California has a budget surplus?

[DC]

Fair enough. I stand corrected. I've been focusing too much on the Grover Norquist and his GOP sycophants who demand no tax rate increases. I'll concede the point but somehow I don't think austerity means tax rate increases to the GOP. I've not seen many other than eeyore who have been willing to consider them. But there have been a few. Not the Norquist fan boys though.

Let me make sure no one is thinking I've moved the goal posts. I accept your wiki as source and I accept the premise. I was wrong and I apologize.

Thanks DC.

debates about Austerity are often very laughable, like in the media. often they fail to talk about it in a meaningfull way, ist often presented as, im for Austerity or im against Austerity. yet often they don't talk about the Details like, what spending do you want to cut? or who's taxes do you want to rse and how much. i think that is the main reason why Austerity is such a strange Topic.
it seems more like a curse word

 

[Puppycow]

" And its returns in the first six months of its current fiscal year were 7.1%, slightly below the 7.5% it had assumed it would gain for the full fiscal year."

Which means they're still falling further behind, they'd have to get 7.9% the rest of the year to catch up.

It means they're most of the way there already in only 6 months. They only need another 0.4% to get there. They will probably exceed the estimate if current market trends continue.

The S&P 500 is up over 13% YTD.

 

[Newtons Bit]

Don't forget the tax increases.

Is this some childish game. I posted the OP. I know what it says. And BTW, I have consistently conceded we need spending cuts AND tax rate increases. I have consistently reported on the GOP plan of 2010 that calls for both so I don't know why you are making a deal about spending cuts. I'm not opposed to them. I've said over and over we need both.

And yet you glossed over it in your reply.

 

[A'isha]

Damn that austerity.

If they haven't fixed their pension mess they don't really have a surplus.

And since when doesn't tax increases count as austerity?

" And its returns in the first six months of its current fiscal year were 7.1%, slightly below the 7.5% it had assumed it would gain for the full fiscal year."

Which means they're still falling further behind, they'd have to get 7.9% the rest of the year to catch up.

So, are California's austerity measures working, or are they not working?

 

[RandFan]

And yet you glossed over it in your reply.

What?

 

[RandFan]

So, are California's austerity measures working, or are they not working?

We need to figure out what is the most politically advantageous.

 

[RandFan]

Fair enough. I stand corrected. I've been focusing too much on the Grover Norquist and his GOP sycophants who demand no tax rate increases. I'll concede the point but somehow I don't think austerity means tax rate increases to the GOP. I've not seen many other than eeyore who have been willing to consider them. But there have been a few. Not the Norquist fan boys though.

Let me make sure no one is thinking I've moved the goal posts. I accept your wiki as source and I accept the premise. I was wrong and I apologize.

Thanks DC.

I don't expect Newton to respond to me so can someone else tell me how this is glossing over anything?

 

[Newtons Bit]

I don't expect Newton to respond to me so can someone else tell me how this is glossing over anything?

All you have to do is look at the timestamps and you'll see!

 

[lomiller]

Perhaps RandFan has forgotten the last time he posted about California's phantom surplus? But hey, who am I to rain on the Democrats in Cali's parade. I suggest they spend the money on the rapid rail project. Bound to work out for them.

Californians have consistently paid considerably more in Federal taxes than they received back in services over the last 2 decades so it doesn’t matter if rapid rail is paid for by the State or by the Federal Government, it’s still their money...

 

[RandFan]

All you have to do is look at the timestamps and you'll see!

Oy vey. I have argued in good faith. When shown wrong I owned up to it and apologized.

Question is still there for anyone else who wants to take me to task. Anyone?

 

[RandFan]

Californians have consistently paid considerably more in Federal taxes than they received back in services over the last 2 decades so it doesn’t matter if rapid rail is paid for by the State or by the Federal Government, it’s still their money...

Thank you.

Red States Feed at Federal Trough, Blue States Supply the Feed

 

[RandFan]

All you have to do is look at the timestamps and you'll see!

One more thing, who was it that glossed over the fact that tax rate increases were part of our economic recovery? Hmmmm..... Who glossed over the fact that the GOP has taken a vow to king Norquist to never raise taxes? Yes, tax increases are part of the wiki definition. They most certainly have NOTHING to do with GOP philosophy of austerity. But I'm guessing you won't be owning up to those facts anytime soon, am I right?

 

[Newtons Bit]

One more thing, who was it that glossed over the fact that tax rate increases were part of our economic recovery? Hmmmm..... Who glossed over the fact that the GOP has taken a vow to king Norquist to never raise taxes? Yes, tax increases are part of the wiki definition. They most certainly have NOTHING to do with GOP philosophy of austerity. But I'm guessing you won't be owning up to those facts anytime soon, am I right?

You appear to be arguing against a giant straw man. Maybe you should reread my posts in this thread.

 

[RandFan]

You appear to be arguing against a giant straw man. Maybe you should reread my posts in this thread.

I think you should reread your posts. No one prior to your quip about spending cuts argued that spending cuts were bad. No one. That was the giant straw man.

 

[Newtons Bit]

I think you should reread your posts. No one prior to your quip about spending cuts argued that spending cuts were bad. No one. That was the giant straw man.

I didn't argue that spending cuts were bad. Nor that the tax increases were bad.

 

[RandFan]

Perhaps RandFan has forgotten the last time he posted about California's phantom surplus? But hey, who am I to rain on the Democrats in Cali's parade. I suggest they spend the money on the rapid rail project. Bound to work out for them.

First, if you look at the OP I put the title in the form of a question mark. I was sincerely skeptical. Perhaps you forgot the thread title. It's at the top of the page in the OP. Here, let me post it so you can see:

California has a budget surplus?

I don't know that we do or will have a surplus by years end. It looks promising though. And I think it worth pointing out. But if attacking me personally boosts your ego then I guess that's what you are going to do.

 

[RandFan]

I didn't argue that spending cuts were bad.

No one has said or implied that you argued that spending cuts were bad. You implied that spending cuts were good. Remember?

Don't forget the spending cuts!

 

[Newtons Bit]

No one has said or implied that you argued that spending cuts were bad. You implied that spending cuts were good. Remember?

Err, no. I see nothing in that sentence that refers to them being good or bad. Only that they HAPPENED.

 

[RandFan]

Err, no. I see nothing in that sentence that refers to them being good or bad. Only that they HAPPENED.

That's dishonest. Why did you ask me to remember them? To what end? There must have been some reason to ask me to remember them, right? Are you for or against spending cuts? Is there no inference I can draw? If not then what was your point?

 

[Newtons Bit]

That's dishonest. Why did you ask me to remember them? To what end? There must have been some reason to ask me to remember them, right? Are you for or against spending cuts? Is there no inference I can draw? If not then what was your point?

Dishonest? My point was that it happened. Did it not happen?