Meet Your Next. U.S. President

[Dinner]

Anyways, as for debt, most of the debt in TX is actually local, whereas California's is state.

That's just dumb since the state can borrow money more cheaply then a city can. In Texas local property taxes pay for the schools where as in California the state pays all the school costs. Since the state can borrow more cheaply then a city the result is lower costs over all. Now that is what I call responsible government.

[Ben Kenobi]

I agree with you that the market thinks Texas is a ****ty state to live in.

So you'd rather pay a lower rate on a higher valuation than a higher rate on a lower valuation? Makes no sense to me.

But that's good. You stay where you are.

[Asher]

So you'd rather pay a lower rate on a higher valuation than a higher rate on a lower valuation? Makes no sense to me.

But that's good. You stay where you are.

I am not in California. Dolt.

I actively reject any solicitations for jobs from either Texas or California.

[Ben Kenobi]

That's just dumb since the state can borrow money more cheaply then a city can.

Yeah, but the state isn't willing to fund boondoggles like Houston, etc. So rather then dragging the whole state down, they let Houston, etc, bust their own budgets.

In Texas local property taxes pay for the schools where as in California the state pays all the school costs.

The result is that TX schools are actually better funded than their counterparts in CA.

Since the state can borrow more cheaply then a city the result is lower costs over all. Now that is what I call responsible government.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/10/california-budget-deficit_n_781848.html

Uh, not when your deficit is 30 percent.

CA had a 45.5 billion dollar deficit in FY 2010. 45! That's triple the TX deficit.

[Asher]

Uh, not when your deficit is 30 percent.

CA had a 45.5 billion dollar deficit in FY 2010. 45! That's triple the TX deficit.

The TX deficit is either $15B or $27B, depending on if you are doing honest accounting or PR accounting. Guess which is which?

California has 12M more people.

[Ben Kenobi]

The TX deficit is either $15B or $27B, depending on if you are doing honest accounting or PR accounting. Guess which is which?

California has 12M more people.

And you're telling me that CAs for this year is at 19?

Wait a year, then we'll get the real numbers.

[Tupac Shakur]

Seriously:

Someone convince me that the United States is in better shape than Canada. Fiscally, politically, internationally, etc. Go.

It's not hard to make the case internationally (Canada doesn't matter much internationally), but it's nearly impossible to make the case fiscally or politically.

Simply put, the United States is the more important country, while Canada is the better-run country.

[Ben Kenobi]

The TX deficit is either $15B or $27B, depending on if you are doing honest accounting or PR accounting. Guess which is which?

Who's reporting 27? I'm seeing 10 for FY 2012, which isn't great, but not in the same league as CA's 45.5 billion dollars.

[Asher]

It's not hard to make the case internationally (Canada doesn't matter much internationally), but it's nearly impossible to make the case fiscally or politically.

Simply put, the United States is the more important country, while Canada is the better-run country.

You may've misinterpreted him.

Not everyone thinks it's a great idea to be the single biggest target in the world. Canada actually benefits tremendously from the lower profile and better reputation. For instance, cheap-ass vacations in Cuba.

[Dinner]

Sure, but they collect quite a bit less than CA, which has a lower rate but massive valuation.

Are you really this stupid. It's taxes paid as a percentage of income. Guess what? Californians make a lot more then Texans both on average and on median. That's why taxes paid as a percentage of income is with in two percentage points between the two states. Please try to use your brain just a little bit. We're talking percentages here.

[Docfeelgood]

I love Texas, it is a very beautiful state. I hate the politics and the ****ing politicians who make it hard to live here.

[Ben Kenobi]

Someone convince me that the United States is in better shape than Canada. Fiscally, politically, internationally, etc. Go.

Fiscally:

The population of the United States is the youngest in the developed world. Canada's population curve is good compared to Europe, but not nearly as good at the US. This means that in 30 years, when all the other states are crushed by their debt and pension obligations, the US will still be chugging along.

Debtwise, it's been a real change under the Obama administration, where Debt/GDP has risen from 60 percent up to 98 in just 2 and a half years. But Obama's not going to stay in power forever. Americans are wealther than Canadians, more productive than Canadians, and that's not taking into account economies of scale that raise American standard of living higher than Canadian's equivalent.

Guy, where I lived in rural Canada, I was 500 miles from the nearest MRI. You have better care facilities. You, as a doctor, make more than your Canadian counterparts. You have more employment options rather then just living in one of the big cities, you have more opportunities within 1000 miles than in all of Canada.

You don't have to speak french.

[Asher]

Who's reporting 27? I'm seeing 10 for FY 2012, which isn't great, but not in the same league as CA's 45.5 billion dollars.

http://frontburner.dmagazine.com/2011/01/12/texas-budget-deficit-15-billion-or-27-billion/

Texas Budget Deficit: $15 Billion or $27 Billion?
Posted on January 12th, 2011 12:28pm by Wick Allison
Filed under Economy

We used the $27 billion figure, which the always perspicuous Glenn Hunter challenged in the comments. Yesterday the News‘ Robert Garrett used the $15 billion number. Today the News’ Christy Hoppe uses the $27 billion number.

So which is right? Short answer: both. Here’s how Senator John Carona explains it:

The $15 billion shortfall number is calculated by subtracting the Comptroller’s available general revenue estimate of $72.2 billion for the 2012-13 biennial budget from the $87 billion 2010-11 biennial budget adopted in 2009. The higher shortfall numbers are calculated by factoring in anticipated increases in program costs associated with growth in population and the cost of goods and services. For example, there are estimated to be 80,000 new students in the public school system that the budget from last session does not take into account.

In Garrett’s piece, whose information seems to have come from the always What?-Me-No-Worry office of the governor and from State Rep. Talmage Heflin, only the revenue portion of the budget seems to be considered. Heflin dismisses the $27 billion, which was calculated by the liberal Center for Public Policy Priorities. (You can see their calculation here.) Heflin backtracked on that when called by Politifact, which analyzed the Center’s analysis and decided that Heflin’s dismissal was factually “false.” Its summary is useful.

The reason is that the Comptroller only estimates revenue. She cannot estimate what the Legislature will spend. (And she is probably a little gunshy on the revenue, since she overestimated by $4.2 billion for the current budget; her $15 billion shortfall may only be $13 billion.)

The problem on the expense side is growth. One example, as cited by Senator Carona, is the increase in schoolchildren. Texas grew at roughly 2 percent a year during the last decade. Using the same rate of growth, we will have added some added some 2,300,000 new Texans by 2013. That’s more people requiring state services like the DMV, etc. Cut state agencies by 7 percent, as the governor has done, and you’ve effectively cut by 14 percent because not only are you serving few people but you’re also not serving all the new people either. In other words, Texas is far from keeping up with its growth.

Maybe that’s the way it should be done. But the Legislature will have to make those choices, not only only in current spending but in future spending to handle the new influx.

So, to recap: The revenue shortfall is probably $13 billion. However, the amount the Legislature will have to cut, rejiggle, fix, and raise revenue for is closer to $25 billion.

As one commenter put it in an earlier discussion, every businessman knows that success requires cash. The faster the growth, the more cash is required. This is the paradox of business growth, and the reason most successful businesses find themselves scrambling to raise capital. In this case, what’s true for business is true for government. Texas has to deal with its success. How it deals with it will determine whether it thrives or whether that success is short-lived.

[Dinner]

Who's reporting 27? I'm seeing 10 for FY 2012, which isn't great, but not in the same league as CA's 45.5 billion dollars.

You're completely out to lunch on your numbers. We're talking about half that amount and ONLY if they stupidly lower taxes again by removing 2% off of the state sales tax. For the love of god, Ben, stop just making stuff up.

[Tupac Shakur]

Canada actually benefits tremendously from the lower profile and better reputation.

Canada benefits because its big brother to the south uses its leverage to shape the international system in a way that generally benefits both countries. Canada can achieve very little on its own, because it's not that important.