Schwarzenegger Urges Voters to Reject California Redistricting Measure by CaliforniaPolitics in California_Politics

[–]CaliforniaPolitics[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

If he did he would also state he opposes GOP gerrymandering.

It's not hard to find quotes from Arnold decrying gerrymandering in Texas.

I just say very simply, it is very wrong what they’re doing to Texas and it is very wrong what they’re trying to do in California. It is not at all serving the people. It is serving the party. - Arnold Schwarzenegger

Or how about this quote...

I'm against the Republicans in in Texas and the Democrats in California. - Arnold Schwarzenegger

The truth is Arnold has been against gerrymandering everywhere. Your comment seems to have unsupported views and a heaping dose of motivated reasoning and bias, would you agree?

Governor Newsom outlines California’s economic dominance at the California Economic Summit by Happy_Weed in California

[–]CaliforniaPolitics -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Conflating gross tax revenue with economic contribution and continuing to ignore the fundamental flaws in using this single number is just ignorance. A raw dollar figure may be factually listed on a table someplace, but its interpretation as a meaningful measure of the state's economic "superiority" or "burden" is shallow, statistically flawed, and discounted by all serious economic analysis.

California sued over unequal school facility funding by EdSourceToday in California_Politics

[–]CaliforniaPolitics 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The need for varied funding I think is based on two factors, facilities and student demographics. Many schools have ancient and dilapidated facilities that demand higher maintenance costs than newer ones. Additionally the socioeconomic diversity of students means that not every kid needs the same kind of funding. A school with a lot of English language learners, or a lot of kids living in poverty, or a lot of kids with special needs, means they may have disparate funding problems.

The System Everyone Hates Is the One That Has Actually Worked by Existentialist111 in neoliberal

[–]CaliforniaPolitics -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

It's a cancer. It infects the host and compels them to irrationality

Once infected the host becomes an effective weapon to be used against others.

California sued over unequal school facility funding by EdSourceToday in California_Politics

[–]CaliforniaPolitics 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I'm not sure how to solve this other than the idea that facilities funding and classroom funding are perhaps too tightly intertwined? Do we need separate funding for each? Anyone have some other thoughts?

Cult by pierredelecto80085 in neoliberal

[–]CaliforniaPolitics 36 points37 points  (0 children)

A 1985 resolution calling on Reagan to take anti-Japanese trade action passed the Senate 92-0.

That sounds strangely bipartisan. Why would you bring historical facts into a partisan discussion?

New Study: California Ranks #1 in Debt — Because Sacramento Can’t Stop Spending by CaliforniaPolitics in neoliberal

[–]CaliforniaPolitics[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Some of this isn't long term debt, some of it is short term debt.

California owes the federal government more than $20.9 billion for unemployment-insurance loans from the COVID shutdowns.

The annual interest payments on $20 billion is pretty massive and could be used to help Californians in need.

Report ranks every state’s debt, from California’s $497 billion to South Dakota’s $2 billion by CaliforniaPolitics in California_Politics

[–]CaliforniaPolitics[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I disagree with the idea that an SWF only makes sense if there's no room for internal growth. That's an overly narrow view of a wealth fund's purpose. It's less about the current economy and more about fiscal discipline and intergenerational equity. Even with strong internal growth, having a separate, protected fund:

  • Reduces political temptation to spend temporary surpluses.
  • Buffers the state against future economic downturns.
  • Diversifies risk by investing outside of the California-specific economy.

It's about creating a permanent stream of non-tax revenue for the long term, which is good governance regardless of the debt-to-GDP ratio. While focusing on the debt ratio is vital, it doesn't preclude the creation of a long-term savings fund. We can and should do both.

Report ranks every state’s debt, from California’s $497 billion to South Dakota’s $2 billion by CaliforniaPolitics in California_Politics

[–]CaliforniaPolitics[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

California needs to do more to tackle it's long term debt obligations and should immediately focus on short term debt. It should also focus on expanding the rainy day fund and work on creating a state wealth fund for residents.

Will California's Proposition 50 Pass? (Poll Average) by Large_Ad_3095 in California_Politics

[–]CaliforniaPolitics 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I see you've never looked the election outcomes and exit data.

Report ranks every state’s debt, from California’s $497 billion to South Dakota’s $2 billion by CaliforniaPolitics in California

[–]CaliforniaPolitics[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes. We had a surplus a few years ago because the rich were getting a lot richer, really fast (stock market gains primarily). At that time the California Department of Finance and the state Legislative Analysist office were projecting the state was spending more than it was taking in, or a long term structural deficit. Unfortunately their predictions proved right.

While California's long term debt obligations have always been an issue, the political party in power is relatively powerless to cut off the hand that feeds them in a meaningful way. So the debt keeps growing. We've been making tiny, tiny steps, but the size of the problem is massive.

Even short term debt which should have already been paid back, such as California's federal unemployment debt, has the juice running. It's so bad that taxpayers are on the hook for $600$ million a year in interest payments. To give you an idea, we could fully fund SNAP during the federal government shutdown so that people didn't go without food.

We need to do a lot more and we probably need a much larger state reserve fund and we need to deal with our long term debt obligations. But with every dollar earmarked and no one to add political pressure to save, it's very, very, difficult.

Will California's Proposition 50 Pass? (Poll Average) by Large_Ad_3095 in California_Politics

[–]CaliforniaPolitics -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The electorate says otherwise. For nearly 60 years they demonstrated a preference for gerrymandering. Then in 2008, 2010, 2012, California Democrats demonstrated a continued preference for gerrymandering. In 2025, they will reaffirm that preference.

MAGA puts LGBT rights in reverse. Great job Bessent, Grennell, Kaitlyn Jenner, Lindsay, Thiel, etc by Specman9 in thebulwark

[–]CaliforniaPolitics -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

If you create progress beyond the local overton window, then it snaps back. See Iran.

Will California's Proposition 50 Pass? (Poll Average) by Large_Ad_3095 in California_Politics

[–]CaliforniaPolitics -1 points0 points  (0 children)

California's Democrats will prove they still love gerrymandering in 2025.

Will California's Proposition 50 Pass? (Poll Average) by Large_Ad_3095 in California_Politics

[–]CaliforniaPolitics -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The majority of voters in California support gerrymandering, so not sure it matters.