Jump to content



Photo

The nation within the nation...


  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 diogenes227

diogenes227

    Member

  • TT Patron+
  • 4,035 posts

Posted 22 November 2016 - 07:16 PM

California, Oregon, Washington.

 

Thriving as the federal government prepares to go dark...

 

From the Link:

 

...For years, conservatives have been saying that a healthy economy depends on low taxes, few regulations, and low wages.

Are conservatives right? At the one end of the scale are Kansas and Texas, with among the nation’s lowest taxes, least regulations, and lowest wages.

At the other end is California, with among the nation’s highest taxes, especially on the wealthy; toughest regulations, particularly when it comes to the environment; most ambitious healthcare system, that insures more than 12 million poor Californians, in partnership with Medicaid; and high wages.

So according to conservative doctrine, Kansas and Texas ought to be booming, and California ought to be in the pits.

Actually, it’s just the opposite.

For several years, Kansas’s rate of economic growth has been the worst in the nation. Last year its economy actually shrank. 

Texas hasn’t been doing all that much better. Its rate of job growth has been below the national average. Retail sales are way down. The value of Texas exports has been dropping.

But what about so-called over-taxed, over-regulated, high-wage California?

California leads the nation in the rate of economic growth — more than twice the national average. If it were a separate nation it would now be the sixth largest economy in the world. Its population has surged to 39 million (up 5 percent since 2010).

California is home to the nation’s fastest-growing and most innovative industries – entertainment and high tech. It incubates more startups than anywhere else in the world. 

In other words, conservatives have it exactly backwards.

Why are Kansas and Texas doing so badly, and California so well?

For one thing, taxes enable states to invest their people. The University of California is the best system of public higher education in America. Add in the state’s network of community colleges, state colleges, research institutions, and you have an unparalleled source of research, and powerful engine of upward mobility.

Kansas and Texas haven’t been investing nearly to the same extent.

California also provides services to a diverse population, including a large percentage of immigrants. Donald Trump to the contrary, such diversity is a huge plus. Both Hollywood and Silicon Valley have thrived on the ideas and energies of new immigrants.

Meanwhile, California’s regulations protect the public health and the state’s natural beauty, which also draws people to the state – including talented people who could settle anywhere.

Wages are high in California because the economy is growing so fast employers have to pay more for workers. That’s not a bad thing. After all, the goal isn’t just growth. It’s a high standard of living.

In fairness, Texas’s problems are also linked to the oil bust. But that’s really no excuse because Texas has failed to diversify its economy. Here again, it hasn’t made adequate investments.

California is far from perfect. A housing shortage has driven rents and home prices into the stratosphere. Roads are clogged. Its public schools used to be the best in the nation but are now among the worst – largely because of a proposition approved by voters in 1978 that’s strangled local school financing. Much more needs to be done.

But overall, the contrast is clear. Economic success depends on tax revenues that go into public investments, and regulations that protect the environment and public health. And true economic success results in high wages.

I’m not sure how Trumpland and California will coexist in coming years. I’m already hearing murmurs of secession by Golden Staters, and of federal intrusions by the incipient Trump administration.

But so far, California gives lie to the conservative dictum that low taxes, few regulations, and low wages are the keys economic success...


"If you've heard this story before, don't stop me because I'd like to hear it again," Groucho Marx.

I spent half my money on gambling, alcohol and wild women. The other half I wasted, W.C. Fields.

#2 colion

colion

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 968 posts

Posted 23 November 2016 - 12:37 AM

 

 

Economic Growth - Blue States vs. Red States

John Hood

http://www.nationalr...ates-red-states

 

Over the past several years, many Republican leaders and conservative analysts have written about the diverging economic fortunes of Republican-governed states with relatively smaller governments and Democratic-governed states with relatively larger governments. Unfortunately, all too often the complex economic and public-policy issues involved have gotten oversimplified. Some analysts have compared California and Texas as prototypical Blue and Red states, for example. That has been rhetorically useful for conservatives in the past. But it has proved problematic over the past year as falling oil prices have slowed the growth of the Texas economy while California has continued to benefit from Pacific Rim trade. As a result, Democratic operatives and liberal columnists have been crowing lately about California’s superior performance, as if it disproved the economic virtues of lower taxes, less regulation, and other market-friendly policies.

 

It does not. Two cases establish precisely nothing, particularly when those two cases happen to be such exceptional ones as California and Texas. Most careful academic studies on the matter conclude that heavy state taxes and regulations tend to hamper state economic growth, all other things being equal. That’s the key phrase, of course. No serious person would suggest that state fiscal and regulatory policies are the most important factors affecting state economies, or even that they are large enough to swamp other factors when seeking to explain state-by-state differences in economic performance. Natural resources, geography, climate, and international trading patterns are clearly important.

 

At the very least, analysts should look at a range of large states rather than just two. I recently took a look at three measures — employment growth, GDP growth, and per-capita income growth — for the 10 most-populous states. In each case, I began the time series in June 2013 (because I was thinking in terms of state fiscal years). The job count grows through November 2015. The GDP measure goes through 2nd Quarter 2015. The income measure goes through 3rd Quarter 2015. Here are the topline results:

 

bullet_blue.gifIn employment growth (from the payroll survey), Florida, California, Georgia, Texas, and North Carolina beat the national average (in that order). Falling below the national average were Michigan, New York, Ohio, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (with PA have the lowest job-growth rate during the period).

 

bullet_blue.gifIn GDP growth, here are the same ten states ranked highest to lowest: Texas, Florida, California, North Carolina, Georgia, National Average, New York, Illinois, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio.

 

bullet_blue.gifIn per-capita income growth, here are the same ten states ranked highest to lowest: California, North Carolina, Michigan, New York, Georgia, National Average, Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, Illinois.

 

Placed in the larger context, then, California’s recent economic growth looks less like proof of the superiority of the Blue State model and more like further evidence that, when possible, people still prefer to live and do business in sunny climes, particularly if they are on a coast. Three states — California, North Carolina, and Georgia — have above-average performance in all three categories. Two more, Texas and Florida, do well in two of the three measures. Michigan and New York beat the national average in only one, per-capita income. Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Illinois rank low in all three.

 

Just as liberals shouldn’t try to use California’s recent performance as a proof for their favored theories about economic growth, conservatives should avoid falling into the trap of holding up just a single state to prove our case. Nor should we oversell the effects of public policy, good or bad. California has such a wealth of natural and human resources that it is not easy to deal its economy a mortal blow — although its liberal politicians seem determined to test that proposition.

 

 


Edited by colion, 23 November 2016 - 12:45 AM.


#3 AChartist

AChartist

    Tim

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 3,661 posts

Posted 27 November 2016 - 07:37 PM

short term fake bubble transients mean nothing to me. Its sustainability. No one has any idea how much sanctuary cities federali redistribution

 

welfare amount to in california and the sums of chinese colonialization, california also has the cyclical benefit of technology and chinese ports being the last functioning leg of the

 

dead economy. I would be careful projecting trends. The ports can be rebuilt in constitutional jurisdictions or even leased from mexico.

 

 

be careful what the pig ignorant chant for

 

 

depopulation success,

 

the obama soros ukraine coup has debased their currency 90%.

because the pensioners cannot pay the energy bill,

the centralized hot water heating system has been shut off to the city.

thousands of old will die this winter "helping" their social security deficit.

communist satanism works good like that, coming to a town near you.

oh, it already did, detroit water.

and they keep chanting for more.


"marxism-lennonism-communism always fails and never worked, because I know

some of them, and they don't work"  M.Jordan


#4 diogenes227

diogenes227

    Member

  • TT Patron+
  • 4,035 posts

Posted 28 November 2016 - 02:38 AM

RESOLVED

 

 

WHEREAS, On November 8, 2016, Donald Trump was elected to become the 45th President of the United States; now, therefore, be it

RESOLVED, That no matter the threats made by President-elect Trump, San Francisco will remain a Sanctuary City. We will not turn our back on the men and women from other countries who help make this city great, and who represent over one third of our population. This is the Golden Gate—we build bridges, not walls; and, be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, That we will never back down on women’s rights, whether in healthcare, the workplace, or any other area threatened by a man who treats women as obstacles to be demeaned or objects to be assaulted. And just as important, we will ensure our young girls grow up with role models who show them they can be or do anything; and, be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, That there will be no conversion therapy, no withdrawal of rights in San Francisco. We began hosting gay weddings twelve years ago, and we are not stopping now. And to all the LGBTQ people all over the country who feel scared, bullied, or alone: You matter. You are seen; you are loved; and San Francisco will never stop fighting for you; and, be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, That we still believe in this nation’s founding principle of religious freedom. We do not ban people for their faith. And the only lists we keep are on invitations to come pray together; and, be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, That Black Lives Matter in San Francisco, even if they may not in the White House. And guided by President Obama’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing, we will continue reforming our police department and rebuilding trust between police and communities of color so all citizens feel safe in their neighborhoods; and, be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, That climate change is not a hoax, or a plot by the Chinese. In this city, surrounded by water on three sides, science matters. And we will continue our work on CleanPower, Zero Waste, and everything else we are doing to protect future generations; and, be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, That we have been providing universal health care in this city for nearly a decade, and if the new administration follows through on its callous promise to revoke health insurance from 20 million people, San Franciscans will be protected; and, be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, That we are the birthplace of the United Nations, a city made stronger by the thousands of international visitors we welcome every day. We will remain committed to internationalism and to our friends and allies around the world—whether the administration in Washington is or not; and, be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, That San Francisco will remain a Transit First city and will continue building Muni and BART systems we can all rely upon, whether this administration follows through on its platform to eliminate federal transit funding or not; and, be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, That California is the sixth largest economy in the world. The Bay Area is the innovation capital of the country. We will not be bullied by threats to revoke our federal funding, nor will we sacrifice our values or members of our community for your dollar; and, be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, That we condemn all hate crimes and hate speech perpetrated in this election’s wake. That although the United States will soon have a President who has demonstrated a lack of respect for the values we hold in the highest regard in San Francisco, it cannot change who we are, and it will never change our values. We argue, we campaign, we debate vigorously within San Francisco, but on these points we are 100 percent united. We will fight discrimination and recklessness in all its forms. We are one City. And we will move forward together.

 


"If you've heard this story before, don't stop me because I'd like to hear it again," Groucho Marx.

I spent half my money on gambling, alcohol and wild women. The other half I wasted, W.C. Fields.

#5 colion

colion

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 968 posts

Posted 28 November 2016 - 08:28 PM

Sanctuary Cities Continue to Obstruct Enforcement, Threaten Public Safety

 

"Over the 19-month period from January 1, 2014, to September 30, 2015, more than 17,000 detainers were rejected by these jurisdictions. Of these, about 11,800 detainers, or 68 percent, were issued for individuals with a prior criminal history."

 

"The Department of Justice's Inspector General recently found that some of the sanctuary jurisdictions appear to be violating federal law, and may face debarment from certain federal funding or other consequences."

 

http://cis.org/Sanctuary-Cities-Map

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

SF programs at risk under sanctuary city defunding

http://www.sfgate.co...ng-10641030.php


Edited by colion, 28 November 2016 - 08:29 PM.


#6 AChartist

AChartist

    Tim

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 3,661 posts

Posted 28 November 2016 - 10:34 PM

Your city could do pretty good if you had a google get $90B censorship contract from taxpayers with hundreds of 

 

whitehouse meetings with google employees. And who knows how much more is there, say 20T white trash labor debt?

 

 

I was also well aware and observed clinton federal justice racketeering for gates antitrust patent theft from superior technology

 

companies.

 

Trump trust buster may break up some satanist [bleeeep] that just came out of the garage, antitrust statute never

 

used since ATT.

 

I new from day one and said first I would never use google, maybe because I was looking for information, not echo chamber bias confirmation

 

safe spaces and saw the orwellian scam from day one.

 

You could do some scheduled takedown for california, cut off chinese mafia ownership of local government and governor moonbeam, maybe crash some technology

 

business with antitrust enforcements, it wouldnt take much but the data I have seen and it can be searched, check the one way moving company diaspora

 

traffic records out of california, satanism takes care of itself so you dont even have to try.


"marxism-lennonism-communism always fails and never worked, because I know

some of them, and they don't work"  M.Jordan


#7 diogenes227

diogenes227

    Member

  • TT Patron+
  • 4,035 posts

Posted 01 December 2016 - 11:58 PM

THE DIVIDE BETWEEN HIGH OUTPUT AMERICA AND LOW OUTPUT AMERICA

 

 

Last week, as my colleague Sifan Liu and I were gnawing on some questions asked by Jim Tankersley of The Washington Post, we happened upon a revealing aspect of the election outcome. While looking at number of influences on the presidential vote outcome, we found that in a year of massive divides, one particular economic split stands out.

Our observation: The less-than-500 counties that Hillary Clinton carried nationwide encompassed a massive 64 percent of America’s economic activity as measured by total output in 2015.  By contrast, the more-than-2,600 counties that Donald Trump won generated just 36 percent of the country’s output—just a little more than one-third of the nation’s economic activity.

 


"If you've heard this story before, don't stop me because I'd like to hear it again," Groucho Marx.

I spent half my money on gambling, alcohol and wild women. The other half I wasted, W.C. Fields.

#8 colion

colion

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 968 posts

Posted 02 December 2016 - 01:05 AM

 

Last week, as my colleague Sifan Liu and I were gnawing on some questions asked by Jim Tankersley of The Washington Post, we happened upon a revealing aspect of the election outcome. While looking at number of influences on the presidential vote outcome, we found that in a year of massive divides, one particular economic split stands out.

Our observation: The less-than-500 counties that Hillary Clinton carried nationwide encompassed a massive 64 percent of America’s economic activity as measured by total output in 2015.  By contrast, the more-than-2,600 counties that Donald Trump won generated just 36 percent of the country’s output—just a little more than one-third of the nation’s economic activity.

 

No big surprise here.  As Carvill (as I recall) said during Bill's campaign "It's the economy stupid".  The economy under Obama has been poor with only about 20% of the quarterly reports being OK (at least to some degree).  Under these conditions job creation matches or exceeds population growth and folks say leave well enough alone.  When GDP growth is inadequate and so does not provide good economic conditions folks go for change.  This was a change election.


Edited by colion, 02 December 2016 - 01:06 AM.


#9 AChartist

AChartist

    Tim

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 3,661 posts

Posted 02 December 2016 - 09:12 PM

says the state is in hock $93k per household. satanism works good like that. Probably why governor moonbeam is selling them

 

out to China who will have no obligation to public unions.

 

 

 

on ZH 120216:

 

Stanford Study Reveals California Pensions Underfunded By $1 Trillion Or $93k Per Household

Earlier today the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research revealed some fairly startling realities about California's public pension underfunding levels.


"marxism-lennonism-communism always fails and never worked, because I know

some of them, and they don't work"  M.Jordan


#10 diogenes227

diogenes227

    Member

  • TT Patron+
  • 4,035 posts

Posted 08 December 2016 - 03:14 PM

Portland to raise taxes on companies where CEO earns 100 times what workers do

 

 

Portland, Ore., city council passed a law Wednesday that will charge businesses a higher tax rate if their chief executive officer gets paid more than 100 times what the average worker at the company does.

Normally, businesses in the city pay a tax of 2.2 per cent of their net income to city hall. But the new law will slap a higher rate on any publicly traded companies in the city if their executive compensation is wildly out of line with what workers at the company earn.

 

There are currently about 550 publicly traded companies including Wells Fargo, Walmart and General Electric that have operations in the city, and they paid city hall a collective $17.9 million last year in taxes.But starting in January, an extra 10 per cent tax will be levied if the CEO makes more than 100 times the average salary at the company. If he or she makes more than 250 times, the added tax is even higher — an extra 25 per cent.
"When I first read about the idea of applying a higher tax rate to companies with extreme ratios of CEO pay to typical worker pay, I thought it was a fascinating idea," said Commissioner Steve Novick, who championed the bill after seeing similar efforts in Arizona and California. "[It was] the closest thing I'd seen to a tax on inequality itself."

It's expected that the move could bring in as much as an additional $3.5 million annually, money that would be earmarked to help combat homelessness in the city.

 


"If you've heard this story before, don't stop me because I'd like to hear it again," Groucho Marx.

I spent half my money on gambling, alcohol and wild women. The other half I wasted, W.C. Fields.