hold both the governorships and the legislatures in Michigan, Indiana and Ohio, and in Wisconsin they control all but the Senate. In each they are pushing for smaller, more accountable government. The outlier is Illinois, where Democratic Gov. Pat Quinn and his Democratic legislature pushed through a tax increase on their heavily indebted state.

Now ask yourself this. Can anyone look at Illinois and say to himself: I have seen the future and it works?

Indiana's Mitch Daniels, a Republican, is probably the only governor who can truly claim to have turned around a failing state. That may change if we get eight years of Mr. Christie in New Jersey. Louisiana's Bobby Jindal, also a Republican, may be another challenger for the title, having just succeeded in pushing through arguably the most far-reaching reform of any state public-school system in America.

Hard economic times bring their own lessons. Though few have been spared the ravages of the last recession and the sluggish recovery, those in states where taxes are light, government lives within its means, and the climate is friendly to investment have learned the value of the arrangement they have. They are not likely to give it up.

Meanwhile, leaders in some struggling states have taken notice. They know the road to fiscal hell is paved with progressive intentions. The question regarding the sensible ones is whether they have the will and wherewithal to impose the reforms they know their states need on the interest groups whose political and economic clout is so closely tied with the public purse.

Mr. Brown's remarks Monday suggest the answer to this question is no.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304371504577404503988018824.html
Image
User avatar
Major Night Strike
 
Posts: 8512
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 2:52 pm

Re: Why States Must Compete: New Jersey vs California

Postby bedub1 on Wed May 16, 2012 10:35 am

California is clearly the worst state in the Union.
Colonel bedub1
 
Posts: 1005
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 4:41 am

Re: Why States Must Compete: New Jersey vs California

Postby Phatscotty on Thu May 17, 2012 5:26 pm

Good read

California - The Fools Gold State.
User avatar
Major Phatscotty
 
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Why States Must Compete: New Jersey vs California

Postby Woodruff on Wed May 23, 2012 6:08 pm

Is it as good of a read as this is:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2 ... ff-recall/

Because that doesn't look like the sort of guy that's interested in saving taxpayer money.

Scott Walker is a real winner:
http://www.thenation.com/blog/167881/did-scott-walker-lie-under-oath-congress-he-says-no-video-says-yes
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class Woodruff
 
Posts: 5093
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am

Re: Why States Must Compete: New Jersey vs California

Postby thegreekdog on Wed May 23, 2012 9:18 pm

Woodruff wrote:Is it as good of a read as this is:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2 ... ff-recall/

Because that doesn't look like the sort of guy that's interested in saving taxpayer money.

Scott Walker is a real winner:
http://www.thenation.com/blog/167881/did-scott-walker-lie-under-oath-congress-he-says-no-video-says-yes


Did you read the first article? How do you not find the title to be misleading to the point of slanderous?
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegreekdog
 
Posts: 7246
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Why States Must Compete: New Jersey vs California

Postby maasman on Wed May 23, 2012 9:27 pm

Night Strike wrote:
Hard economic times bring their own lessons. Though few have been spared the ravages of the last recession and the sluggish recovery, those in states where taxes are light, government lives within its means, and the climate is friendly to investment have learned the value of the arrangement they have. They are not likely to give it up.

Meanwhile, leaders in some struggling states have taken notice. They know the road to fiscal hell is paved with progressive intentions.



The bolded part sounds pretty progressive to me. Changing things up to see if it works is what I like to call being progressive, whether it's a Republican or Democratic ideal is something totally different in my eyes.
Image
User avatar
Major maasman
 
Posts: 543
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 6:45 pm
Location: Goose Creek, USA

Re: Why States Must Compete: New Jersey vs California

Postby Phatscotty on Thu May 24, 2012 2:49 am

Woodruff wrote:Is it as good of a read as this is:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2 ... ff-recall/

Because that doesn't look like the sort of guy that's interested in saving taxpayer money.

Scott Walker is a real winner:
http://www.thenation.com/blog/167881/did-scott-walker-lie-under-oath-congress-he-says-no-video-says-yes


what a horrible article the first one was. I could have done better. I read the whole thing, trying to find out what he spent the 100 million on.....he spent it on economic development in the poorest areas....Isn't that exactly why the people elected him? To develop the state's economy? If your beef is coming up with 100 million today while the state was broke 2 years ago, you'd be amazed how willing people can be to loan money to a state who has a balanced budget, like Wisconsin does today. You might even get a better interest rate too.

If there is any tax money that should not be being spent right now, it's the sore losers forcing the state to pay for the recall election. Scott Walker is up by 6 points, and he will probably win by even more than that. The whole thing is a waste of time and money. Just another example of how Democrats are balls deep about Democracy, except for when they lose.

Wisconsin is ground zero for the United States of America. After Walker wins, we will continue to fix our country, one state at a time.
User avatar
Major Phatscotty
 
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Why States Must Compete: New Jersey vs California

Postby Woodruff on Thu May 24, 2012 6:16 pm

Phatscotty wrote:Just another example of how Democrats are balls deep about Democracy, except for when they lose.


Which reminds me a great deal of how you are balls deep about FREEDOM!, except for when it's someone else's freedom.
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class Woodruff
 
Posts: 5093
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am

Re: Why States Must Compete: New Jersey vs California

Postby Phatscotty on Thu May 24, 2012 11:57 pm

Woodruff wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:Just another example of how Democrats are balls deep about Democracy, except for when they lose.


Which reminds me a great deal of how you are balls deep about FREEDOM!, except for when it's someone else's freedom.


You just can't get over me can you? I'm flattered

however.....there were a couple of questions I asked ya about your articles. Did you even notice?
Last edited by Phatscotty on Fri May 25, 2012 7:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Major Phatscotty
 
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Why States Must Compete: New Jersey vs California

Postby Woodruff on Fri May 25, 2012 5:02 am

Phatscotty wrote:
Woodruff wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:Just another example of how Democrats are balls deep about Democracy, except for when they lose.


Which reminds me a great deal of how you are balls deep about FREEDOM!, except for when it's someone else's freedom.


You just can't get over me can you?


You're right that I just can't get over what a massive hypocrite you are.

Phatscotty wrote:I'm flattered


You shouldn't be...it's highly uncomplimentary.
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class Woodruff
 
Posts: 5093
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am

Re: Why States Must Compete: New Jersey vs California

Postby luns101 on Fri May 25, 2012 5:56 pm

I moved to California in 1990, as there seemed tons of opportunity. Sadly, it felt like there became more and more takers with less producers/businesses the last 5 years I was there. I finally moved 2 1/2 years ago to Texas, where jobs are in abundance. One thing that really struck me when I moved here was how many young people were working. I think that generally keeps them from getting into trouble.

I've still never said y'all though.
User avatar
Major luns101
 
Posts: 2196
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 11:51 pm
Location: Oceanic Flight 815

Re: Why States Must Compete: New Jersey vs California

Postby PLAYER57832 on Fri May 25, 2012 6:37 pm

Funny, folks keep criticizing California, and certainly there is reason, but don't forget there is ALSO plenty of reason why it has been so prosperous.

Part is the good weather and fantastic scenary. But, another part is the infrastructure it still has better than many states. Unfortunately, a lot of folks came and got wealthy and then decided that all they had to do was worry about themselves. They forgot that it was the wonderful education system, particularly a university system unparalled for a long time in the world (many would argue Berkeley, UCLA, etc are still among the best in specific fields). It was clean rivers and beaches where all but the poorest could go, have fun and enjoy themselves. People were willing to take lower wages just for the priviliage of living in those kinds of areas. Except... when a lot of people want to live somewhere, prices rise.

What happened to California was not failure, it was SUCCESS. It was success, however, that got greedy. It was success that allowed people to get caught up in housing prices that were way too high, but that kept rising because by then, so many folks who were quite happy to have made their money were utterly unwilling to even require developers to provide more low income housing, to build in truly environmentally friendly ways. No, they were allowed to build subdivisions all through what WAS the greatest farm land on Earth just about. -- in the San Jaoquin valley, the Inyo Valley, etc.

There is more... how about how big corporations were allowed to take over small logging operations and wound up shutting down what was 20 years of work in only 5... or how greed meant people were happy to let school systems languish once THEY had graduated and got their degrees, and had jobs that paid well enough that their kids could just go to private schools (note, I talk about my own family in that comment).

Yeah, sure, Luns. Texas has more money now... and they have a drought, and a HORRIBLE education system, and a lot of other problems that keep getting pushed by the way side.
Last edited by PLAYER57832 on Sun May 27, 2012 5:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
Corporal PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Why States Must Compete: New Jersey vs California

Postby PLAYER57832 on Fri May 25, 2012 6:41 pm

Oh, yeah.. newsflash. CA is several times the size of New Jersey, very ecologically and sociologically diverse, not to mention its not situation to be essentially a bedroom for 2 large cities (New York and Phildelphia, specifically).

So, yeah, talking about New Jersey and CA as if they were somehow comparable makes a LOT of sense Night strike... NOT!
Corporal PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Why States Must Compete: New Jersey vs California

Postby Pedronicus on Fri May 25, 2012 6:56 pm

nuffin he says makes sense
Image
Highest position 7th. Highest points 3311 All of my graffiti can be found here
Major Pedronicus
 
Posts: 2080
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 2:42 pm
Location: Busy not shitting you....

Re: Why States Must Compete: New Jersey vs California

Postby Night Strike on Fri May 25, 2012 7:02 pm

PLAYER57832 wrote:Oh, yeah.. newsflash. CA is several times the size of New Jersey, very ecologically and sociologically diverse, not to mention its not situation to be essentially a bedroom for 2 large cities (New York and Phildelphia, specifically).

So, yeah, talking about New Jersey and CA as if they were somehow comparable makes a LOT of sense Night strike... NOT!


They are two states in the United States, so everyone should study why their state economies are the way they are. They may be different in their details, but why can't we compare them? Because one state is running by big-government liberal policies and failing while another state is running by conservative, responsible policies and becoming successful? The big-government handouts aren't working, and the massive deficit California has verifies that.
Image
User avatar
Major Night Strike
 
Posts: 8512
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 2:52 pm

Re: Why States Must Compete: New Jersey vs California

Postby PLAYER57832 on Sat May 26, 2012 5:19 am

Night Strike wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:Oh, yeah.. newsflash. CA is several times the size of New Jersey, very ecologically and sociologically diverse, not to mention its not situation to be essentially a bedroom for 2 large cities (New York and Phildelphia, specifically).

So, yeah, talking about New Jersey and CA as if they were somehow comparable makes a LOT of sense Night strike... NOT!


They may be different in their details, but why can't we compare them? Because one state is running by big-government liberal policies and failing while another state is running by conservative, responsible policies and becoming successful? The big-government handouts aren't working, and the massive deficit California has verifies that.

Because in the real world those "details" matter far more than your economic theories.

... and a generation of business folks who seem unable to even recognize that basic fact is part of why this entire country is in trouble. NOT putting money into social services and infrastructure. Infrastructure and social services made this country great.


HINT... who was in office when CA was prosperous? Who has been in office in the slide?
Corporal PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Why States Must Compete: New Jersey vs California

Postby BigBallinStalin on Sat May 26, 2012 7:13 am

Why was and is the CA government so fiscally irresponsible?


Granted, they can continue such deficit spending because the federal government enables this; however, why don't we see this occurring in other states--at an equal magnitude?
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: Why States Must Compete: New Jersey vs California

Postby Night Strike on Sat May 26, 2012 8:33 am

PLAYER57832 wrote:
Night Strike wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:Oh, yeah.. newsflash. CA is several times the size of New Jersey, very ecologically and sociologically diverse, not to mention its not situation to be essentially a bedroom for 2 large cities (New York and Phildelphia, specifically).

So, yeah, talking about New Jersey and CA as if they were somehow comparable makes a LOT of sense Night strike... NOT!


They may be different in their details, but why can't we compare them? Because one state is running by big-government liberal policies and failing while another state is running by conservative, responsible policies and becoming successful? The big-government handouts aren't working, and the massive deficit California has verifies that.

Because in the real world those "details" matter far more than your economic theories.

... and a generation of business folks who seem unable to even recognize that basic fact is part of why this entire country is in trouble. NOT putting money into social services and infrastructure. Infrastructure and social services made this country great.


So our country wasn't great before the Great Depression? Or before the 50s? Our government no longer provides social services: it provides social dependency. Social programs should be at the bare minimum (you know, the portion that actually helps get people back on their feet) instead of the $4 trillion per year deficit that it is now. And if we would cut out most of the social dependency, we could actually afford to work on our infrastructure. If all those governmental programs were so necessary, why are they always more expensive than projected and always running deficits? Get government living within its means, just like every other individual and business has to do.
Image
User avatar
Major Night Strike
 
Posts: 8512
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 2:52 pm

Re: Why States Must Compete: New Jersey vs California

Postby luns101 on Sat May 26, 2012 1:22 pm

PLAYER57832 wrote:Yeah, sure, Luns. Texas has more money now... and they have a drout, and a HORRIBLE education system, and a lot of other problems that keep getting pushed by the way side.


Are drouts something they teach kids about in the PA educational system?
User avatar
Major luns101
 
Posts: 2196
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 11:51 pm
Location: Oceanic Flight 815

Re: Why States Must Compete: New Jersey vs California

Postby Phatscotty on Sat May 26, 2012 1:33 pm

BigBallinStalin wrote:Why was and is the CA government so fiscally irresponsible?


Cuz it's a blue state.... any more brain busters?
User avatar
Major Phatscotty
 
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Why States Must Compete: New Jersey vs California

Postby PLAYER57832 on Sun May 27, 2012 5:59 am

BigBallinStalin wrote:Why was and is the CA government so fiscally irresponsible?
Becuase people in power decided to ride the "we have to support big business" band wagon during the 80's and 90's. However, unlike in other states, they ALSO were willing to pass on some of the largess to the "lower classes" and some sticky environmental issues.

BUT.. make no mistake, they allowed farm and timber lands to be raped, areas that had much greater economic impact in a variety of ways (timber brings tourists, for example.. when its managed properly).

The damage was partially hidden by Silicone valley, but not entirely.

BigBallinStalin wrote:Granted, they can continue such deficit spending because the federal government enables this; however, why don't we see this occurring in other states--at an equal magnitude?

No other state is as large. Its the same issues, but more extreme in CA. Also, California tried for a bit to "have its cake and eat it too", in supporting many social programs along with tax breaks. However, folks ignored destruction of the real base.. agriculture and timber, even fishing (though to a GREATLY reduced extent by then) hurt a great deal as well.

You could say it "began", in part with Proposition 13, which greatly limited most people's property taxes. Since property taxes were the major way schools were funded, it seriously hurt the school systems. That damage is still being felt and is a big part of why CA is no longer the leader it once was. There still are very good schools... the standards my nieces, friends kids face exceed what my kids get here in rural PA (and CA always had some terrible schools, particularly in the inner cities), but schools have absolutely been squeezed.

Then you had infrastructure needs and changes. Building excess subdivisions was bad, but unless you have lived in California or visited it before about 1980 and then after 2000, it is hard to really imagine the huge changes. I-5 used to be almost entirely grazing land. A few isolated restuarants and gas stations were all that existed. A Howard Johnsons, then about 140 miles further a coffee shop. That was it. Now... There are groups of fast food at every junction just about. Housing tracts fill in where there used to be grazing land. All of that required major infrastructure additions. The demans for water have intensified. Commuting added some business in the form of all the fast food places, gas stations and the like, but it did not add truly good paying jobs or even a real sense of community.

People who have to work 2-3 jobs just to make rent, never mind trying to buy a house, and then have to try and raise their kids... well, its not a good recipe for success.

Farmer/ranchers and timber people (NOT companies.. that's a different issue entirely) were all used in pawns by big business folks, along with a lot of others.

And... well, illegal immigrants were allowed to go from just doing the menial, low-end agricultural jobs for which they were historically needed and to move into skilled trade jobs. I think the direct economic impact of that last has been exaggerated (and proposed "solutions" mis-directed), but hte indirect impact has been huge.
Corporal PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Why States Must Compete: New Jersey vs California

Postby PLAYER57832 on Sun May 27, 2012 6:10 am

Night Strike wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:
Night Strike wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:Oh, yeah.. newsflash. CA is several times the size of New Jersey, very ecologically and sociologically diverse, not to mention its not situation to be essentially a bedroom for 2 large cities (New York and Phildelphia, specifically).

So, yeah, talking about New Jersey and CA as if they were somehow comparable makes a LOT of sense Night strike... NOT!


They may be different in their details, but why can't we compare them? Because one state is running by big-government liberal policies and failing while another state is running by conservative, responsible policies and becoming successful? The big-government handouts aren't working, and the massive deficit California has verifies that.

Because in the real world those "details" matter far more than your economic theories.

... and a generation of business folks who seem unable to even recognize that basic fact is part of why this entire country is in trouble. NOT putting money into social services and infrastructure. Infrastructure and social services made this country great.


So our country wasn't great before the Great Depression? Or before the 50s? Our government no longer provides social services: it provides social dependency.

LOL
Great in comparison to what?
Sure, there were some strides made... but the damage that was done was incredible. The country's resources were abused and essentially stolen. A few wealthy folks did very VERY well, but a lot of people had nothing.. or less than nothing as they were forced to work in dangerous factories without even the most basic safety standards. Rivers were destroyed, oceans depleted.

The west was still largely undeveloped and "open".... the destruction of the East is directly why those moving west took a harder environmental and social stance.

You seem to forget that the times before the Depression CAUSED the Depression.

Night Strike wrote:Social programs should be at the bare minimum (you know, the portion that actually helps get people back on their feet) instead of the $4 trillion per year deficit that it is now. And if we would cut out most of the social dependency, we could actually afford to work on our infrastructure. If all those governmental programs were so necessary, why are they always more expensive than projected and always running deficits? Get government living within its means, just like every other individual and business has to do.

This is not about social programs, sorry.

Social programs can use revision, absolutely. However, pretending that giving a few people food stamps, and putting more money into schools is why the CA deficite is so high is incorrect.

Schools were the greatest benefit CA always had. As I said, they are still pretty good, but the University and State College systems are quickly being brought down. That will continue to hurt not just California, but the entire country for some time, particularly in the sciences.. where we have incredibly serious lacks already in this nation.
Corporal PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Why States Must Compete: New Jersey vs California

Postby Night Strike on Sun May 27, 2012 8:25 am

Actually, a lot of the problems in California revolve around them treating illegal immigrants the exact same as state citizens, and in some cases even giving them special protections (like not requiring drivers licenses). California treats illegal immigrants better than it does US citizens from other states, which is a major part of why they're in debt and will continue to have a ballooning debt.
Image
User avatar
Major Night Strike
 
Posts: 8512
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 2:52 pm

Re: Why States Must Compete: New Jersey vs California

Postby notyou2 on Sun May 27, 2012 9:06 am

Night Strike wrote:Actually, a lot of the problems in California revolve around them treating illegal immigrants the exact same as state citizens, and in some cases even giving them special protections (like not requiring drivers licenses). California treats illegal immigrants better than it does US citizens from other states, which is a major part of why they're in debt and will continue to have a ballooning debt.


They are in debt because they are allowing illegal immigrants to drive without licenses?







Okaaaaay...........
Image
User avatar
Captain notyou2
 
Posts: 6447
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 10:09 am
Location: In the here and now

Re: Why States Must Compete: New Jersey vs California

Postby Night Strike on Sun May 27, 2012 12:52 pm

notyou2 wrote:
Night Strike wrote:Actually, a lot of the problems in California revolve around them treating illegal immigrants the exact same as state citizens, and in some cases even giving them special protections (like not requiring drivers licenses). California treats illegal immigrants better than it does US citizens from other states, which is a major part of why they're in debt and will continue to have a ballooning debt.


They are in debt because they are allowing illegal immigrants to drive without licenses?







Okaaaaay...........


Well, that specific detail is only a minor portion of what's going on, but it is indicative of the larger problem of carving special entitlements for certain groups of people, each of which will have a cost to the government.
Image
User avatar
Major Night Strike
 
Posts: 8512
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 2:52 pm

Next

Return to Acceptable Content

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users