As Judge Approves Stockton Bankruptcy, Krugman Praises California Comeback

The good times are here, y'all!


Does the air on Planet Krugman have higher levels of nitrous oxide than Earth's? I always find myself trying to hold back giggles reading Paul Krugman's columns. When last I touched on him, Krugman was weirdly blaming Hostess' failure on the decline of union power and influence, even though union power most assuredly contributed to the company's downfall.

Now, Krugman wants to tell us what we can learn from California's comeback. Yes, he has bought into that narrative, while at the same time accusing the rest of us of buying into a narrative that the state is going to hell:

Without political opposition, California will no doubt soon be as successful as Detroit!

Again, however, reports of the state's demise proved premature. Unemployment in California remains high, but it's coming down — and there's a projected budget surplus, in part because the implosion of the state's Republican Party finally gave Democrats a big enough political advantage to push through some desperately needed tax increases. Far from presiding over a Greek-style crisis, Gov. Jerry Brown is proclaiming a comeback.

Needless to say, the usual suspects are still predicting doom — this time from the very tax hikes that are closing the budget gap, which they say will cause millionaires and businesses to flee the state. Well, maybe — but serious studies have found very little evidence either that tax hikes cause lots of wealthy people to move or that state taxes have any significant impact on growth.

Well, I'm sure there's some other explanation for the map below, showing the extent of migration from California to other states that have lower taxes. The migration figures from the census end at 2000 (the blue arrows). The state's population was the same by the end growth was modest through 2010, though, and California failed to gain any new Congressional representation:

Red: 1955-1960. Blue: 1995-2000.
Source: U.S. Census

I'm also sure there's some logical reason why immigrants have actually begun spurning Los Angeles that reflects positively on the state, somehow, though I can't think of anything at the moment. Immigrants avoiding your biggest city is one of the top indicators of economic recovery, right? Krugman makes brief mention of California's environmental climate, but oddly, fails to make the connection between environmental regulations and lack of available growth options.

Krugman, like the New Republic, claims the destruction of the state's Republican Party as a source of obstruction is leading to this progressive moment where California will return to its shining glory:

The point, however, is that these problems bear no resemblance to the death-by-liberalism story line the California-bashers keep peddling. California isn't a state in which liberals have run wild; it's a state where a liberal majority has been effectively hamstrung by a fanatical conservative minority that, thanks to supermajority rules, has been able to block effective policy-making.

And that's where things get really interesting — because the era of hamstrung government seems to be coming to an end. Over the years, California's Republicans moved right as the state moved left, yet retained political relevance thanks to their blocking power. But at this point the state's G.O.P. has fallen below critical mass, losing even its power to obstruct — and this has left Mr. Brown free to push an agenda of tax hikes and infrastructure spending that sounds remarkably like the kind of thing California used to do before the rise of the radical right.

There are a lot of what I would call strange omissions if David Dayen hadn't made the same omissions at the New Republic.  Krugman casually dismisses conservative claims that California public employees are overpaid without providing any counter-evidence. Like Dayen, he makes absolutely no mention of the state's pension crisis, which is getting bad enough that the California Public Employee Retirement System is now willing to acknowledge its existence. Those new taxes Krugman declares will move California back in the right direction will in all likelihood end up being used to pay pensions instead. Brown's budget actually doesn't say that much about infrastructure. He's going to release a five-year plan later this year. I can only hope that Krugman isn't counting Brown's ludicrous high-speed rail project as infrastructure. And as the Reason Foundation recently noted, California is actually one of the only states whose highway infrastructure hasn't improved in the past 20 years.

California's economy has its own response to Krugman's column. Today a judge ruled the City of Stockton is eligible for bankruptcy protection.

NEXT: Two Women File to Run for Office in NW Pakistan

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Higher unemployment than the national average every single month since 1992.


    1. I’m old enough to remember when CA had the best economy of earth.

      Thanx a million leftard locusts for killing it.

      1. Don’t fret now, they are trying equally as hard to fairly kill off the economy of the rest of the country. Equality, you know.

    2. And this is with Apple, Google, Silicon Valley, and the web economy of SF. Imagine what their numbers will be like once they’re gone.

      I suspect that Apple’s unnecessarily huge campus under construction in Austin is their backup company headquarters in case CA goes more psycho.

  2. I can’t find the quote right now, but I remember someone on or from this forum aptly characterizing Krugman as a clock that has stopped on a time of day it will never be again.

    1. He’s nothing more than a DNC hack. His only job is to spin information (lie) to make republicans look like they are the sole problem concerning everything that goes wrong in this country. Once you realize that is his only purpose, everything he says makes perfect sense.

  3. …and there’s a projected budget surplus, in part because the implosion of the state’s Republican Party finally gave Democrats a big enough political advantage to push through some desperately needed tax increases.

    Just remember, a grown-ass man said that.

    1. A grown ass-man.

      1. A groaning ass, man.

        1. Man what a groaning ass.

          1. Ass, what a groaning man.

    2. projected budget surplus

      Let me know when the deposit clears the bank.

    3. The man is a walking rebuttal to any claim of prestige from academic credentials. He is the most comprehensively misinformed, self-absorbed, and deluded court astrologer since Keynes.


  4. Krugman is weird.

    He’s like the spirograph guy on The Simpsons. Remember him?

    1. Did you know that there’s a direct correlation between the decline of Spirograph and the rise in gang activity? Think about it.

      1. Best obscure cartoon figure evah!

      2. I will

  5. Why must reason pick on Krugman so? It’s online bullying is what it is.

    1. Given that Krugman once claimed Donald Luskin was stalking him because Luskin wrote mean things about him on the internet, I think Krugman might actually believe that.




    2. If they’re trying to bullycide Krugman, they’re not trying nearly hard enough.

  6. …”a projected budget surplus,”…
    Moonbeam cleaned the change out from under the seat cushions of every sofa in the state, emptied every ’emergency’ fund that exists, got his tax increase passed by some tiny margin, and hopes (HOPES!) the budget might cover the minimum payment due on all the credit cards.
    Yep, a real “comeback”.

    1. Tony-level delusion.

  7. What’s with the infrastructure obsession? It’s like “infrastructure” is code for “please, I’m a super serious pundit who only cares about non-controversial issues!” blah blah blah.

    1. What’s your problem with infrastructure? Why are you against people being able to move and travel? Why do you hate ROADZ!!!

      1. “What’s your problem with infrastructure Union and bundler payoffs? Why are you against people being able to move and travel fleeced? Why do you hate ROADZ Teh Kronyizmz!!!”

        I liked yours as well…

      2. Becuz TRAINZ instead of ROADZ!!!11!


    2. It’s one of the few things that people think government does kinda-sorta OK, so it’s used to justify the other million things government totally fucks up.

      1. I know, but GD it seems like “we” always “need” more infrastructure spending. I guess the billions spent on infrastructure go to hookers and blow.

      2. If government weren’t involved in those other millions things, which they shouldn’t be involved in, then maybe we might be able to afford roads and bridges. Just a thought.

        1. Hyperion, I’ve often wrestled with how the government gets involved in so many things they shouldn’t. But isn’t that the fault of the voter? Is it the people that ask for so much government involvement or is it the other way around?

          1. Check the vid down-thread.
            When the ‘voter’ is the ‘government’, we got problems.

            1. That is a good, though short, video.

              The only thing is, is that if he would have factored in the non-workers who are completely dependent upon government, then we are already a minority, and it’s already too late.

          2. But isn’t that the fault of the voter?

            There’s 2 sides of that coin, of course. Most voters are just ignorant, they don’t know what’s going on, or what the implications of it are. The politicians, on the other hand, do know what’s going on, and what the implications of it are, they are just so greedy and corrupt that they are like addicts, with no self control.

            1. Something about the best argument against democracy is a 5 minute conversation with an average voter.

      3. That is why it gets mentioned so much. Everyone agrees it is not such a bad thing. So lefty always talk about when they are wanting more taxes and such. But when it comes time to spend the money, then they forget about infrastructure and just steal it.

    3. “Infrastructure” sounds better than “payola to aristocracy of government check cashers”.

  8. I like the small arrow going from New York to Cali. It’s just a funny little ray of hope, like “See? We’re not the worst!”

    1. Kinda like Stockton’s slogan:
      “We’re not Fresno!”

  9. Am I the only one who finds Krugman’s writing style annoying? I don’t think it’s because I disagree with him, I honestly think it’s because of the way he strings words together. I can’t put my finger on it. It almost sounds like he knows that the only people reading him already agree with him. Anyone else have this problem?

    1. He’s oppressively snide and every time he writes one of his snarky little rejoinders I feel like I am surrounded by the noise of rustling beard hairs and the steady mewling of overfed cats.

      His writing style is like literary anthrax.

      1. “His writing style is like literary anthrax….angle grinder across the teeth nail gun to the eye and intellect.”

        1. I think you had a winner with “angle grinder across the teeth.” That metaphor made me wince almost as hard as Krugnutz’s writing.

    2. Ooh! Wait a second, I think I can field this one!

      Is it how he sets up any opposing views as the babbling drivel of rabid chimpanzees and follows up with his own pontifications that are always qualified by something-something-SERIOUS-PEOPLE?

      Is that what you find offensive about it?

  10. the era of hamstrung government seems to be coming to an end.

    Here, the mask slips. The ultimate goal of Progressives is to unchain the Leviathan of government under the delusion that its power can never be turned against them.

    1. Worse than Thomas Hobbes.

    2. “under the delusion that its power can never be turned against them.”

      Well, when “Them” are opposite wings of the same basic party…they kinda have a point. You, I, us, we are never “Them”.. and never will be…

      1. Wouldn’t you like to be a pepper too?

    3. That’s because the government will be controlled by them, the victims, the oppressed. The government will finally put an end to evil white male rule, and their greedy corporate machine of oppression.

      Once that comes about, utopia will finally be realized, because the only thing that has ever kept it from magically appearing, is the evil patriarchal and capitalist ways of white males in control.

      Now, there is the entire story behind the progressives way of thought. There really is nothing else to know.

      1. Progtard heaven will some day come. They just know it.

        1. “Progtard heaven will some day come. They just know it.”

          It’s worked out fabulously in Detroit..

    4. Them == The Nomenklatura ?

      1. This is America! We don’t put in for any of that funny Russian talk! We call them the Ruling Class here, led by the glorious god-emperor of America, Imperator Barack I Obama.

    5. The platonic ideal of liberal political thought, such as it is, is to Elect The Right King. They really do not believe in limited government in any way, shape, or form.

      Last week, I was getting into it with someone who made the utterly ridiculous comment that gay marriage is “the civil rights issue of our time” or something to this effect. As in, really? More important than the permanent end of habeas corpus? The poor sap tried gamely to compare it to Lincoln’s Civil War termination of same (gee, there was an actual declared war on), but there was no dissuading him on this point. In many ways, they are the mirror image of the social conservatives: they don’t give a damn about how the things their heroes, er, elected officials might eventually abuse, so long as they’re wearing the right color lapel pin and express sympathy for the right groups.

  11. I was flipping channels this weekend and Krugabe was on one of the news shows. So I listened to him for about five minutes. And while I am doing this I see where Google puts up a picture of Cesar Chavez on Easter. And it really struck me how leftism really is a religion. Krugabe is not dumb. And he is also knowledgeable. But he comes across the same way as someone equally smart and knowledgeable but who is a strict creationist would come across in a scientific debate. Every fact and every perception must be seen through the prism of dogma. For Krugabe the dogma is leftism and a fanatical belief in central planning. When every fact must be either denied or spun to support the dogma, it makes even the most clever person say and do very foolish things. In fact, the more clever a person is, the more foolish they become.

    1. Of course it’s a religion. See my post above.

      Only instead of sin and the devil, and maybe some infidel tribes, it’s white patriarchy and capitalism that are the great enemies keeping them from realizing their paradise.

      And instead of some invisible sky god for the deity, it’s big government by way of socialism.

      And I’m not even condemning religion, except for when, like the proglodytes, they want to force it upon all of us by means of the state.

      1. And what a shitty boring religion it is. It doesn’t even produce great art. And worse still, it completely lacks any sense of humility or faith.

        1. But maybe they will have some good religious holidays.

          They’ll probably replace Easter with Abortion Day.

          1. Abortion Day comes twenty weeks after the Feast of the Immaculate Conception*.

            *Yes, I know that’s not what the IC refers to. Just go with it.

          2. Well, back when the left was about socialism and not so much a vague collectivist and equalizing impulse, Labor Day was essentially the equivalent of a religious holiday. Committed socialists would run out and participate in their party’s marches and activities, rather than rest.

          3. Good holidays?

            Do you like Earth Day? Or perhaps 4 different Earth Days, an Earth Hour, and an Earth Week?

            Itching for a Disabled Lesbian Hindu History month?

        2. We have actually contrived to invent a new kind of hypocrite. The old hypocrite, Tartuffe or Pecksniff, was a man whose aims were really worldly and practical, while he pretended that they were religious. The new hypocrite is one whose aims are really religious, while he pretends that they are worldly and practical.

          — G. K. Chesterton

          1. Great quote

          2. I read every GK Chesterton quote in a Ravi Zacharias accent.

    2. The right cannot accept spontaneous order in biology; the left, in economics.

  12. Got sent the link recently, hadn’t heard of the group, but it’s a good vid on gov’t growth:…..r_embedded

    1. Sevo, this reminds me of a story my brother in law told me yesterday over Easter lunch. He lives in a lovely but tiny town with a very implicated municipality. The other day he notice four reps from the town standing around. He knew one of the guys (who’s a pain in the ass) and asked what was up. He was asked (this is all in French by the way) if he was Italian. He answered yes but was perplexed.

      He was then asked if he was ‘making’ the tomatoes as most I-talians are apt to do – among other things as he explained. But again he was perplexed.

      He wasn’t making any (he’s useless with his food and my sister is too busy – our mothers are a different matter) but he knew his neighbours did – they are incidentally Italian. However, he didn’t reveal that to the communists.

      Rather he wanted to know what was the problem.

      Seems they were concerned at the splotches of tomatoes on the street that could lead to tomatoes growing everywhere.

      My brother in law was stunned at the stupidity. He explained to them this is Quebec where the climate isn’t conducive to tomato growing. There are no blueberry or strawberry fields growing freely here. The seeds will not lead to fucking tomatoes growing idiots.

      All this to say, the guy spearheading the expedition? He makes $100 000 a year working four days. Who knows what the other three earn. Urban planners in the municipality I own my business earn $70 000 and they’re rude as fucks.

      Just a story I thought fit in with the narrative here.

      1. He ‘noticed’ and ‘He’s bad with food.’ Not ‘his’ food.

      2. “All this to say, the guy spearheading the expedition? He makes $100 000 a year working four days”

        Not sure what he does qualifies as “work”.

  13. When last I touched on him

    I hope you were extra drunk Shackford.

    1. When last I touched on him

      I hope you were extra drunk Shackford.

      …And washed up thoroughly afterwards…

  14. I read something very interesting this weekend I had never heard. In between 1917 and 1920, there was a great inflation, nearly 20% per year. Meanwhile, wages barely moved. Essentially all of the wealth the country had built after the civil war evaporated in a great inflation. The average income adjusted for inflation in 1919 was about what it was in 1866. Wilson and his fellow progtards essentially pissed away an entire generation of wealth.

    1. Wasn’t the fed established in 1913?

    2. “Wilson and his fellow progtards essentially pissed away an entire generation of wealth.”

      And properly sullied the progressive brand for ~70-80 years, worthy of ridicule and derision, until some fools resurrected it, and rinsed it off and foisted it upon us again…

      1. It was after Wilson that progressives hijacked the term “liberal” from classical liberals, only to abandon it in the ’80s after they stunk that one up, too.

  15. “I always find myself trying to hold back giggles reading Paul Krugman’s columns.”

    Krugman’s one of those people who have emerged as something like a professional straw man.

    Ann Coulter does the same kind of thing, just on different issues and coming from the right.

    The idea of a professional straw man is that you actually advocate all the things the other side accuses you of believing secretly. In the past, that would draw charges of beating up a straw man, but with a professional straw man like Krugman living out in the open and reveling in his role, there’s no reason to level that charge anymore…

    On the left, now, Krugman is a respected professional straw man.

    We could pick almost any random position–no matter how absurd–and start accusing the left of believing it secretly, and in a matter of weeks, Krugman would publish a column advocating precisely that position.

    1. “We could pick almost any random position–no matter how absurd–and start accusing the left of believing it secretly, and in a matter of weeks, Krugman would publish a column advocating precisely that position.”

      Just make sure it’s about economics.

      1. I wouldn’t have believed they’d be openly advocating for printing money, and a Bush-style check from the gov, but, well, there’s Matt Yglesias at slate.

        Time to pick up some bitcoins.

        1. Yeah, the fear I’d always heard about bit coins was: 1) They could lose their value quickly if the market for them dried up, and 2) They can be stolen by hackers and malware and such…

          On the other hand, holding U.S. dollars isn’t without its risks, too. They could also lose their value quickly, and they can be stolen by politicians and governments and such…

          I think, too, that the spike in bitcoin prices should indicate that a lot of the support for the U.S. dollar is, likewise, tied to people’s anxiety about holding other world currencies.

          The U.S. dollar may be the prettiest horse in the glue factory, but, sooner or later, people elsewhere in the world are gonna notice that we’re waiting in line to be slaughtered.

          1. Pretty much. Cyprus should be a wake up call, and I think it will be, eventually.

            I went to wiki to brush up on financial repression. Four of five points satisfied. It’s like looking at the planks of the communist manifesto.

            1. Is capital controls the only one you don’t see?

              1. Yup. Granted, there is the 10k reporting cap, and getting chuck Schumer talking about you by name on Sunday morning talk shows…

                But it seems like it isn’t an explicit one.

          2. It won’t be too long, at all, before you start hearing politicians, here in the US making serious suggestions that our government should follow the lead of Cyprus, because greedy people don’t want to pay their fair share, and that if we don’t do it, there will be another sequester and this time, for real, millions of children will die in the streets.

            I guarantee we will hear this from politicians on the left before this year is over. Those on the right would never dare say this, they will just vote for it and hope no one notices when/if it comes up for a vote, instead of moving through some form of executive emergency order.

            1. Just like in California, they won’t cut spending until they’ve exhausted every way possible to come after our money.

              1. They’re watching Cyprus very closely right now. If they don’t see many pols swinging from light posts soon, that will be the cue to move on to slightly bigger economy and try it again.

            2. Count on it. They’ll be coming for 401Ks, bank deposits, anything they can get their hands on.

              See Executive Order 6102. Strange how I was never taught that in school.

    2. Question: is this Slate article an April Fool’s gag? Or real Paul Krugman advice?

  16. OT: Detroit community activists stay classy.

    One is under indictment for ripping off local schools, but the money quote comes from the other:

    Meanwhile, activist Malik Shabazz sought to present Oreo cookies to Orr, Bing and council President Pro Tem Gary Brown at City Hall on Monday, saying the cookies are “black on the outside, white on the inside?. You don’t do anything to hurt the majority population of our city.”

    1. If only Detroit hadn’t suffered the last three decades of rule by white Republicans!

      1. Four decades, almost. Starting with the administration of white Republican Coleman A. Young on January 1, 1974.

      2. The Mayor has been a Democrat since 1962.

        1. Might be some sarcasm up there…

  17. Stockton bankruptcy can move lean forward, judge rules


  18. This is what the other economists of the world did to Krugman.

  19. 2. Op-Ed columnist Paul Krugman has the disturbing habit of shaping, slicing and selectively citing numbers in a fashion that pleases his acolytes but leaves him open to substantive assaults. Maureen Dowd was still writing that Alberto R. Gonzales “called the Geneva Conventions ‘quaint’ ” nearly two months after a correction in the news pages noted that Gonzales had specifically applied the term to Geneva provisions about commissary privileges, athletic uniforms and scientific instruments. Before his retirement in January, William Safire vexed me with his chronic assertion of clear links between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein, based on evidence only he seemed to possess.

    No one deserves the personal vituperation that regularly comes Dowd’s way, and some of Krugman’s enemies are every bit as ideological (and consequently unfair) as he is. But that doesn’t mean that their boss, publisher Arthur O. Sulzberger Jr., shouldn’t hold his columnists to higher standards.

    – Former New York Times Public Editor Daniel Okrent on New York Times Op-Ed writers

    1. I learned early on in this job that Prof. Krugman would likely be more willing to contribute to GOP Senator Frist for President campaign than to acknowledge the possibility of error. When he says he agreed ‘reluctantly’ to one correction, he gives new meaning to the word ‘reluctantly.’ I can’t come up with an adverb sufficient to encompass his general attitude towards substantive criticism.

      – Also Daniel Okrent.

      1. *almost* channeling Mencken there.

        “… Adverb sufficient to encompass his general attitude towards substantive criticism.”

        Must be NYT-editor-speak for “Christ, what an asshole”

        1. Let’s not get ahead of ourselves.

          Here is something that the psychologists have so far neglected: the love of ugliness for its own sake, the lust to make the world intolerable. Its habitat is the United States. Out of the melting pot emerges a race which hates beauty as it hates truth.

          No one has ever written an insult like Mencken, no one will ever write an insult like Mencken.

      2. I can’t come up with an adverb sufficient to encompass his general attitude towards substantive criticism.

        Petulant child comes to mind.

  20. Sometimes man, you jsut have to smack dat ass!

    1. Exactly Sump, Krugman has been bad and needs to be punished. Preferably with a cricket bat.

      1. It seems like you can’t insult someone without making it sound like a weird S&M thing.

        Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

        1. When else have I done this?

          1. My god, he doesn’t even realize he’s doing it.


            1. Oh dear, maybe I have a problem.

              1. Oh dear, maybe I have a problem.

                How do you not see that, Jesse? This whole sentence is just perverse.

                I come to Reason for some good, clean discussions about ethics and religion, and you just keep smutting it up all the time.

                1. Hmph, smutting up the place is entirely different than making every insult sound like an S&M thing.

                  In that vein, I’d like to apologize to Jon Hamm for comments I made yesterday about his terrifying trouser snake.

                  Jon Hamm is apparently not amused.

                  1. HOLY SHIT!

                    I didn’t realize what you were talking about when you mentioned his penis yesterday. That is one impossibly large bulge.

                    1. I did not need to see that.

                    2. Yeah, I wasn’t going to post an image so reasonable users wouldn’t be in the line of fire for Jon Hamm’s assault penis, but since you’ve already popped that cherry, THIS is just absurd.

                    3. One should always use good judgment and restraint before clicking on any links here. Let’s call it the Warty rule. I won’t click on any links here when at work, even if they promise they are a link to cute fuzzy little kittens playing in an Easter basket. Well, especially not then.

                    4. Dude needs to invest in some underwear…I can’t imagine the chafing.

  21. Krugman is just a paid mouthpiece for the progressive school of economic thought.

    We don’t have a spending problem. The problem is that we haven’t spent enough. That’s always the underlying message of everything that he says. It’s pure bullshit, of course. How can anyone even do the mental contortions necessary to convince themselves that being trillions of dollars in debt, with no end in sight, is a good thing?

    1. the progressive school of economic thought.

      There is no such thing. There is the Keynsian charade of bequeathing academic approval of looting.


  22. California is a joke

  23. Tom Green and Norm MacDonald are killing it.

    1. Neither of them are dead?

      1. Together they have 3 balls

        1. Carolla has 3 all by himself, and that’s 3 more than all of Congress combined.

          Ok, it’s only 1 more. I give Rand Paul and Justin Amash, one ball rating each. So that’s 2 balls for all of Congress.

          1. Carolla is funny, but not in the same way Norm MacDonald is funny. Pair Norm with Tom Green, and you have a comedy explosion.

            1. Maybe, but I would give a lot of money to see Carolla in Congress, in a televised debate. That would probably be the funniest shit any of us will ever see. I can just hear him now, ‘You bunch of fucking pussies!’

  24. Interestingly, the State now has a net worth $-127.2 Billion…. negative. I don’t know how that is even possible.

    “About half of the $127.2 billion in accumulated red ink came from the state’s issuing general obligation bonds and then giving the money to local governments and school districts for public works projects, the auditor pointed out. The assets built with the bonds remain on local balance sheets while the bonded debt accrues to the state.
    The remainder, however, is all on the state’s ticket. “Expenses that exceeded revenues and increased long-term obligations resulted in an 81.4 percent decrease in the total net assets for governmental and business-type activities from the 20-10-11 fiscal year,” said the report.”…..rylink=cpy

    1. Citing a figure for the net worth of a government makes me wonder what is being counted as assets…

      1. And how much of the “assets” are valued in real terms rather than highly inflated. You have to suspect Land is included in assets. Not to mention the incredibly rosy Revenue Projections.

    2. Damn, I knew I was forgetting a piece of horrible California news. There’s just so much of it I always miss something.

  25. Brown’s budget actually doesn’t say that much about infrastructure.

    That’s because he expects people to turn in their cars and travel down highway 5 in bikes and scooters. No, really.

    He’s going to release a five-year plan later this year.

    What’s with socialists and their love affair with 5-year plants???

    I can only hope that Krugman isn’t counting Brown’s ludicrous high-speed rail project as infrastructure.

    Hope springs eternal.

    1. What’s with socialists and their love affair with 5-year plants???

      You see, socialists are so inefficient, that it takes them 5 years to grow a plant. While most of it can do it in only a few months!

    2. Chicken-shits can’t even come up with a Thousand-Year Plan.

  26. Honestly, if you live in california there’s really nothing to worry about. They are currently max-taxing and can’t inflate away their own debt. It’s just going to be fun to watch the state govt employees scream bloody murder while the rest of the state continues normally.

  27. I’m glad the Dems have taken over California and the socialists have taken over France. Lets get this shit party started! If it works, I will gladly admit I was wrong. I just can’t wait to hear what the excuse from Krugs is when it crashes and burns.

    1. “I did not advocate for inflating a housing bubble, and I have always been against Martian invasions, and I was never interested in single Democratic rule and max-tax in California…”

    2. You won’t be admitting to anything, and neither will Krugman. Only for different reasons.

  28. The migration figures from the census end at 2000 (the blue arrows). The state’s population was the same by the end of 2010, though, and failed to gain any new Congressional representation:

    Well, no. If the population had stagnated from 2000 to 2010, CA would have LOST an assload of congressional seats. The no change in seats means the population grew at around the U.S. average:…..population of california

    1. Amended. It’s always the stuff I toss in during the editing phase that gets me in trouble.

    2. Seems like an arrow from south of the border is missing on the diagram.

  29. Let’s go camping.

  30. Can’t we just ban it , to be safe?

    1. Gah, screaming children. Yes, ban them.

  31. Paul Krugman in 1998: Internet will have no Greater Econ Impact than Fax Machines by 2005.

    1. Okay, okay, we get it. Paul Krugman is an unrepentant idiot.

  32. Lindsay Lohan
    Its official. Pregnant…

  33. “there’s a projected budget surplus”

    Pink ponies for everyone, straight out of Moonbeam’s rear.

  34. Paul Krugman is awesome, California is awesome, Arnold Schwarzenegger is awesome.

  35. Gotta love those kangaroo court judges lol.

  36. I am trying to plan my exit out of Maryland…

    But this map has deflated me a little bit. All of the Southern states I would consider have too much blue line for my liking.

  37. I always find myself trying to hold back giggles reading Paul Krugman’s columns.

    Why do people read Paul Krugman’s columns? I read a lot of pundit-shit, but avoid his like the plague. I already know what he’s going to say on any given subject, so why wallow in it? Its like walking by dog shit on the street, you know it stinks from fifty feet away – why walk up and stick your nose in it?

    Reflecting on that further, Krugman is kind of the left’s Ann Coulter – detractors love to hate them much as fans love to like them. Its a great niche that always guarantees somebody gives a shit what you say, even if they don’t like it. And what’s more important for any of these succubi than an audience of any kind?

    Every time people read and respond to Krugman’s articles, they’re inadvertently feeding perhaps the most successful troll in all the intertubes.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.