Thursday June 20, 2019
SNc Channels:

Search
About Salem-News.com

 

Jun-23-2009 05:39printcomments

California Republicans Win Gold Medals in Selfishness and Greed

The Republicans will not compromise, will not listen to reason, have no empathy for the average person, and will not allow any new taxes or tax increases.

Salem-News.com
Salem-News.com

(SACRAMENTO) - I challenge any and all of you to prove me wrong on this. As you may know, the state of California is facing a twenty four billion dollar deficit. This is by far the largest deficit any state has faced in the history of the United States of America. The politicians have to fix this crises soon, or the state will run out of money.

The Republican plan is to cut the budget by twenty four billion dollars. To do this they plan to cut, and in many cases eliminate, programs that primarily serve the needs of the old, the disabled, the poor, the mentally ill, our veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and those who have lost their jobs or their homes due to the current economic crises. And how are the rich going to contribute to solving this budget problem? They are NOT!

Republican legislators Monday said that a Democratic plan to tax just the oil, alcohol and tobacco companies, in addition to the massive spending cuts, was DEAD ON ARRIVAL and a complete WASTE OF TIME! The Republicans will not compromise, will not listen to reason, have no empathy for the average person, and will not allow any new taxes or tax increases.

The rich have most of the money to begin with, and the majority of Californians have what is left. Who has ever heard of the poor taking the full brunt of a problem like this, while the rich get off without contributing a dime? To make matters even worse, once the budget is settled, it is the rich who will start reaping the profits that will result from balancing the budget, long before the rest of us ever see anything.

I am appalled that anyone in this country would try to solve such a monumental crises by putting all of the burden on the poor, and not have he rich contribute anything to fix the problem. Think about it for just a second. Do you think this is the right thing to do?

To me, this is not right, it clearly is not fair, it is not morally justifiable- in other words, it is just plain wrong! Many less fortunate Californians will die as a result of these deep budget cuts to critical services, more will lose their jobs, others their homes.

And the rich? They will continue to buy up distressed properties, buy jewelry, fancy cars and yachts, take fabulous vacations, and will probably laugh at this state for allowing them to get away with such criminal behavior. May God forgive and have mercy on the greedy and shameless Republican leaders who are behind this overwhelming miscarriage of justice, for I will neither forgive them nor show them any mercy when it comes time to hold them accountable for their sins.




Comments Leave a comment on this story.
Name:

All comments and messages are approved by people and self promotional links or unacceptable comments are denied.



Martin June 24, 2009 6:50 pm (Pacific time)

The article by Mr. Scheer was a brief outline, that's for sure, but he was accurate and the Nation Magazine did a brave job publishing it, that really impressed me. That is why I also referenced the commercial real estate market with the subprime residential market to clearly show that it was those uncreditworthy loans that went unregulated and created the bubble that caused the domino economic impact. I agree that both major parties were involved, but the successful commercial real estate market (at the time) shows what happens when due dillegence and sound business practices are followed. It was the relaxation of those credit policies by Rubin and others that set this up. It also looks like we may have it happening again in regards to some of the lending policies that are being followed today.


Henry Ruark June 24, 2009 12:32 pm (Pacific time)

Martin: With all due respect to both Scheer and the NATION, to which I'v subbed ever since '34, Scheer is a pundit and the book has its own stance to support and strengthen. Any pundit operates by self choice of both issue-and-fact; ask any one selling such content what and why it is so developed and shaped. That's Point One for any writer' it's gotta sell, and to do so it better be timely and on topic obviously popular at the time... Happens I agree with them here, but feel they need to go back further and deeper, since tat national policy for building the American Dream ideal of housing ownership was part of FDR's agenda. Allasame with many other of the "hot ones" today...will develop this further via even-more if you can stand it!


Martin June 24, 2009 8:01 am (Pacific time)

Actually according to a very liberal publication, The Nation, and a very liberal pundit, Robert Scheer our current financial downturn was caused by policies from the Clinton Administration. When the democrats took over congress in 2006 the unemployment rate was at around 5%. It is true that nearly every "blue" political area is where you have the majority of problems, ranging from crime, poverty and most every other social ill, plus the highest tax rates! Blaming someone else just enables those incredibly poor leaders to continue with their incompetence. Being wrong is human, but to not correct wrongs when realized, is far worse. "...The huge expansion in collateralized mortgage and other debt, the bubble that burst, was the direct result of enabling deregulatory legislation pushed through during the Clinton years...The problem occurred only when that mortgage debt could be aggregated and sold as securities to others in an unregulated market..." http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090615/scheer It was all about issuing residential sub-prime loans to those who were unqualified,e .g, compare the latter with the successful commercial market, at the time the bubble burst. Look which politicians were the top receivers of campaign donations from Wall street bankers (Senator's Chris Dodd and Obama #'s 1 and 2).


Henry Ruark June 23, 2009 5:30 pm (Pacific time)

K.D.N.:
  Those paying higher tax on higher income invariably made it via use of common wealth supplied by all via government, which is as it should be.
  Re higher ed.costs, also higher school population, and higher economic costs and many other variables. In fact most schools better records than nearly any business per costs of management, etc.
  School quality declines when absolute needs are neglected, as in any other operation. IF you check in detail by actual experience you will be amazed at how well educators do in face of nearly insuperable odds.
  Re snatching away already diminishing support, why do we NOT simply banish "common school" imposed by Founders prescient for what it supplies our society, and do as done in some primitive nations, let each family teach what they will at whatever levels and in whatever way they wish ?
  THAT will obviate costs... and much else too !!
  Are you really ready to go that route ? OR is the answer rational, reasonable, skilled, expert, informed study and wise action by elected representatives held tightly to their sworn oath to act for the commonweal ?
 


Henry Ruark June 23, 2009 5:28 pm (Pacific time)

K.D.N.: Those paying higher tax on higher income invariably made it via use of common wealth supplied by all via government, which is as it should be. Re higher ed.costs, also higher school population, and higher economic costs and many other variables. In fact most schools better records than nearly any business per costs of management, etc. School quality declines when absolute needs are neglected, as in any other operation. IF you check in detail by actual experience you will be amazed at how well educators do in face of nearly insuperable odds. Re snatching away already diminishing support, why do we NOT simply banish "common school" imposed by Founders prescient for what it supplies our society, and do as done in some primitive nations, let each family teach what they will at whatever levels and in whatever way they wish ? THAN will obviate costs...and much else too !!


Henry Ruark June 23, 2009 5:04 pm (Pacific time)

Viktor: You wrote: "...for all the political units, or at least most of them, that are in bad economic shape are run by democrats." Your contempt for readers here shows clearly, sir, in these words which can only be propaganda uttered despite the national view enjoyed by most of our serious readers here. SO V., for me and many others, please simply stick anything more younowhere, with whatever aplomb you can still summon. Here we eschew such open --and contemptuous-- statement obviously buit from both distortion and intentional perversion...offensive to any and all who appreciate the First Amendment, and the privileges it offers ONLY with requisite responsibility and accountability in open, honest dialog as in S-N. IF you have statistical proof from solid, rational, reasonable sources, sir, show ;em here-and-now by easy link for "see with own eyes" and then "evaluate with own minds" right out here in public...that's what makes honest public opinion worth attention when it (rarely, these days !) doth still occur...mostly in the few such channels as we offer here.


Ky D. Nguyen June 23, 2009 3:22 pm (Pacific time)

Taxing the rich is not a solution. The top 1% of the population of California already paid more than 50% of the total taxes. Just asked the state of Maryland. When they increased the tax on the rich, the rich moved their money elsewhere. The year after the tax increase, Maryland took in less money from the rich than previous year. It would be a short-sighted move. The problem with California is on the spending side. The solution must address spending. Tax will not solve California problem. Example: the budget for education is higher than what it was 5 years ago, even with the proposed cut. During the sme time, the K-12 school quality declined noticeably. Education spending has not improved our schools. Stop spending may actually do some good.


Viktor June 23, 2009 12:38 pm (Pacific time)

Then it does not apply to California or any other state that is suffering financial hardship run by republicans, for all the political units, or at least most of them, that are in bad economic shape are run by democrats. Possibly you have info that disputes that, but when you compare, it's obvious where we have some vey serious problems ranging from high crime rates, high school drop out rates, poverty, out of wed-lock birthrates and so many more negative things going on. This is how it is, so when one wants to develop antecedent cause and effect variables, Disraeli's comment does not apply to American Gentile republicans, in fact it applies chiefly to democratic run locations.

Editor: Vicktor, I have said a thousand times that this news organization is not a propaganda site for the GOP.  Democrats have their hands in everything to some extent, and they are far from perfect, but the GOP led us into this financial mess and there are many ways this can be explained.  I don't care what part of it you look at, the Republicans are tied to the money issues that have nearly bankrupted this nation.  California's problems are unique but they have a great deal in common with the rest of the nation.    


Henry Ruark June 23, 2009 12:28 pm (Pacific time)

To all: Book title is SO DAMN MUCH MONEY, by Robert Kaiser, longtime reporter, editor and editorialist at WPost. He's "been there, done that" for 50 years. Check Amazon for full detail and many illuminating Comments by serious readers. IF you wonder why elected reps. are so overwhelmed, this will clearly illuminat their impossible working situations for you. "See also" previous Op Eds via STAFF/HCR "Written by..." line, and upcoming Op Ed on WHERE, WHY, WHAT "corporate contributions" are now doing to democracy.


Henry Ruark June 23, 2009 12:16 pm (Pacific time)

Viktor et al: You wrote: "Who controls the money legislation ?" For the most crucial periods both nationally and in the states, that has clearly been corporate influence on every major issue in any way impacting their private and profit interests. Public history re "corporate campaign contributions" ever since the railroad-growth time in national history shows that distressing fact clearly, and surely NOT cleanly...with the cold hard cash involved at each level serving as the dollar-wrapped iron bar to get the job done, at the behest of lavish dollar-levels lavished slavishly on beholden key ones and twos heading and shaping essential committee and other action-areas. For fully documented distressing details, with names, dollars and both dates and acts involved, see new book "TOO DAMNED MUCH MONEY" cited here weeks ago...will repeat detailed ref. with ISBN a bit later when can surface it here...


Anonymous June 23, 2009 11:20 am (Pacific time)

No, Viktor, I was referring to the Republicans.


Viktor June 23, 2009 11:13 am (Pacific time)

Daniel Johnson your comment about Disraeli is well taken, but are you suggesting California is a conservative government?


Andy June 23, 2009 10:58 am (Pacific time)

California has had to opportunity to vote on what is paid for by the government. each election there are new ways to spend that the (largly) democrat run government puts up. but what does not add up is where the money comes from. the california voter is to blame on how much money comes out of Sacramento. my company has everyone take manditory days off each quarter, 80 hours worth. yet the the overpaid people with government jobs (average 37% higher paid than private sector) complain about a 5% pay cut. boo hoo!! the california voter is the blame for not paying attention when the votes are cast!


Daniel Johnson June 23, 2009 8:33 am (Pacific time)

Benjamin Disraeli: A Conservative Government is an organized hypocrisy.


A Connelly June 23, 2009 6:53 am (Pacific time)

Ca.-Could solve its problems easily by stopping all aide HOUSING


Viktor June 23, 2009 6:30 am (Pacific time)

Didn't the California voters just overwhelmingly turn down a huge tax increase? Who is the majority party in California? How did California get into this financial mess, considering they tax and fee at a higher level than any state other than New Jersey? Anytime you start spending everything you have, or in some cases more than you have, then if a financial hit takes place, you are going to have to tighten the belt. California has spent itself into this problem, and Oregon has also. Who controls the money legislation? Seems that congress and the different state legislatures and their leaders need the accountability.

[Return to Top]
©2019 Salem-News.com. All opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Salem-News.com.


Articles for June 22, 2009 | Articles for June 23, 2009 | Articles for June 24, 2009
Your customers are looking: Advertise on Salem-News.com!

googlec507860f6901db00.html
Special Section: Truth telling news about marijuana related issues and events.

Annual Hemp Festival & Event Calendar

Donate to Salem-News.com and help us keep the news flowing! Thank you.

Support
Salem-News.com: