OT: California and Arizona Are Worst Managed States in America

formatting link

Reply to
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred
Loading thread data ...

Except that California is a lot more fun.

I was surprised that the CA per capita debt is about average, and a third of Massachusetts.

CA is big enough to be six states. The situation varies greatly by region.

Reply to
John Larkin

formatting link

I wonder if one could find correlation of those states with their procentage of population who are essentially moochers. I suspect there is a correlation.

Reply to
cameo

Those numbers are very suspicious. Illinois, for example, has been hiding spending even better than the Obama administration.

Does that include unfunded liabilities? Somehow I doubt it.

Texas could be five states and is doing quite well. All of it.

Reply to
krw

formatting link

There is probably a correlation with the number of days the legislature works in a year, too.

Reply to
krw

formatting link

Which is why the DC area isn't part of any state. It would be the first 50 worst states out of 51.

Reply to
Michael A. Terrell

formatting link

AZ is certainly laced with non-citizens who can't speak English.

But Bloggs is such a weenie he wouldn't dare show his face around here. ...Jim Thompson

--
| James E.Thompson, CTO                            |    mens     | 
| Analog Innovations, Inc.                         |     et      | 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Jim Thompson

formatting link

They would send him back to whatever third world 'hole he came from?

Reply to
Michael A. Terrell

formatting link

Your link lists Arizona at #47.

Predictably, Michigan (Detroit) is #48, and Illinois (Chicago) is #49.

Reply to
Lord Valve

formatting link

And none of you have been to AZ. ...Jim Thompson

--
| James E.Thompson, CTO                            |    mens     | 
| Analog Innovations, Inc.                         |     et      | 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Jim Thompson

formatting link

Heck- I have relatives in Scottsdale probably since before you lived there.

Reply to
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred

Well yeah, but you would be in Texas!

Now Texas is very socialistic in that they have an extraction tax on oil and gas. California has yet to pass such a plan, but now that the Republican party is totally irrelevant in California, we might be able to pass an extraction tax.

If you don't follow Ca. politics, the Republican party insisted on putting a referendum on the ballot to take redistricting out of the hands of the politicians, because they thought the Democrats were gaming the system. So the "fair" redistricting was done and the GOP lost a pile of seats. The Democrats have supermajorities in both houses plus the governorship, so the Republicans aren't required to show up.

We also dumped some really big time douche bags in the house like Dan Lundgren.

The problem with California is everyone wants to live here. It isn't like you can stop people from moving. Given the low unemployment in Nebraska, one has to assume there are a lot of people that rather be jobless in California than be employed in Nebraska.

Regarding debt per capita, any infrastructure in California or say Massachusetts is going to cost more to build than in some hell hole state. So the debt will be higher in the nicer states.

Reply to
miso

They were there before fire was discovered? ;-)

Reply to
Michael A. Terrell

I'd *much* rather be in Texas than Kalifornica. Ick! When I've moved, CA, NY, and MA were on the *NO* way list. ...the other half had many more (like, where it's cold).

What a moron.

Right. They're too left to allow drilling.

You're an idiot.

I do. It's Vaudeville. Proof that nuts roll left.

Really? What a surprise. ...or are you saying that there is no politics in redistricting?

Irrelevant. The object of gerrymandering is not always to maximize seats. I wouldn't expect you to know much about politics, though. Leftists know nothing.

...and how many states are in Republican control? How are the finances in those states, compared to where Democrats are in control? You really are stupid.

Too funny.

Then why are people, and jobs, moving *OUT*. Once again, you prove your ignorance.

"Debt per capita" doesn't include unfunded liabilities, where you take the cake.

A comparison to MA is about as dumb as you can get. I'm sure you'll try harder, though. Keep it up. You're funny!

Reply to
krw

I doubt Bloggs' claim. I moved to Scottsdale from Cambridge 50.5 years ago.

But I assure you, liberals don't like how Arizona is run >:-} ...Jim Thompson

--
| James E.Thompson, CTO                            |    mens     | 
| Analog Innovations, Inc.                         |     et      | 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Jim Thompson

You might want to play with the population trends graph on Google: On the surface, it looks like Calif, Texas, and Arizona are all showing population increases. Now, go to the bottom left, select "Age Group" and check "30-34" or "35-39". Very different picture. So, who's coming to these states? Try checking "15-19" which would be mostly illegal aliens coming to the country.

--
Jeff Liebermann     jeffl@cruzio.com 
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Jeff Liebermann

"The fact is Texas led the nation in net population growth for the past decade, while New York and California led the nation in net population loss. Interestingly, the most new Texans (over 550,000) came from one state- California."

[snip]
[snip]

Bwahahahahahaha!

"From 2000 to 2010 a staggering 3.4 million people moved out of New York resulting in a net loss of 1.3 million residents. California was a close second with a net population loss of 1.2 million during the same decade."

See

formatting link

The only people staying in Californica are Democrat politicians and village idiots. ...Jim Thompson

--
| James E.Thompson, CTO                            |    mens     | 
| Analog Innovations, Inc.                         |     et      | 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Jim Thompson

But that Google chart doesn't match with multiple articles saying Californica lost 94,000 "citizens" this past year. ...Jim Thompson

--
| James E.Thompson, CTO                            |    mens     | 
| Analog Innovations, Inc.                         |     et      | 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Jim Thompson

I don't think you're going to see a 94,000 loss out of 37 million on the graph. There also may be some estimates, extrapolation, and politics involved.

--
Jeff Liebermann     jeffl@cruzio.com 
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Jeff Liebermann

That would be great. Once the state gets a piece of the revenue, we'll be drilling in downtown LA.

Drive on a state highway from California into Nevada. The roads improve radically, going east.

The big bucks are going to state employees, active and retired. One cop made over $450K last year, and he can retire after 30 years with a pension 90% of that. One prison psychologist, with credentials from Afghanistan, made over $800K. Retirement benefits were $3.7e9 last year, soaking up money that should be spent on streets and schools. They will only go up.

The Governing Class looks out for itself.

Reply to
John Larkin

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.