If You Can't Clean House, Dirty it!

Arnold Schwarzenegger! You've just lost a special election that would have theoretically imposed iron-like fiscal discipline on Sacramento! Now whaddya gonna do?

Would you believe, a $50 billion bond issue for infrastructure?

And yes, two years after the decline and fall of Gray Davis, and one year after a historically huge, "one-time only" voter-approved bond of $15 billion, California still has the lowest bond rating in the nation. Do they have good beaches in Nevada?

Comments

[Jason Ligon]

Why not? Cost containment is for losers.

[joe]

Is he trying to starve the beast?

[fyodor]

Is he trying to starve the beast?

Maybe he should try to stab it with his steely knives!

[SR]

Hmmm, I think I'll probably save my money for a safer investment, you know, like Congolese hedge funds....

[John DeWitt]

*sigh* et tu, Ahnold?

He didn't even wait a week before reverting to California As Usual. Can't say I'm surprised, but I'm a little disappointed with myself for even bothering to be disappointed.

[Eric the .5b]

Well, isn't he just responding to the Will of the People, really?

[joe]

"Maybe he should try to stab it with his steely knives!"

Last thing he remembered, he was running for the door

He had to ink a mega deal to make Terminator 4.

[fishfry]

No beaches in Nevada ... but plenty of Californians.

[jdog]

Arnold knows he lost and that raising taxes is his only option. A bond is a tax. He'd rather cast in stone that this new tax money be spent on infracture rather than social programs and bloated government employee compensation. Arnold is right about this. It's not his fault that CA voters can't do arithmetic.

[Stevo Darkly]

"Maybe he should try to stab it with his steely knives!"

Last thing he remembered, he was running for the door

He had to ink a mega deal to make Terminator 4.

"Relax," said the SkyNet
"We are programmed to attack
"You can check out anytime you like
"But you must say, 'I'll be back!' "

[Wild Pegasus]

To all the people who wrote about how Arnold was a turning point in Californian politics or a "moderate libertarian" or some other such rubbish:

HA-ha!

- Josh

[JonBuck]

I want out of this state.

[joe]

jdog, that's what we call "starve the beast."

If you can't actually convince the public to reject programs you dislike, damage the state's fiscal position and economy so much that they can't afford them.

Hooray!

[jdog]

joe:

If you can't actually convince the public to reject programs you dislike, damage the state's fiscal position and economy so much that they can't afford them.

I think that's exactly what Arnold wants to do. And I am for it. CA voters want to spend like crazy. That's a given. Arnold, admitting defeat, wants to spend this non-existent money on infrastructure.

CA cops and firemen are retiring and 51 or so with full health care benifits for the rest of their lives and a pension equal to their working salary. Teachers, administrators, and others aren't far behind.

By spending of infrastructure, he would at least be paying people for doing a hard days work on project from which everyone would benifit.

[FatDrunkAndStupid]

Is Arnold good or what? Just days ago the press (Reason included) was writing his political obituary. Now he is being mobbed by a billion adoring chinamen, and he comes out with the ultimate populist political plan, so outragously irresponsible that the California electorate is assured of eating it up. By re-election time they will be ready to annoint him dictator for life.

[Trotsky]

Alright, as I understand things the bond would be tied to a sales-tax increase (half a cent, perhaps) to pay them off. Arnold's long pushed fiscal discipline in Sacramento in part as a way to make some important infrastructure investments in a state still growing by half a million people or so each year.

Well, whether this or that budget-cutting power passes, we still need to fix the Delta levees, build some new highways, etc, etc, etc.

[The Wine Commonsewer]

Way back around 1990 the Rand forecast that by 2000 Californicate whould spend 90% of its money on education, social welfare, and Medi-Cal. Jaded and cynical as I was (and am) I thought they were nuts. I was wrong. They were right.

When I was a lad, Ca had the finest roads in the world. We built schools, fire stations, and hired cops like a house afire to keep up with the exploding population that was us, the boomers. Taxes were reasonable (sheesh, sales tax was 3%-4% not 7-9%) and everything seemed to get done the way it was supposed to on the public side (OK, the schools weren't great but compared to now?).

I know that SF spent all the tolls and didn't do the bridge maint. I know lots of dumb things were done in the ensuing years. But I still can't quite grasp why, across-the-board, things suck so dang bad.

Maybe it's TWC's Law of Exponential Governmental Deterioration

And now, Schwarzengroper is singing that old Temptations song....

and politicians say, more taxes will solve everything

[The Wine Commonsewer]

Actually, I think the Rio has a nice sandy beach.