Big government and absurdly strong unions destroyed Greece and Spain. Expect no less for California.

User Forum Topic
Submitted by ctr70 on November 11, 2012 - 11:47am

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.h...

Good post by Mish.

I think with the Dem super majority now in CA, the Dem legislature is now going to just sit around all day and think up new ways (like Prop 30) to tax those so called "rich" (although we all know $250k in Coastal CA is not even close to rich) more & more. While at the same time doing very little to stop the parasitic state retiree pensions from sucking the life blood out of the state, as the Dem legislature bows down to the mafia like state public unions that have them in their pockets. Pretty scary stuff. The best thing to do is vote with your feet and leave the state and watch it implode from a distance while they tax their best and brightest high income w-2 workers to death.

Submitted by AN on November 11, 2012 - 12:54pm.

The funny part is, w/in CA, people who live in SF gets paid the most for the same amount of work, since their cost of living is so high, so it's much more likely to make >$250k in SF. So, they're voting for taxes on themselves. Since cost of living in SD is much lower, we also get paid much lower. Which means it's that much hard to make over $250k here than SF. So, they get to pay for CA's spending. They're happy to do it, since they voted for it, so I'm happy too. Maybe, once they need more money, they'll propose higher taxes on family making more than $150k. After all, it's still only a small percentage of CA's population.

Submitted by bearishgurl on November 11, 2012 - 12:55pm.

ctr, have you ever considered relocating to (biz-friendly) Tulsa (OK)? Lots of people from CA already have. There's so much traffic there now in the middle of the biz day, I thought I was trying to turn left onto Figueroa St (in LA) in a recent "visit" for the day (to get my car repaired). With all the drivers of (still) CA-plated vehicles to contend with, it took me over four stoplight changes to get thru one traffic light there and more than five mins to safely turn left out of a gas station :=0

After noticing my license plate, the service writer asked where I was from and I told him "San Diego." It turned out that he, the owner and their chief mechanic were all from SD County, having relocated there in the last few years :=0

You could reside in a "red state" with nice large cheap brick homes on large lots and feel right at home with an abundance of "escaped Californians" all around you :=]

Submitted by ctr70 on November 11, 2012 - 1:17pm.

I would never personally live in Tulsa OK I would only likely move to the Pac NW or New England, maybe Hawaii. Or possibly even to somewhere in Asia part of the year. But I have heard people say good things about Tulsa, it's just not for me.

I wrote in another post what I think of the whole red state/blue state color coded map issue and how it is over simplified. The fact is there are still a lot of fiscal conservatives in places like CA, Pac NW, and the Northeast U.S. Many are the wealthier higher educated people working in knowledge based industries (silicon valley, biotech, venture cap, etc). They are of course still much smaller in numbers than the Dems, but just looking at a color coded map of the U.S. red state vs. blue state generalizes this. It makes one believe everyone in a blue state is a raging liberal and everyone in a Red state listens to Rush Limbaugh daily.

I think the Repub party suffers from a marketing "branding" problem with these color coded maps in being too associated with *social conservatives* in the bible belt. When there are many moderate Repubs that lean to the right on taxation, spending, size and scope of Gov, entitlement reform, unions, pro-business, financial regulation. But lean to the left on gun control, pro choice, climate change, environment, war mongering. These are moderate Republicans, more "Michael Bloomberg" type Repubs. And I think if the Repub party branded itself more along these lines, they would get more of the higher income undecided voters and women on the coasts, who really are fiscal conservatives deep down. Or they will be soon when they start looking at what's left of their paychecks.

Submitted by bearishgurl on November 11, 2012 - 1:14pm.

AN wrote:
The funny part is, w/in CA, people who live in SF gets paid the most for the same amount of work, since their cost of living is so high, so it's much more likely to make >$250k in SF. So, they're voting for taxes on themselves. Since cost of living in SD is much lower, we also get paid much lower. Which means it's that much hard to make over $250k here than SF. So, they get to pay for CA's spending. They're happy to do it, since they voted for it, so I'm happy too. Maybe, once they need more money, they'll propose higher taxes on family making more than $150k. After all, it's still only a small percentage of CA's population.

AN, I maintain that the avg salary in SF is 40% higher that the exact same position pays in SD County. This includes the counties of SF, SM, SC, Alameda, Contra Costa and Marin. Housing is NOT 40% higher in SF (or any of the abovementioned surrounding counties) than SD County. It is between 0 and 25% higher, depending upon the micro-area there and its comparable micro-area here.

Salaries are higher there because they don't have a captive audience of thousands of employees (Americans incl) living cheaply in MX and crossing the border everyday to work in the US. And the weather in the SF Bay area isn't as consistent as it is here. Periodically, the wind is very high in SF and SM counties. And commuting traffic can be much worse than here for residents of SC, Alameda and Contra Costa Counties (and beyond).

I understand you grew up here and your family still lives here but I feel that the SF Bay area has MUCH more opportunity for a "worker-bee," ESP a Gen-Y worker, even in light of a so-called "affordable housing shortage" in the areas of the best jobs. I also feel it is entirely worth it for a young San Diegan college grad to relocate there for work, even one with a family. Most of the public schools there are better than here, as well.

Submitted by no_such_reality on November 11, 2012 - 1:27pm.

You all need to go read the census figures. They'll debunk you SF makes more mantra.

Submitted by bearishgurl on November 11, 2012 - 1:42pm.

ctr70 wrote:
. . . I wrote in another post what I think of the whole red state/blue state color coded map issue and how it is over simplified. The fact is there are still a lot of fiscal conservatives in places like CA, Pac NW, and the Northeast U.S. Many are the wealthier higher educated people working in knowledge based industries (silicon valley, biotech, venture cap, etc). They are of course still much smaller in numbers than the Dems, but just looking at a color coded map of the U.S. red state vs. blue state generalizes this. It makes one believe everyone in a blue state is a raging liberal and everyone in a Red state listens to Rush Limbaugh daily. . . .

ctr, I'm sure you're aware that, contrary to popular belief, the "bible belt" is full of an eclectic mix of folks from ALL races, nationalities, religions and political persuasions. You might be surprised to learn that a LOT of people there don't even know who Rush Limbaugh is (ESP the younger people). The only race there is less of there is Asians, which tend to reside around the universities and military bases. Yes, some "bible-belt" states look "red" on the CNN map but in reality, its population is largely moderate, like you stated. I think most of the voters there just had issues with Obama because of the bailouts. "Bible belt" culture teaches its residents to pay their own debts and live within their means. And since their residential RE never really skyrocketed in "value" (lol) to begin with, there was never a lot of HELOCing and cash-out refinancing going on anywhere there during the millenium-boom years. Most of the residents there have no sympathy for those residents of states with boom-bust RE cycles who lived off their primary residence for years (until they lost it) and/or bought more house than they could afford.

Submitted by bearishgurl on November 11, 2012 - 1:40pm.

no_such_reality wrote:
You all need to go read the census figures. They'll debunk you SF makes more mantra.

What do you mean by this?

Submitted by no_such_reality on November 11, 2012 - 1:57pm.

I mean go look at the census fact finder and read the economic stats.

They look like OC.

Submitted by bearishgurl on November 11, 2012 - 1:58pm.

Oh, and btw, CTR, I can tell you that the "bible belt" is full of multimillionaires. However, they go humbly about their business every day, driving their (made in USA) pickups over to meet their friends at the local coffee shop at 7 am to discuss biz and current events. And no, they don't serve Starbucks there.

No matter what their age, the (rural AND city) multimillionaire dress code for males is Levis 501's, a hat and boots.

It's tiring and taxing checking on one's petroleum production all day. By the end the day, they are exhausted and their levis are filthy.

Occasionally, they "splurge" and run their pickups through an automatic car wash :=]

Their favorite drink for the road is coke in a bottle with peanuts poured in :=D

Most of them regularly vacation with their families in Cancun and the Caribbean. And nearly ALL own lakefront houses and speed boats free and clear :=D

Submitted by bearishgurl on November 11, 2012 - 2:00pm.

no_such_reality wrote:
I mean go look at the census fact finder and read the economic stats.

They look like OC.

I'm not following you. Who is "they?"

Submitted by spdrun on November 11, 2012 - 2:26pm.

Speaking of the "bible-belt", I know that TX didn't have a bubble because they actually had stricter restrictions on mortgages and HELOCs than many of the "liberal" states. LTV is capped at 80%, only one HELOC is allowed, and HELOCs on primary residence were prohibited till the early 2000s. Those restrictions date from the 1800s and aren't recent.

Re: Oklahoma - guess the great migration is reversing itself :)

Speaking to SF, I looked at Craigslist apt listings there recently out of curiosity. The place seems to have become more outrageously expen$ive than even Manhattan of late. $2k/mo for a sh!tty studio in a mediocre area? Nothx.

Submitted by bearishgurl on November 11, 2012 - 2:27pm.

spdrun wrote:
Speaking of the "bible-belt", I know that TX didn't have a bubble because they actually had stricter restrictions on mortgages and HELOCs than many of the "liberal" states. LTV is capped at 80%, only one HELOC is allowed, and HELOCs on primary residence were prohibited till the early 2000s.

Those restrictions date from the 1800s and aren't recent...

You would be correct, spdrun. You are referring to the TX "homestead exemption." (Limited) HELOC lending has only been allowed there since 1998. See:

http://piggington.com/what_is_the_equiva...

Submitted by bearishgurl on November 11, 2012 - 2:36pm.

spdrun wrote:
...Re: Oklahoma - guess the great migration is reversing itself :)...

LOL, OK is not the "dust bowl" of yesteryear anymore. In the early to mid-fifties, it started dredging its rivers and built several large beautiful man-made lakes ... complete with dams and islands :)

Not ALL of the "bible belt" is in the middle of the plains or desert. The aerial view of Tulsa in the fall is gorgeous as it is heavily treed all throughout the city as well as around its beautiful surrounding lakes.

Submitted by paramount on November 11, 2012 - 2:48pm.

I agree it may finally be time to leave, but at the moment I have a fairly high paying job in SD. With the job market so iffy is it really a good time to leave your job assuming it's somewhat stable? Maybe I could get a transfer.

Also, do you leave your properties behind or sell?

Submitted by spdrun on November 11, 2012 - 2:48pm.

LOL, OK is not the "dust bowl" of yesteryear anymore. In the early to mid-fifties, it started dredging its rivers and built several large beautiful man-made lakes ... complete with dams and islands :)

Not ALL of the "bible belt" is in the middle of the plains or desert. The aerial view of Tulsa in the fall is gorgeous as it is heavily treed all throughout the city as well as around its beautiful surrounding lakes.

I know that. I was just commenting on the reversal of old migration patterns. If anything, inner/Southern California has become somewhat of an (economic, if not literal) dustbowl right now.

Submitted by spdrun on November 11, 2012 - 2:51pm.

Also, do you leave your properties behind or sell?

Sell if you're above water, they can't be rented at a profit, and there are properties in OK that can be. Leave behind if they can be rented at a profit of at least 20% of PITI or if you'd need to short-sell. You just need to find a nice guy or gal who's somewhat hand as a tenant, so they can fix minor issues instead of needing a managing agent.

Submitted by ltsdd on November 11, 2012 - 3:03pm.

bearishgurl wrote:
ctr, have you ever considered relocating to (biz-friendly) Tulsa (OK)? Lots of people from CA already have. There's so much traffic there now in the middle of the biz day, I thought I was trying to turn left onto Figueroa St (in LA) in a recent "visit" for the day (to get my car repaired). With all the drivers of (still) CA-plated vehicles to contend with, it took me over four stoplight changes to get thru one traffic light there and more than five mins to safely turn left out of a gas station :=0

Sounds like you just made a good case why one SHOULD NOT relocating to Tulsa.

Submitted by paramount on November 11, 2012 - 3:06pm.

I wonder how many of the under 25 crowd who voted for prop 30 think: we're so smart our generation even invented the iphone and ipod and I'm an expert at using these gadgets.

I'm so smart.

When in reality, I'd say the vast vast majority of later generation y'ers are utterly clueless.

Submitted by spdrun on November 11, 2012 - 3:24pm.

What y'all don't realize is that other places have un-capped property taxes. So CA is just making up revenue that would come from R.E. taxes in other states.

Plus California sends more tax money per citizen to the pigs in DC than it gets back in subsidies for things like education. Unfair system that doesn't account for living costs, but there you have it. (Which is why I'm a supporter of both Californian and Northeastern secession in the long run, and think that Lincoln was one of the worst presidents ever -- should have let the South leave and good riddance.)

Welfare vs subsidizing states:
http://scatter.wordpress.com/2009/02/16/...

California got back $0,79 per dollar paid in as of 2009. Injun Territory got back $1,36.

Submitted by paramount on November 11, 2012 - 3:41pm.

That Prop 30 easily passed illustrates the glaring problem with direct democracy: The average voter is not only utterly uninformed and clueless, they are also self-centered. Tragedy of the commons.

Submitted by spdrun on November 11, 2012 - 3:42pm.

Because keeping school and university funding isn't good for everyone concerned? Sounds like voters made the best choice possible.

Submitted by bearishgurl on November 11, 2012 - 4:00pm.

spdrun wrote:
...Injun Territory got back $1,36.

What a lot of y'all don't seem to realize is "Injun Territory" has no problem raising its own funds. "Indian Gaming" is the second largest "industry" in OK (after government).

Oklahoma Indian gaming is the second largest industry in the state. In 2011 revenues from Indian gaming are estimated to be $3.5 billion...

http://500nations.com/oklahoma_casinos.asp

Perhaps the "Pigs in DC" are finally attempting to better subsidize the DEA/NTF in "Injun Territory" where their sparsely staffed law-enforcement departments have been fighting a losing battle over the last 15 years against those same meth mfrs whom they drove out of So Cal in the nineties. These "biz people" had to set up shop somewhere. Where better than isolated (and heavily-wooded parts of) "Injun Territory?" :-0

Submitted by spdrun on November 11, 2012 - 4:11pm.

This should be a state-level problem. Or just legalize methedrine, manufacture it under controlled conditions to avoid the environmental problems attendant to illegal drug labs, and give it away to registered addicts in pharmacies (after taking their kids away). Hopefully most of them will kick off and die after a few years of hard living -- kind of like the "crack scourge" solved itself in the 80s.

People who are so stupid as to get involved with hard drugs don't deserve much in my book. And certainly we should spend as little as possible attempting to save them from themselves.

And if you want to save people from themselves, subsidizing treatment is a lot cheaper than spending massive $ on law enforcement campaigns that fail in the end.

Submitted by flyer on November 11, 2012 - 4:34pm.

It's sad to see the political parties so polarized against each other, especially when all of it will only result in less families--not more--achieving and sustaining the "American Dream" going forward.

Those who have already attained their wealth will always find a way to take care of themselves and their families, but, from here on, IMHO, achieving wealth in this country is going to become more difficult than ever. That's the sad reality for future generations--but they just don't know it yet.

Submitted by Hobie on November 11, 2012 - 6:44pm.

Bingo. Wish I had a solution. Anyone??

Submitted by ltsdd on November 11, 2012 - 6:49pm.

spdrun wrote:
What y'all don't realize is that other places have un-capped property taxes. So CA is just making up revenue that would come from R.E. taxes in other states.

+1

People also don't realize that moving out of CA to get away from higher taxes only solve the cost side of the business. They neglect to take into account the impact of moving to a place like Tulsa would have on revenue side.

Submitted by spdrun on November 11, 2012 - 6:55pm.

If the business sells nationally, then it should be irrelevant revenue-wise unless:
(1) the business is heavily dependent on shipping and needs an ocean port close by
(2) the prestige factor comes into play
(3) skilled workers that can't be found outside of certain areas (read: biotech or IT) aren't easy to find in OK

Submitted by bearishgurl on November 11, 2012 - 7:30pm.

ltsdd wrote:
spdrun wrote:
What y'all don't realize is that other places have un-capped property taxes. So CA is just making up revenue that would come from R.E. taxes in other states.

+1

People also don't realize that moving out of CA to get away from higher taxes only solve the cost side of the business. They neglect to take into account the impact of moving to a place like Tulsa would have on revenue side.

The repair I had done in Tulsa cost only $3.75 less than my mechanic in SD would have charged me for it (I checked). The garage in Tulsa recently expanded to 5-6 bays and got new expensive testing equipment for German makes where my longtime garage is SD (Japanese only) has had the same three bays for the last 20 years. Both garages have PLENTY of business, often having to schedule it out to fit it all in :)

I don't know if it cost any less to do biz in Tulsa (the lease, maybe?) but DO know that the Tulsa garage definitely had a few more employees.

Submitted by paramount on November 11, 2012 - 7:35pm.

spdrun wrote:
Because keeping school and university funding isn't good for everyone concerned? Sounds like voters made the best choice possible.

No, because 1) none or precious little of prop 30 money will make it to the schools and 2) because in a state controlled by thug public employee unions it's easier to raise taxes due to a stupid electorate than to make cuts.

California has a spending problem, not a revenue problem.

Submitted by spdrun on November 11, 2012 - 7:35pm.

If the garage in SD is making enough money to support the owner and his employees, why would it want to expand? Not everyone wants the tsuris of managing many employees.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.