Ronald Reagan Day declared in CA

[srellim234]

For those of you who still refer to Jerry Brown as "Governor Moonbeam" and continue to fail to grasp that his tenure this period as governor has been markedly better this time around, this one's for you:

http://ktla.com/2018/02/06/gov-brown-de ... -birthday/

I don't agree with him on everything but I must admit he's not the wacko he used to be. There has even been some bipartisanship and occasional fiscal sanity. And that's coming from my Republican state representative's letters to his constituents..

[Bubba1]

I remember him from the 70's. Brown, (and California itself I suppose)has always had passionate haters over the years, but it does appear he's learned a few lessons from his time as "Governor Moonbeam". I confess as an east coaster, I've never really cared about California state politics, but I did watch an interview he did recently. He seemed more pragmatic than I remember. I guess 40 years will do that. I also understand California is doing better fiscally during his current term, even to the point of a big budget surplus? Of course, whether he had anything to do with that I have no idea. Did he?

[srellim234]

He lucked out in that he didn't have to deal with recessions like his last two predecessors did but he has kept things under control for the most part. When he came in he cut spending and has tried to make sure we have at minimum a balanced budget. We were in a deep financial hole back then then so we voted a tax increase to help with the recovery as long as it wasn't going to get squandered this time. With a healthy economy here we have outperformed the country but the Republicans in Washington are hellbent to destroy anything Democratic, even if it works, so our future is uncertain.

Yes, we are now looking at multibillion surpluses. Brown wants to sock some of it away as future recession proofing. Democrats in the state legislature are already pushing to blow it on bigger social programs. The Republicans want to just give it all back in the form of refunds to the people and still not have a "rainy day" emergency fund or plan.

Now if we could only get him to give up on that ridiculous, unneeded and for the most part unwanted bullet train. They need to use that money to start fixing potholes. We need to improve our water situation, too. Last year was just a temporary reprieve from the 7 years of drought. It's back.

[krimsonviper]

I wouldn't say the bullet train is unwanted, but compared to the infrastructure fixes and upgrades its less wanted. I would like to hit up SoCal easily rather than a plane or six hour drive. We need to help flood proof areas that will be coming with rising tides in the coming decades.

I really want the cap and trade program nerfed and back to traditional regulations, but I have a feeling it's here to stay. Maybe the revamp to the system will fix the problems it has.

I'm not a big fan of the parks the gov't is trying to put up, but I am for the saving of the environment. I wish those two weren't always tied together. I understand parks are nice for the inner city communities, but that money can be spent elsewhere like education, or just the surplus for when the economy tanks again, which will happen.

I don't know of Brown's history. Nor am I fan of Reagan.

[srellim234]

I'd like to be able to get elsewhere more quickly too, without the hassle of the airport, but the bullet train mess is already over budget and all studies have indicated that it will never be cost effective to operate. The only people who will ever be able to ride it will be people like lobbyists and top business people while the public will still have to subsidize it.

Add to it the problems that are causing the hassle at the airport. A terrorlst can easily bomb or sabotage a high speed train. Soon after the train begins operations you will be going through the same screening you go through now at the airport. Fortunately my wife and I are retired so we're not in a hurry to get anywhere anymore; we'll stick with our Prius for the long drives.

You should take a look at Jerry Brown's life. Very interesting. He was a very liberal governor the first time around, the son of a long-time liberal governor. He was dating rock star Linda Ronstadt when he was elected the first time and there was speculation she'd become California's First Lady.

He became mayor of Oakland before he became governor this time and declared as mayor he was too old to be obstinate and stuck on unattainable pipe dreams rather than actually accomplishing things anymore.

There's a ton more to his life. It's worth a read when you have the time.

[telcoman]

Telcoman

[centralcoaster33]

I feel like I can't afford Jerry Brown much longer. Nothing but the most expensive, ahem I mean, the finest solutions to California's 'problems'. Between him and Feinstein's fossilized logic, CA is far from progressive. It's just edgy, experimental and expensive.

I'm sure he's had an interesting life.

[srellim234]

Jerry Brown is out with the election this fall. The problem is that we could well wind up with someone even more liberal and expensive like Gavin Newsome. The other side of the coin is that the Republicans may put up a far right wing nut. Even if the Republicans put up a reasonable moderate there's virtually zero chance of the Republican winning due to the backlash against Trump and the Republicans in Washington.

Now that my wife and I are retired we're starting our search for a different state. We'll make the move in 3 or 4 years, after our youngest is out of high school and gets settled into college life. Going to a state with no income tax and a lower sales tax will save us over $1200 a month. That's huge when your income is fixed on pensions and Social Security.

[Bubba1]

just curious, which states are you looking at for retirement?

[srellim234]

We're really open since we have family in CA, UT, CO, IL, TX, GA, TN and NC. Also, our son and his wife inherited a house in TX so they'll be moving there in a couple of years. One thing we don't want to do is get isolated like my wife's older sister from her adopted family. They went to NC and the siblings are all still in CA.

We'd like to get relatively centered or else get close to the relatives we interact the most with that will be around for a while. We were looking to SD for financial reasons but the annual climate put the brakes to that. My wife has rheumatoid arthritis and I have regular arthritis in my knees.

If we had to pick today we'd most likely go with Laughlin, NV for the combination of taxes and climate as well as knowing the area well. My best friend and golf partner is across the river in Bullhead City and I-40 is there for us to get to anyone. We also are attracted to St. George or Salem in UT. Other possibilities right now would be Grand Junction or Arvada, CO. We're closest with the family and friends in the western states.

A lot can change in the next four years so we can be patient with our choice. It helps that our current house is worth $400k, too.

[srellim234]

Just for kicks I filled out the 10-question "Where is your best place to live?" survey at Sperling's Best Places.

https://www.bestplaces.net/fybp/

It wasn't too far off but it was missing a few important questions. According to them our place is Logan, UT. Anyone else try that survey?

[krimsonviper]

I dunno if terrorism is a huge concern about bombing the train. There's already Amtrak and I haven't heard much about that.

[srellim234]

When we start approaching 200 mph trains bombing will be. Damage the track or otherwise derail a car at 200 mph and you wipe out the whole train.

[srellim234]

Hopefully someone wakes up and "derails" this bullet train nightmare before it goes further into development or implementation. The rail authority just released some new figures. $77 billion, an increase of $13 billion from their estimate just two years ago. That means a $43 billion funding gap, more than half the project? The earliest trains would operate only on a partially built system starting in 2029, five years later than previously estimated.

http://ktla.com/2018/03/09/cost-for-cal ... 3-billion/

It's a hair-brained idea that needs to be stopped and the sooner the better.

[Bubba1]

Just for kicks I filled out the 10-question "Where is your best place to live?" survey at Sperling's Best Places.

https://www.bestplaces.net/fybp/

It wasn't too far off but it was missing a few important questions. According to them our place is Logan, UT. Anyone else try that survey?

I just took it. It suggested Rochester NY. Uh, no.

[srellim234]

It's entertaining but I certainly wouldn't give it any weight in my decision.

[telcoman]

I feel like I can't afford Jerry Brown much longer. Nothing but the most expensive, ahem I mean, the finest solutions to California's 'problems'. Between him and Feinstein's fossilized logic, CA is far from progressive. It's just edgy, experimental and expensive.

I'm sure he's had an interesting life.

I guess you don't like budget surpluses?

Take a look at Kansas and what the republicans did to that states budget.
The party of fiscal responsibility.

Jerry Brown’s Legacy: A $6.1 Billion Budget Surplus in California
The governor hopes to avoid the fate of predecessors who left office with big deficits

https://www.wsj.com/articles/jerry-brow ... m=referral

Telcoman

[srellim234]

The governor hopes to avoid the big deficits of his predecessors but with things like his bullet train to nowhere he won't. Well, he might because he is kicking that $50 billion shortfall on that one project alone down the road for a future governor and state legislature to deal with.

As I stated in my first post of this thread, he's been much better than he was during his first stint as governor. He could still do better.