Can California Be Saved?

[vt]

Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2015 8:48 pm Post subject: Victor Davis Hanson: Can California Be Saved?
Victor Davis Hanson: Can California Be Saved? BY VICTOR DAVIS HANSON 05:47 PM ET Crime is back up in California. Los Angeles reported a 20.6% increase in violent crimes over the first half of 2015 and nearly an 11% increase in property crimes. Last year, cash-strapped California taxpayers voted for Proposition 47, which so far has let thousands of convicted criminals go free from prison and back onto the streets. Now the state may have to relearn what lawbreakers often do when let out of jail early. The state may be entering the fifth year of a catastrophic drought, but California has not started building any of the new reservoirs that were planned but long ago canceled under the unfinished California Water Project. Water may remain scarce, but legislators — many of whom have their daily water needs met by the ancient reservoirs and canals that their grandparents built — don't seem overly bothered. They prefer to designate transgender restrooms, ban plastic bags at grocery stores and prohibit pet dogs from chasing bears and bobcats. Never has a region been so naturally rich but so poorly run by its latest generation of custodians. California endures some of the highest gasoline taxes, sales taxes and income taxes in the nation. Yet its roads and public schools rate near the very bottom of U.S. rankings. Traffic accidents in California increased by 13% over a three-year period — the result of terrible roads and worse drivers. Almost half of all accidents in Los Angeles are hit-and-runs in which the drivers leave the scene. California has lots of petroleum and natural gas. It used to be a pacesetter in building nuclear and hydroelectric plants. Yet because of inept governance, the state's electricity and gasoline prices are among the highest in the nation. Why is California choosing the path of Detroit — growing government that it cannot pay for, shorting the middle classes, hiking taxes but providing shoddy services and infrastructure in return, and obsessing over minor bumper-sticker issues while ignoring existential crises? The cause is political. California is a one-party state, without any serious audit of authorities in power. The California State Assembly currently includes 52 Democrats and 28 Republicans. The California State Senate has 26 Democrats and 14 Republicans. All of the state's executive officers are Democrats. Both of its U.S. senators are Bay-area progressives. \California's House delegation is overwhelmingly liberal and Democratic. The party in power can do as it pleases without being held accountable at the polls. But what turned a once bipartisan and purple state bright blue? A perfect storm of events. Higher taxes and increased regulations have driven out lots of small-business owners. In the last few years, hundreds of thousands of disgruntled middle-of-the-road voters voted with their feet and left for no-tax Nevada, Texas or Florida. The state devolved into a pyramid of the coastal wealthy and interior poor — the dual constituencies of the new progressive movement. A third of America's welfare recipients reside in California. Nearly a quarter of Californians live below the poverty line. Yet nowhere in America are there more billionaires. California's long, thin coastal corridor has become a tony La-La land unto itself. Some of the highest housing prices in the nation and richest communities are clustered along the Pacific coastline, from the wine country and Silicon Valley to Malibu and Hollywood, dotted by marquee coastal universities and zillionaire tech corporations. Meanwhile, poorer people in the interior, in places such as Madera and Delano — far from Stanford, Google, Pacific Heights and Santa Monica — require ever more public services. The very rich don't mind paying the necessary higher taxes, while the strapped, shrinking middle class suffers or flees. Demography also explains the new true-blue California. It is one of the youngest states, with a median age of 35. Voters tend to be more liberal before they reach 40 — and must take on increasing responsibilities, often for people other than just themselves. California hosts more undocumented immigrants than any other state. Its percentages of minority and foreign-born residents are among the highest in the country. (One of four California residents was not born in the United States.) As with the young, immigrant groups are likewise traditional liberal constituencies, at least in the early generations. Good money in California along the affluent coast, for the most part, is not made the old-fashion way — in mining, timber, ranching, farming and construction. Instead, California specializes in high-tech, social media, the Internet, government employment, academia, lawyering and acting. Profits usually involve programming, investing, financing, hedging, talking, dealing, suing, instructing and regulating. The money is better, the physical work less grubby, and utopia seems attainable in a way impossible when growing lettuce, mining granite, drilling gas wells, producing two-by-fours, building dams or shipping steel. Could California change? Only when voters of all persuasions decide to return to the old give-and-take politics that keeps politicians honest. Or when water taps in the suburbs go dry. Or perhaps when the state's growing poor populations connect their exorbitant gas, power and housing costs with an elite agenda of rich coastal liberals, who do not seem to care about the people working hard to glimpse what the elites take for granted.

[lektrode]

Re: Can California Be Saved?

.....

when the state's growing poor populations connect their exorbitant gas, power and housing costs with an elite agenda of rich coastal liberals, who do not seem to care about the people working hard to glimpse what the elites take for granted.

why does this all sound OH so familiar.... oh yeah, now i remember...
theres nuthin quite like 'life in the blue states'

[santafe2]

Re: Can California Be Saved?

why does this all sound OH so familiar.... oh yeah, now i remember...
theres nuthin quite like 'life in the blue states'

Hey Lek, it's expensive supporting the red states.

[dcarrigg]

Re: Can California Be Saved?

Hey Lek, it's expensive supporting the red states.

The distribution's not so clear cut. But generally MN is the biggest giver and WV is the biggest taker. A lot of this can fluctuate wildly by year, though. Natural disasters move the needle a lot.



The Koch Brothers' Tax Foundation wanted to look at it another way. They wanted to look at Romney's 47% and see if it held up...which states had the most people not paying income tax. I still think this isn't fair, because the south is generally poorer, but here's what those looney tunes found:





Still, I wonder why is everyone so worried about California?

It's one of the faster-growing states in the union. Population growth alone will carry it forward.

In general, if you're concerned about state finances, worry more about the east than the west, friends. Except the southern Atlantic-Coast states. From Maryland down to Florida, within about 50 miles of the drink, things are growing okay.

It's the Northeast, the Midwest, Appalachia, and the Deep South that largely stopped growing.

With no population growth to carry them forward, these states are where finance problems are going to happen.

And these states are going to be tough to spur population growth in. The Northeast is very expensive and has terrible weather. The Midwest is cheap, but with few good job prospects and arguably worse weather, Appalachia is cheap with the fewest good job prospects and a somewhat closed-culture, and the Deep South is cheap with few good job prospects and an even more closed-culture.

If you ask me, the Northeast has the best chance to get out of the population growth slump, but the people there have to get out of their own way and let developers go on a building spree. Greater Boston has done pretty well with getting some building going, but they're fowling it up by ignoring middle-income housing and commercial and building exclusively high-income nonsense. You'll never cross the chasm from 3% to 6% population growth with only luxury condos. Plus, of course, this requires updating all the infrastructure that runs the northeast. And you'll need a pretty big cudgel to get all the NIMBYs to pick a few spots for rapid dense expansion and to drive the highways and trains and sewers and reservoirs and all the rest of the infrastructure through that will service it.

That's where South Carolina screwed up. They let the growth happen with no infrastructure plans to deal with it at all. Now it's at the point where the SC Chamber of Commerce is begging for new taxes to just get something done to fix it. Very rare the business community asks for higher taxes for anything.

Anyways, the moral of the story is not to worry too much about finances in states where population is growing.

That's the big thing VT's article missed.

Detroit lost more than half its population.



California is growing rapidly:



The article is comparing oranges to baseballs here.

[vt]

Re: Can California Be Saved?

Good charts DC. As always your contributions are excellent to the discussion

I still say California has a problem with finances. Fortunately the have a growth machine with the technology explosion, which may produce enough revenue to save them from a poorly run government.

There public schools are terrible and have been for decades. There university system is good but slipping a bit.

By the way I think Boston is the best city on the east coast. I've always been a Celtics fan, even though I've never lived there. Red Auerbach graduated from my college, and was good friends with one of my older buddies.