Originally Posted By gottaluvdavillains I am truely asking this Darkbeer... Where should the budget be cut? The schools are already nearly barebones. If we want our kids to do music or sports (for some kids the only thing that keeps their grades up) we have to pay extra for it - for some of us that works... for many they can't afford it so they can't play. I know many teachers would like to get rid of "No Child Left Behind" which would save some funds.. Our roads are horrible - how much can be cut there... which is another place that was suggested be cut... Where is the waste? If there is so much waste ($16 bil)... why isn't our republican governor yelling from the roof tops about it?
Originally Posted By Darkbeer >>I am truely asking this Darkbeer... Where should the budget be cut? << Once again, THIS Thread is about the TACTICS the Democrats are using to avoid mentioning the TAXES in Prop 1A in the May 19th Election. I won't answer the question in this thread.
Originally Posted By andyll I never really want the original Prop 13 was. What a lousy law. No wonder housing is so expensive and there is no money.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "FYI, my Fiancee is a Government employee (County employed) and she is a Moderate Republican that strongly indorses TRUE Budget Cuts in the State, not just slightly reduced increases... OH MY, you just got her going..." So let her post here if she's all fired up. "I won't go thru it all, but if WE (individuals) have to be responsable and watch our budgets, and CUT expenses due to INCREAsED taxes, why shouldn't the state (and local governments) do the same??? We HAVE to do with less in this economy, and basically going from yearly budgets of $100 Billion to $150 Billion in the last five years is WAY overspending, and we NEED to get back to the lower levels, PLAIN and SIMPLE!!!" But where, Mr. Exclamation Point, where? Once we lay off all the state employees, we're still $20B short, remember? 'Cuz once they're gone, what's left? Right now, your answer sucks because it is no answer. It's the same tired, obstinate, idelogical mantra that has absolutely no substance to it whatsoever. Just like the two hyenas of KFI, John and Ken, it's the same cut, cut, cut without saying where where where, because the thought processes apparently stop after that. In the meantime then, since the no tax monkeys can't come up with anything else, we're left with no choice but to raise taxes.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder Here's the deal Darkbeer and his allegedly worked up fiancee. Your premise here lacks any kind of foundation. Why are you ticked off about omitted language? Because it was supposedly done on purpose by Democrats. Why Democrats? Because you think they raised your taxes for no good reason. Why are taxes important to you? Because you're against them. Whyare you against them here? Because you think there should be cuts in spending. Where do you think there should be cuts in spending? Hello? Hello? Where should we cut? If we lay off EVERYBODY, where else is there left to cut? The only other solution is taxes. So again, if not taxes, what else you got? See how that works?
Originally Posted By Darkbeer SELECTED PARAGRAPHS ONLY.... <a href="http://www.sacbee.com/politics/story/1666423.html?mi_rss=State%2520Politics" target="_blank">http://www.sacbee.com/politics...Politics</a> >>When the Legislature places a measure on the ballot, however, it often bypasses the attorney general by specifying the ballot title and even indirectly designating those who write ballot pamphlet arguments. In other words, the Legislature, in league with the governor, tries to fix the election by fixing how measures are portrayed. Cases in point are the six measures that the Legislature and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger are asking voters to approve in a hurry-up May 19 special election to implement much of their state budget deal. The most important of the measures, Proposition 1A, would create a state spending limit and direct excess revenue into a "rainy day" account to be used when the economy and state revenue dip. But a very important provision of the package is that billions of dollars in new taxes would be short-circuited if Proposition 1A is rejected. That "poison pill" is designed to discourage unions and other left-of-center groups – which despise state spending limits – from campaigning actively against the measure. But it indirectly gives conservative anti-tax groups, which despise the new levies, a potential weapon.<<
Originally Posted By mawnck >>Where should we cut? If we lay off EVERYBODY, where else is there left to cut? The only other solution is taxes. So again, if not taxes, what else you got? << Haven't you figured it out yet? All disagreements with and challenges to Darkbeer are off-topic.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <Once we lay off all the state employees, we're still $20B short, remember?> Have you ever even stopped to wonder where all that money is going, if it's not going to state employees? This is what happens when liberals get their way. Spending goes through the roof, and the tax rates become more progressive, and when the economy goes through a downturn it's a huge crisis rather than a problem. Have you ever wondered why states where conservatives have more control aren't having as big of problems? And if the solution to the problem is so obvious, why are the Democrats rigging the process? Lastly, why is a poster who claims to be Republican so unwilling to denounce what the Democrats are doing, and instead tries to draw the thread down a rabbit track?
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Once again, THIS Thread is about the TACTICS the Democrats are using to avoid mentioning the TAXES in Prop 1A in the May 19th Election.> Yo, Mr. Thread Police: When you focus so narrowly, it seems as though you don't really want discussion, you want assent. Like we all should nod our heads at the obvious wisdom and say "those naughty Democrats." What kind of discussion is that? You can't view something like this out of context. Which is what everyone else is talking about. How to deal with the budget shortfall in California. Even if you got what you seem to want and everyone agreed that the Democrats were naughty boys and girls for writing the proposal the way they did, SO WHAT? California would still have a huge budget shortfall and would have to come up with some way to fill it. That's the far more important discussion, which you seem unwilling to engage in. Is it because, as has pointed out numerous times, taxes will have to be raised one way or the other, and you are unwilling to admit to this? <I won't answer the question in this thread.> Clearly. But don't flatter yourself that doing so upholds any LP rules against derailing and you're "holding to principle" or some such. Since you so helpfully posted the LP rules, one would think you would realize that talking about related matters within a thread is NOT considered derailing. The only guideline on the matter is #8. Here it is again: "8. STAYING ON TOPIC: There is a section on LaughingPlace.com for each area of Disney. Please post your messages in the most appropriate section. If you feel a new section should be created, please send us Feedback and we will consider it." Got that? It's about keeping things in the proper SECTION. In other words, a thread on taxes shouldn't be in the "DL General" or "Disney Animated Films" section. It says nothing about talking about obviously related matters within a thread. (mawnck): <Haven't you figured it out yet? All disagreements with and challenges to Darkbeer are off-topic.> Boy howdy.
Originally Posted By Darkbeer HEY, this THREAD is not about "Darkbeer", it is about the actions the California Democrats took in regards to the wording of a Special Election, and the official Ballot Pamphlet... It is not about MY opinion, or what I think about something, it is about an item in the news, the DEMOCRATS and their Tactics... Quit with the Bait and Switch... Let's discuss the wording of Proposition 1A and what is lacking!
Originally Posted By Dabob2 This thread is about what ALL the participants in the thread, not just one, decide it's about. That's how threads work. It's perfectly permissible to talk about related matters.
Originally Posted By Darkbeer BUT NOT PERSONALITIES, that is CLEARLY against LP rules, discuss the TOPIC, NOT the Poster!
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Yes, it's hard not to discuss personalities a little when the topic becomes about why a specific person isn't answering a question put to him multiple times. And all-caps does no more good than exclamation points in the credibility department.
Originally Posted By Darkbeer K2M, have you even read the thread? I have written a LOT in this thread....
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Yes, I read it, thanks for asking. You've posted a lot of links. Oh, and you copied and pasted LP's rules. Why don't you, for once, just say clearly what your opinion is, and then respond when someone asks you a direct question? You keep talking about cutting spending, which is nice and broad and general, but you don't talk about what areas to cut specifically when asked. You refuse to answer it, because that's a difficult question to answer. It is very easy to decry "wasteful spending" or "tax and spend policies" -- offering an alternative is much more complex and dicey. Take a stab at it. Or, go ahead do what you usually do. Post links and avoid giving your opinion or answering direct questions. But don't be surprised when folks become annoyed at that nonsense.
Originally Posted By Darkbeer Sorry, it seems that EVERY time I post something in WE, SPP comes in with a personal comment, addressing ME and NOT the topic, and I am just plain sick and tired of it... This is one of SO Many threads in WE, and I don't go in and interupt the "hate" threads, such as the current GOP Idiot thread, in fact, I haven't even read one post in it, because I know all it is in just on big bash on the non-Ultra Liberals. Heck, LP'ers are of all shapes, colors, genders, etc... and Political opinions. My shape, getting a bit smaller, but still not "average", My Color, no real idea, I do like Charger Blue, both the current, and the old "throwback" color. Gender, that one I know, based on what Deogee's Mom tells me As for my political position, I tend to be a not-so-strong Libertarian, yes, we need some governement to run things, and do things like form a military, build roads and infrastructure such as water, sewer, etc. Enough about ME, lets get back to the wording of Prop 1A!
Originally Posted By Darkbeer My opinion on the wording of Prop 1A, the Democrats are showing they are BIG Jerks by avoiding mentioning the $16 BILLION in taxes in the OFFICIAL State Ballot Election Pamphlet!
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <<You keep talking about cutting spending, which is nice and broad and general, but you don't talk about what areas to cut specifically when asked. You refuse to answer it, because that's a difficult question to answer.>> <lets get back to the wording of Prop 1A!> The juxtaposition is delicious.
