Because of the Greedy Public Unions, we the US Taxpayers will be Bailing Out the Bankrupt City of Stockton, California --


Union Greed Drives California to Bankruptcy

[reason.com]

"In the 1990s, Stockton granted its employees some of the most generous and unsustainable labor contracts in the State of California.… Safety employees could now retire at the age of 50.… Many safety retirees today earn 90 to 100 percent of what they made when they were still on the job."

"Stockton went even further than most other cities and granted things like unlimited vacation and sick time that could be cashed out when an employee retired, and added pay categories for almost everything imaginable.… Our public safety employees were costing us on average more than $150,000 a year each."

"This was free medical care for a retiree and a dependent for the rest of their lives. No co-pays, no generic requirements, no HMOs, and no premiums. See any doctor, stay in any hospital, purchase any drug, and just send the bill to the city of Stockton.

"Absurd pay and benefits are common, and not just in Stockton. San Francisco Chronicle columnists Matier and Ross revealed recently that the Alameda County executive receives a $423,000 a year pay package for life. Compensation for California firefighters is in the $175,000 a year range. Some Newport Beach lifeguards receive $200,000 a year pay packages. As a friend of mine joked, revolutions have been fought over lesser instances of public pilfering."

"The potential constitutional question in the Stockton case is whether federal bankruptcy law trumps a California law that says money owed to the state pension fund must be paid."


****************

So like this Government Unconstitutionally Bailed out and took over GM (fascism), and left taxpayers holding the bag, California is trying to do the same thing - shaft the taxpayers, while giving Public Unions a bail-out.

"If Klein sides with the city, then municipalities will face a disturbingly low bar for pursuing bankruptcy. They will be emboldened to choose Stockton’s course—i.e., using bankruptcy as a strategic policy tool to offload debts without having to confront the main reasons that they went bankrupt in the first place, such as lush pensions. Bankruptcy will no longer be a policy of last resort."

"If the city wins the case, then the public-sector unions and the scandal-plagued California Public Employees Retirement System are right. No matter what problems befall a city, public services and taxpayers suffer first while union members and public retirement systems are protected."

*****************

As usual, the Democrats in California want to continue collecting their exorbitant public union salaries and pensions at the expense of we taxpayers.

I wonder how those who are so outraged about the Bank-Bailout 'feel' about bailing out the Democrat Cities and States that are going Bankrupt because of Public Unions? I imagine it's the usual Hypocrisy.

************

These people give a good eplanation of the situation -

[hotair.com]

"As with all the rest of California, Stockton is in debt to the California retirement system fund (CalPERS), and has been for some time."

"It’s pensions that are sinking states and cities. A bunch of politicians took public employee union dues, funded their campaigns by promising new and better things to public employee unions, won those campaigns, and knew damn well there was no way to actually deliver on ever more extravagant promises, but went ahead and did it because it’d likely be someone else’s problem some day."

*********

BTW, I'm sure everyone realizes by now that the PUBLIC UNIONS are the reason the whole world is going Bankrupt and needs taxpayer bailouts - Greece, etc.

<<<BTW, I'm sure everyone realizes by now that the PUBLIC UNIONS are the reason the whole world is going Bankrupt and needs taxpayer bailouts - Greece, etc.>>>

The reason why the whole world is going Bankrupt is because of a Debt-Based Economy and Odious Debt.

[www.henrymakow.com]
Greek Film Shows Way Out of Debt Bind
June 20, 2011

"Debtocracy" argues convincingly that there are strong precedents for repudiating the Greek debt.

by Henry Makow Ph.D.

"Debtocracy" a 75-minute documentary made for $15K has inflamed popular resistance in Greece by casting the debt crisis in a new light.

Seen on the Internet by over a million Greeks, the film convincingly argues that the debt is a neo-liberal ("Economic Hitman" scam and there are strong precedents for repudiating it.

The brainchild of Costas Lapavitsas, an economist and professor at the School of Oriental and African Studies in London, the film introduces the concept of "odious debt" which was used in 2003 by the United States to renounce Saddam Hussein's $120 B debt to Russia and France.

Defined by Russian economist Alexander Sacks in the 1920's, "odious debt" is incurred by a despotic power, "not for the needs or in the interest of the State, but to strengthen its despotic regime, to repress the population that fights against it, etc., this debt is odious for the population of all the State."

He went on. "This debt is not an obligation for the nation; it is a regime's debt." Sack called it "a personal debt of the power that has incurred it." When this power falls, that debt "consequently . . . falls with the fall of this power."

Sack also considered a debt odious when, "the loans incurred by members of the government or by persons or groups associated with the government to serve interests manifestly personal - interests that are unrelated to the interests of the State." A bribe is an example of a manifestly personal interest.

Now, in order for a debt to be deemed "odious," Sack said that the lender must also be aware that the loan is "contrary to the interests of the nation."

In this case, Professor Sack said, "the creditors have committed a hostile act" against the people. They can't therefore expect that a nation freed from a despotic power will assume the 'odious' debts, which he called "personal debts of that power."

As we shall see, these criteria apply to Greece. But first the film looks at:

EQUADOR

The Illuminati banker - IMF method of absorbing the world's wealth is well documented. They bribe corrupt regimes to incur huge debts for costly boondoggles built by companies owned by the same bankers. Then the bankers make their targets repay these "loans" (created out of thin air) by accepting severe "austerity" programs and privatizing national enterprises and resources.

At first we thought this predatory behavior was reserved for the Third World, but now it's clear Europe and America are also in their cross-hairs.

Rafael Correa, the President of Equador didn't think the majority of his government's income should be to used to service the national debt. He ordered an "audit committee" to investigate how this debt was incurred and discovered that 70% of it was due to the corruption of prior regimes.

He renounced that debt. Equador's bonds fell to 20 cents on the dollar. His government secretly bought it back and saved seven billion dollars in interest.

Interestingly many civil servants at the Ministry of Finance refused to cooperate with the audit committee. This emphasizes that there is always a class which is in cahoots with the bankers and profits at the expense of the people.

GREECE

The banker-owned mass media has put out the story that Greece's problems are due to bloated bureaucracy and a crippled tax system. But "Debtocracy" documents a pattern of wasteful boondoggles from which the bankers and the ruling class benefited.

These include bribes and kickbacks from the German conglomerate Siemens to build the Athens subway system and a $1.1 B boondoggle for "security" at the 2004 Athens Olympic games.

But the most costly expenditure has been billions for unnecessary weaponry -- aircraft and submarines -- bought from European manufacturers owned by the same bankers.

CONCLUSION

It's clear that the Illuminati bankers intend to use debt to enslave and impoverish us. They will use the specter of financial mayhem to extort the money from us.

Like Greece, our governments will have a choice. Either default on the debt or default on the people. Our puppet politicians have been defaulting on us for a long time. We need to use the concept of "odious debt" to ensure they stop now.

The bankers' credit scam cannot go on for ever. Eventually the social contract will break down as is happening in Greece. This is why the bankers are creating a New World Order police state, under the pretext of a war on terror.

---

Film available here - Be patient. "Odious Debt" introduced after 30 minutes. [32.12 MM]

Latest - Europe Delays Decision on Greece
[www.henrymakow.com]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[www.youtube.com]
DEBTOCRACY (FULL - ENG Subs)
1:14:48 Minute Video
Uploaded by kryfos0kosmo on May 12, 2011 35,822 Views @ 6-21-11
For the first time in Greece a documentary produced by the audience. "Debtocracy" seeks the causes of the debt crisis and proposes solutions, hidden by the government and the dominant media.

...
[www.youtube.com]

Yes, spending and borrowing are driving us into bankruptcy, also.

Here's a good article about the Blue Cities and States going into Bankruptcy, by Judge Napolitano, the great Libertarian, who did the great commentary - What If?

When the Government Goes Bankrupt -- What Stockton's Plight Means for America

[www.foxnews.com]

******************

Here's the Famous "What If" Video -

Judge Andrew Napolitano "What If ?"

[video.search.yahoo.com]

Since 1981, 42 U.S. cities and towns have filed for bankruptcy. The pace has picked up with 10 in the last four years and many others teetering on the brink of insolvency. Recent cities taking the plunge include Mammoth Lakes and Stockton in California, and Central Falls, R.I.

42 cites and you know what most of them are not in Ca.

U.S. Bail Out here we are!

You're right, riverhousebill. This is good information -

Nebraska, Not California, is King of Municipal Collapse

[www.bloomberg.com]

Although they went broke for a different reason in Nebraska than runaway government workers pay and pensions that are happening now in California.

But I think it's ridiculous that taxpayers should pay government workers pensions - just using logic, you can see it's a recipe for economic disaster. And I don't think government workers should be paid twice what regular workers get paid.

We're in a huge Government Bubble, and I hope it bursts soon.

Here's another excellent article about California's Tax and Spending Problem -

Big Government and High Taxes Definitely Didn't "Save" California

[reason.com]

"But look at bankrupt Stockton. That city is decrepit largely because it spent most of its money on absurd levels of compensation for its workers and could no longer provide crucial services. Stockton may have taken it further than most, but it exemplifies the situation throughout California, which faces a half-trillion-dollar unfunded pension liability.

Then there’s that little thing called freedom. California ranked as the 49th freest state in the union in a new Mercatus Center study. As the authors noted, “California not only taxes and regulates its economy more than most other states, but also aggressively interferes in the personal lives of its citizens.”

California may be a model for those who believe that most other states have not sufficiently copied the unsustainable welfare-state models of Western Europe, but it should offer warnings for everyone else."

Kidraw The report from Mercatus is on Mescal!

State Government
California's Extreme Budget Makeover
By Karen Weise
January 17, 2013
Tweet
LinkedIn
Google Plus
Email Related
Story
California Voters: Please Tax Us
Video
Has California Really Balanced Its Budget?
Story
California's Job Growth Outpaces Texas's
Video
California's Reversal of Fortune: Home Sales Rise
Story
U.S. Cities and States Start Spending Again
Story
Small Biz Suffers From State Budget Cuts for Courts
Story
Coding to Cut Red Tape for Startups in Santa Cruz
Column
Small Businesses Don't Choose Low-Tax StatesLess than a year ago, California faced a $15.7 billion budget shortfall, and cities were declaring bankruptcy. The unruly, Democrat-led legislature couldn’t come up with enough votes to raise taxes. The future looked so dire that some professors at public universities were told they’d probably have to start projecting tests onto classroom walls because money for copy paper was running out.

Then on Jan. 10 of this year, Governor Jerry Brown announced the unthinkable: The state’s budget was finally in the black—and not by virtue of accounting tricks or heavy borrowing. “We’re talking about living within our means,” Brown said at a press conference. “This is a breakthrough.”

If California once seemed positively ungovernable, it now offers hope for balancing budgets in the age of debt-ceiling crises and fiscal-cliff fiascoes. The recession walloped the state’s finances, left fragile by years of tax cuts and increased spending. In 2009 the deficit hit a record $42 billion, and creditors increasingly feared the state might default. Brown took office in 2011 and cut annual spending by 6 percent. “Brown really slowed down the growth of government,” says Stephen Levy, director at forecasting firm the Center for Continuing Study of the California Economy. “He tightened welfare eligibility, reduced spending on Medicaid, and had much less spending for education.”

The state needed more revenue, though, and California law makes tax hikes difficult. Two-thirds of the legislature has to approve them or put the issue to voters in a referendum. Brown couldn’t persuade enough GOP lawmakers to join Democrats in asking Californians to pay more. So he collected the 808,000 signatures required to get a measure on the 2012 ballot. Known as Prop 30, it asked voters to approve $6 billion in new taxes raised mostly from the top 1 percent of earners. If voters rejected it, $5.9 billion in education cuts would be triggered under a provision Brown and the legislature had baked into the 2013 budget. The lawmakers were betting that with clear consequences, people would be willing to pony up.

The referendum faced stiff opposition—and even competition from another taxes-for-education ballot measure bankrolled by civil rights lawyer Molly Munger. In the end, more than 7 million Californians—55.4 percent of voters—backed Prop 30. A 0.25 percentage point bump in sales tax took effect on Jan. 1, and an income tax hike of up to 3 percentage points applies to what wealthy taxpayers earned starting in 2012.

The ballot measure’s success enabled the 2013-14 budget Brown is now proposing. The state projects that it will not only break even but also amass a $1 billion surplus by summer 2014. Tom Dresslar, spokesman for the state Treasurer’s office, says credit ratings firms have praised the state’s improving finances, and his office hopes that a ratings upgrade could be coming. Standard & Poor’s currently rates California debt at A-, the lowest in the U.S.

Some investors aren’t convinced. “California has been famous for talk, talk, talk, talk, talk,” says Marilyn Cohen, founder of Envision Capital Management, a Los Angeles investment firm that specializes in bonds. “Are they really going to collect all the tax revenue they think?”

Brown seems intent on tearing down what he calls “The Wall of Debt.” In recent years the state has continually used budgeting gimmicks to show a zero-dollar balance in its general fund, moving money between state accounts and borrowing from cities and school districts. That pile of IOUs amounts to roughly $30 billion. Under Brown’s budget, the state would make good on all but $4.3 billion by mid-2017. The nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office, which conducts research for state lawmakers, said in a Jan. 14 report that this new “emphasis on fiscal discipline” is “commendable.”

Sacramento might be exhaling, but the state isn’t fully in the clear. The Prop 30 sales tax hike expires in 2016, and the income tax increase in 2018. That means “the future really depends on the economy,” says Levy, the economist. If prolonged budget fights in Washington halt the nation’s recovery, the state’s surplus and copy paper could both disappear.


The bottom line: Last year, California’s budget was $15.7 billion in the red. Now state officials are projecting a $1 billion surplus by mid-2014

Ca grows 30 percent of the nations food. The west is the best I say



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/07/2013 09:08PM by riverhousebill.

Thursday, Mar 28, 2013 02:35 PM PDT
Libertarians name North Dakota “most free” state
Sorry, women! Your "freedoms" aren't as important as freedom from excessive taxation VIDEO




Enlarge
(Credit: freedominthe50states.org)
The Mercatus Center, a libertarian-oriented — and Koch brothers-affiliated — think tank based out of George Mason University (a public university, for whatever that’s worth), regularly releases its ranking of American states in terms of “Freedom.” Their definition of “freedom” largely adheres to the standard American libertarian conception of “liberty,” which is to say it is oriented almost entirely around private property ownership and low taxation. As a result, America’s freest state this year turns out to be North Dakota.

North Dakota has also been in the news for another reason recently. What was it, again? Oh, right, it passed the most restrictive antiabortion laws in the country. Including a law specifically aimed at shutting down the state’s lone abortion provider. It passed this law knowing it was unconstitutional.

The data Mercatus used, as far as I can tell, are largely from 2011. But these laws wouldn’t do a thing to change’s North Dakota’s ranking, because Mercatus doesn’t take reproductive rights into account at all. In fact, no issues specifically related to women’s rights are taken into account. Same-sex marriage is included, but not housing employment anti-discrimination rules. They do weigh “‘smoker protection’ in employment,” though. (I think they are in favor of laws barring companies from firing smokers. Isn’t that the government interfering with the employer’s Freedoms?) There is also a list ranking the states in terms of friendliness to Bachelor Parties.

[UPDATE: Mercatus opposes "smoker protection laws" and a state's rank fell if it had them. I apologize for getting that wrong, and assuming the Institute had an inconsistent position. Thank you to Radley Balko, whose work I've always sincerely admired, for correcting me and then calling me a hack.

I'd still note that in the report's scoring system, "Tobacco Freedom," which is mainly about smoking bans and cigarette taxes, makes up 4.1 percent of a state's "freedom ranking." "Marriage Freedom" is 2.1 percent. Freedom from "Asset Forfeiture" -- a frequently abused police outgrowth of the drug war -- is 0.1 percent, which would seem to indicate that it's included mainly to say that it was included.]

“Economic freedom” is of course their most important freedom, and so it is weighted the heaviest, with fiscal and regulatory matters making up a bit more than two-thirds of each state’s score. Which is how their No. 1 freest state is ranked 39th on the “Civil Liberties” list. Though that list is fairly useless, as their definition of “civil liberties” is “unrelated policies, such as fireworks laws, prostitution laws, and trans-fat bans.” On the list taking into account “incarceration rates, non-drug crime arrests, and drug enforcement,” Freest State North Dakota is at 24. (Second-freest state South Dakota is 48.) And Arizona has climbed to No. 11 on the overall list, because at no point are the rights of immigrants or people whom the police may suspect are immigrants taken into account.

Also fun is their “Right to Work” list, where every single state is either tied for first or tied for last. (It should be noted that many libertarians think there’s nothing particularly libertarian about Right to Work laws, which are strictly pro-business, not pro-”market.”)

And they made a cartoon.


So this is how the Mercatus Center defines freedom: the right of people with money to keep it all, and for everyone else to @#$%& off. Almost any Liberty issue that wouldn’t concern a straight, white, male capitalist is wholly ignored.

The Mercatus Center, coincidentally, is run in large part with money from Koch Industries. Charles Koch sits on its board, along with another high-ranking Koch Industries executive. Mercatus is effectively the in-house think tank for the Kochs, providing reports and research that support the ideological aims of the notorious brothers, and their ideological aims usually also support the long-term goal of the Kochs to make as much money for themselves as possible without anyone telling them to “pollute a bit less” or “pay taxes.”

Looking at the list, it’s clear that most Americans have “voted with their feet” and chosen to live primarily in our least free states. Bottoming out the list are California, the second-least free and most populous state, and New York, third in population and dead last in liberty.

I called North Dakota a “@#$%& @#$%&” on Twitter earlier, which was unfair of me, because while it is unreasonably, inhospitably freezing cold in much of the state for much of the year (and I say this as someone who grew up one state away) it is, on the whole, a reasonably pretty part of the country full of decent people (unless you are openly gay or transgendered or in need of an abortion obviously). I can more easily figure out why people, indigenous and immigrant, settled there than, say, Phoenix. But there is a reason that fewer people live in all of North Dakota than in Detroit, and there is a reason why the population of North Dakota slowly declined from the 1920s through the end of the 20th century: Not that many people want to live there. People are moving there now because of a natural resources boom (and those always last forever and always create permanent, stable communities, right?) not because North Dakota suddenly became a much nicer place to live, on account of freedom.

New York and California, though, are both super-nice, even though we confiscate more money than North Dakota, and spend it on things like mass transportation (freedom from having to own cars!) and helping people without means get food and healthcare (freedom from dying!). Koch industries co-owner David Koch, for the record, lives in New York City. Though I imagine he and his brother will soon pack up and relocate to sunny, free Grand Forks.

It is a very obvious observation but it is still the case that Americans — and people everywhere else — have generally decided that they don’t mind a bit of taxation in exchange for a more humane and fairer society. This Mercatus Study, with its limited, self-serving definition of “freedom,” is like a mean-spirited parody of the sort of “libertarianism” that’s just a front for the interests of the wealthy and powerful.

(Also for real North Dakota is almost America’s Siberia.)

Here's the link to riverhousebill's first article about California balancing their budget -

California's Extreme Budget Makeover

[www.businessweek.com]

This is good --

"Brown took office in 2011 and cut annual spending by 6 percent. “Brown really slowed down the growth of government,” says Stephen Levy, director at forecasting firm the Center for Continuing Study of the California Economy. “He tightened welfare eligibility, reduced spending on Medicaid, and had much less spending for education.” "

But the way he is balancing the budget is by RAISING TAXES --

"The state needed more revenue, though, and California law makes tax hikes difficult. Two-thirds of the legislature has to approve them or put the issue to voters in a referendum. Brown couldn’t persuade enough GOP lawmakers to join Democrats in asking Californians to pay more. So he collected the 808,000 signatures required to get a measure on the 2012 ballot. Known as Prop 30, it asked voters to approve $6 billion in new taxes raised mostly from the top 1 percent of earners."

Of course the majority of Democrats in California would vote for raising taxes on "The Rich", so --

"In the end, more than 7 million Californians—55.4 percent of voters—backed Prop 30. A 0.25 percentage point bump in sales tax took effect on Jan. 1, and an income tax hike of up to 3 percentage points applies to what wealthy taxpayers earned starting in 2012."

So you had a tax hike on 'the wealthy' and a sales tax hike so Gov. Brown could balance the budget.

Anybody can balance a budget by Raising Taxes, and that's what they're doing in California.

In fact, California has the highest taxes in all the United States!

**********

Now here's the real story -

California, Unsaved, Speeds Toward a Wall of Debt

[mobile.bloomberg.com]

"In reality, the Brown approach is the latest in a series of “kick the can down the road” budgets that ignore the buildup of debts. It rewards public-employee unions with pay and benefit increases -- while shielding them from desperately needed pension reforms -- and ignores deep problems within the state’s economy."

More Raising of Taxes!

"Voters in November also approved a tax increase for out-of- state businesses in order to fund green-energy projects."

And more Plans to Raise More Taxes!

"Some Democratic legislators want to start with a ballot initiative that would remove Proposition 13 protections from commercial properties, while leaving them on homes. Governor Brown might not want to deal with the potential implications of such a measure during his re-election bid in 2014, according to the San Jose Mercury News, but the newspaper sees efforts to soften Proposition 13’s protections against local parcel taxes - - a form of across-the-board property tax -- heating up this year."

***************

"Others were blunter about California’s financial health. As the Los Angeles Times reported: “It owes Wall Street more per resident than almost every other state. And it has accumulated a crushing load of debt for retiree pensions and health care, now totaling more than taxpayers spend each year on all state programs combined.”

The Times compares the state’s situation to that of the California cities of Vallejo, Stockton and San Bernardino, which all became insolvent largely because of their inability to pay for public-employee pensions and health care."

In Conclusion -

"Democratic supermajorities in both houses of the state Legislature, combined with Democratic control of all constitutional offices. With Republicans now irrelevant, Democrats can raise taxes and ramp up spending at will, meaning that the cycle of artificially produced fiscal crises will speed up, with a legislative majority committed to the endless growth in government and the protection of public-employee pay and privilege at all costs.

Until California’s leaders tackle the state’s enduring debt issues and view the private sector as the generator of economic growth, rather than as a means to fund government, California’s next fiscal crisis will always be just around the corner."

Here's the link to riverhousebill's second Salon article about how North Dakota was ranked first in freedom --

Libertarians name North Dakota “most free” state

Sorry, women! Your "freedoms" aren't as important as freedom from excessive taxation

[www.salon.com]

So this Liberal guy who wrote the article is saying North Dakota is not really the freest state, because -

"North Dakota has also been in the news for another reason recently. What was it, again? Oh, right, it passed the most restrictive antiabortion laws in the country."

and because -

"Mercatus doesn’t take reproductive rights into account at all. In fact, no issues specifically related to women’s rights are taken into account. Same-sex marriage is included"

"Women's Reproductive Rights" is a ginned-up meme, a left-wing invention, used by the Democrats during the Election to assassinate Romney's character.

So, riverhousebill, I assume you are a proponent of killing babies in the womb.

So according to the Liberal Salon website, because North Dakota doesn't want to kill unborn babies, they are not 'free' at all. I would think not wanting to kill babies would make a person more free. The dead babies aren't free, are they.

(I thought abortion was OK when I was in my twenties, but once I had a baby, I became anti-abortion. I just cannot fathom how a mother who has been pregnant, had a baby in her belly and delivered the newborn, and nursed the baby, and raised the baby into a child, can possibly think it's fine to kill her baby in her belly.)

So "Reproductive Rights" is the Right to Kill Your Baby in Your Belly, and anyone who doesn't believe in that genocide is waging a "War on Women" or a "War on Women's Reproductive Rights"

Bizarro World.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/08/2013 12:51AM by KidRaw.

So, riverhousebill, I assume you are a proponent of killing babies in the womb.

Hard call I cant make Kidraw
I just support killing Babys with drones ect everytime I have to pay fed tax at the gas pumps. or when we are fighting for FREEDUMB And so do you< We are good Killers