California To Have A Budget Surplus

[Dreamliner]

Governor Moonbeam a conservative ? Who knew ?

[SydneySLee]

So cutting spending and raising taxes doesn't make things worse? Anyone tell Europe about this idea? Or maybe the OP didn't see the irony of posting this about a State and not about the US.

[rivergator]

Originally Posted by northandsouth

Your statements prior allow the inference you have no understanding of the long-term balance sheet implications accounting gimmicks reflect on the availability of current revenues to be spent on new projects.

My question was do you "understand" accounting, not that you "know what" it is as you assert last. Those are not the same thing.

As to your question of "how do (I) know that's true?"

Accounting gimmicks and tricks allow you to create a false and misleading balance sheet that allows you to divert current funds from legitimate prior obligations to more current projects. It is really that simple. My history of working with governments has given me much experience seeing exactly this.

You accused me of criticizing the use of "accounting gimmicks" on behalf of a "liberal state" based on nothing more than politics. Methinks you attempt to attack the messenger as a way of diverting attention from the message. Especially since you know nothing of me.

I will ask again, in the sincere hope you will at least offer your opinion if not a factually supported statement. Is it your assertion the current budget situation in California is the result of an expanding tax base the result of an expanding state economy there? Or is the the result of trickery and gimmicks?

Again, simple question. I cannot fathom why you refuse to answer. Unless you know the answer and that said answer will expose your earlier attempt as mere hackery.

I'm sorry, but is your question whether I know exactly everything that is going on in the California budget? Do I know all specifics about the accounting?
The answer, of course, is no. And neither do you.

[northandsouth]

Originally Posted by rivergator

I'm sorry, but is your question whether I know exactly everything that is going on in the California budget? Do I know all specifics about the accounting?
The answer, of course, is no. And neither do you.

Then why in the hell do you make a knee-jerk contribution automatically presuming that a statement discussing the possibility/probability that "accounting gimmicks" might not be indicative of an accurate and reliable budget situation has to be the result of some reflective response in opposition to a liberal state?

I love how you turn and twist a direct question in some effort to evade a simple answer. I never asked if you know "exactly everything" regarding the current budgetary circumstances in California. Merely, I asked if you believe the reported surplus is the result of an expanding tax base resulting from an expanding state economy? One not need know with absolute certainty EVERYTHING about the budget to answer the question I posed to you to formulate an answer. But it appears you have staked a position that my comments HAD to be the result of some political assault so I can see where you prefer to continue to evade a direct response.

You seem to be able to read my mind and capable of inferring my motives quite easily. Surely you have some ability to discern the nature of the California economy as it relates to the question at hand. Right?

Or do you merely spout garbage in an effort to squelch posters who contribute questions in opposition to your particular mindset? You see, I merely stated, based on my personal experiences with budgeting on a governmental level, that a surplus resulting from "accounting gimmicks" is not reflective of a strong and stable and growing economy. You immediately attacked this opinion as some thoughtless negative assertion based on nothing more than politics. Why did you of all people here, the self-proclaimed purveyor of rational and reasonable thought jump to such a conclusion?

[rivergator]

Originally Posted by northandsouth

Then why in the hell do you make a knee-jerk contribution automatically presuming that a statement discussing the possibility/probability that "accounting gimmicks" might not be indicative of an accurate and reliable budget situation has to be the result of some reflective response in opposition to a liberal state?

I think because I read the story and actually understood it.

[G8trGr8t]

do you believe that all their pensions are fully funded?

[rivergator]

Originally Posted by G8trGr8t

do you believe that all their pensions are fully funded?

don't know. do you?

[northandsouth]

Originally Posted by rivergator

I think because I read the story and actually understood it.

Actually, you obviously did not. Perhaps what the words said, but not the accurate picture of the situation the words portray.

I guess you refuse to answer a direct question. So why bother?

The article states California is about to spend more money because their accounting "gimmicks" corrected their balance sheet and that is proof enough for you that all is well. I wished I understood the logic behind your conclusion, but I do not and you refuse to offer any assistance toward that understanding.

You win. I will not attempt to demean you any further by asking your opinion on the matter.

[GatorAvatar]

A multibillion-dollar stack of IOUs awaits state lawmakers when they return to Austin next year, and it’s a pile of their own making, the fruit of budget tricks that would leave Penn and Teller both speechless.

Gov. Rick Perry has a righteous gripe when it comes to the Legislature’s fiscal gymnastics. That part of his stepped-up “truth in budgeting” campaign has merit, but other parts we have a major problem with.

When lawmakers adjourned their session last year, they left a nearly $5 billion Medicaid tab uncovered and scheduled a late aid payment to schools to balance the books. Then there is their slippery practice of siphoning off taxes dedicated for one purpose and pouring them into the general fund.

The granddaddy of all diversions is the big grab out of the highway fund, where fuel taxes and fees are supposed to go for road- and bridge-building. More than $1 billion of that money will be spent this budget cycle on other uses. North Texas, meanwhile, is forced to build major highways with toll financing.

Last week, Talmadge Heflin, budget specialist with the Texas Public Policy Foundation, testified to lawmakers that “even people with advanced degrees have trouble tracking funds in the budget, let alone the average taxpayer or legislator.”

In this light, Perry’s truth-in-budgeting call is a good one, yet we wonder why his mind blanked when he signed the state’s current smoke-and-mirrors budget 16 months ago, saying, “I am proud Texas will continue to live within its means.”

http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/ed...-gimmickry.ece

[ArtDeco]

Originally Posted by GatorAvatar

http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/ed...-gimmickry.ece

I'm sorry, do you live in Texas or know something about their budget, or do you always take an "editorial" in a Dallas newspaper as fact?

BTW, props to North and south. About time someone who actually knows about the subject actually chimed in.
However, if California is actually making real headway, I'd like to think people of all political ideologies could be thankful and maybe learn something. I had heard Gov Moonbeam was making some tough fiscal decisions since taking office out there.

[ncgatr1]

Originally Posted by rivergator

yes, this is a projection.

So we are using comments like budget? A little premature don't you think?

[The_Graygator]

Originally Posted by 108
California's budget really didn't have many problems until the crash of 08 that left nearly every state reeling with a lack of revenue

Ironic... the crash created and caused by who? The democrats.

[neisgator]

This thread is funny.

[Dreamliner]

Flickers of hope in Kollyfornia: earlier this year voters in San Jose and San Diego slapped down public unions. And reportedly, voter turnout was way down this past November.

[gatordowneast]

108, give it up re CA and budget "surplusses". Another fantasy. Their only options are a bailout by the rest of us or bankruptcy. CA and Illinois (as Ron Zook called it) are in the same boat. Anyone with the resources and know how is getting out of CA and treating it like the rest of us...as a place to visit and vacation...while we can.

[Burke]

California is a basket case and has been for years.

They got so desperate out there that they even elected a Republican, Schwarzenegger, to do something about it. But unfortunately, he is a closet Dem.

[rivergator]

Originally Posted by Burke

California is a basket case and has been for years.

They got so desperate out there that they even elected a Republican, Schwarzenegger, to do something about it. But unfortunately, he is a closet Dem.

you apparently don't know much about the state. The majority of California's governors have been Republicans. By 2-1.

[Dreamliner]

They've found a way to balance the budget by: (1) raising taxes and (2) paying back less money borrowed from rainy day funds than previously purposed.

Translation: they kicked the can down the road.

[myamiG8R]

Originally Posted by GatorNorth

california has its problems but trading away the world's 7th or 8th largest economy for mostly frozen, uninhabitable tundra or an island of unskilled laborers is nuts.....and isn't puerto rico already a US territory? Not much to gain there.

i am more focused on getting rid of the automatic 55 electoral votes to the democratic nominee not matter who or what he or she is...

[Gatoragman]

North, welcome to the world of Rivergator, rarely answering questions and just pointing at the messenger