Arnold says "you're terminated" to state employees, Controller says no

[scottmandue]

Of course you guys realize the people that got laid off were the bottom of the feeding chain, the worker bees if you will.

Government is notoriously top heavy but start cutting management (and their much larger paychecks), noooooooooooo we couldn't do that!

Come to think of it with these layoffs the managers and supervisors will have less people to look after.

If Arhnold really wanted to make a change he would start cutting people at the top of the ladder not the bottom.

[VaSteve]

In any organization, the worker bees are expendable. Sad but true.
However, laying people off is almost always a short term solution. Once you lay them off, watch what doesn't get done.

[Hugh R]

VASH,

You're not on the bridge on I-5 across Magic Mountain Parkway down here in Valencia? They've been widening it and lengthening it, and paving it for about six years, continuously. It only goes across a four lane wide road.

[Tobra]

THe budget has a lot of mandated spending, automatic increase in education budgets

Problems on the income side too. Businesses fleeing due to the anti business climate, lot of people using infrastructure and not contributing to the cost(the millions of illegal immigrant's kids in school, getting free food and healthcare) Income for the state is tightly bound to income taxes. When people make less money, sell fewer houses, buy less gas, the state starts running out of cash.

Ahnold is doing his own little Kabuki with the paying everyone minimum wage song and dance. He is no different, he just has a better publicist.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

Originally Posted by VaSteve

In any organization, the worker bees are expendable. Sad but true.
However, laying people off is almost always a short term solution. Once you lay them off, watch what doesn't get done.

100% correct (you've just summed up EXACTLY why one of my biggest goals in life right now is "going independent" and why I place such value on entepreneurial spirit, which is all but dead in this country). The footnote to what you're saying is that with regards to GOVERNMENT, the fact that some stuff won't get done isn't necessarily bad. The underlying problem here is that government is simply too big, too bloated, too bureaucratic and trying to be too many things to too many different people. The parts that government sheds away will represent EXCELLENT niches for private sector consultants or enterprising private individuals or companies to fill. Nature abhors a vacuum. If the stuff was necessary to begin with and/or potentially profitable (i.e. of value to people), someone will do it. Preferably someone not on the public payroll.

I don't see this as a punitive or heavy-handed measure, it's a necessary one. Call it "forced privatization of unnecessary government functions" if you will. The smart/resourceful/motivated people will be salivating at the opportunity to get into those areas - they're business opportunities just waiting for the right folks.

[PatrickB]

Do you really know where your Tax dollars are going? If all the illegal aliens were deported tomorrow, there would be a balance surplus...

[VaSteve]

Originally Posted by Wayne at Pelican Parts

Research it, it's all true...

-Wayne

lolz, that's OK, I have my own issues over here on my coast.

[onewhippedpuppy]

Why is it that layoffs always lead to hand wringing in the streets? Seriously, shouldn't those people be looking for another job? I've had a lot of different jobs in my life, never had trouble finding a new one. Never been fired or laid-off either, I have no doubt it sucks. Hey, life goes on.

[sammyg2]

We seem to have severe short term memory loss.

Arnold ran on a couple of promises:
1) pass a balanced budget requirement that says we can't spent more than we have and when we have a surplus we put it in a rainy day fund instead of pissing it away,
2) and to get entitlement spending under control.

Simple, straightforward, eveyone was all for it. We all said, "GOOD IDEA, LET'S DO THIS THING" and we voted for him. Seems Mr. Grey Davis was in trouble at the time because spending was out of control and we had a huge deficit and the people were tired of that. We all agreed we need to turn this state around and we were behind Arnold all the way.

until......
He actually tried to keep his promises. What a dumb thing to do.
He went to the legislature and said, "let's do this". They said no way.
He said, "let's do this or I will take it to the people". They said no way.
He took it to the people for a vote.
Unfortunately the nurses, firemen, and teachers have very strong unions with lots of money. They spent every penny trying to undermine and discredit the governor, then they borrowed more money and did it some more. Seems they like their entitlement. they like things like full early pension and full FREE medical for ever after retirement, tenure, and they like all kinds of entitlement type things that are costing this state a fortune. Not only do they like their outrageous entitlements, they want MORE! Arnold was trying not to give them more and that pissed them off.
The majority of the people of California, being mindless sheep, listened and bought into the propoganda and lies spewed forth by the teachers union, the firemen, and the nurses.

He tried to keep his promise, but we abondoned him. He said OK, but we'll be sorry. he said it won't be long before he has to say 'I told you so" but agreed to move on and try to work with the legislature.

A few years later and BAM! He was right, we're in trouble. We had a surplus and spent it like drunk sailors on leave.
We kept spending like it would never end, and now we have a huge deficit and we are still spending more than we take in thanks to the DEMOCRATS in Sacramento.
Wanna know why it takes so darn long EVERY YEAR to pass a budget? because the democrat majority agrees to spend all kinds of money we don't have on social welfare type of programs, and the rebublican minority tries to fight it and it drags out. Every stinking year this happens.
Should the republicans cave in and become just as bad as the democrats, or should the democrats learn a little fiscal responsibility and start trying to run the company within it's means?
Doesn't matter. They will still be the POS they are and squander more than they take in and then cry poverty and ask for more taxes.
Somehow they, with the help of the special interest groups, will figure out a way to make it look like it's all Arnold's fault and the mindless California liberal sheep will eat it up.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

Yep. I agree with Sammy 100%.

I give Arnold credit for trying to do the right thing and for trying to change the system from within. The problem is (as always) the ******* Legislature. Is there any provision in the State Constitution to just fire the lot of 'em and give the governor's office special powers to appoint a new one? I should look into that...

This state is ultimately doomed and WILL collapse under the weight of its deficit spending. Just a matter of when.

[sammyg2]

I also have to put some of the blame on Arnold because he's not a politician. he doesn't know how to weasel, he doesn't know how to trick, he doesn't know how to do back door deals, he just comes right out and says what he wants and if he doesn't get it he starts trying to bully people. That usually doesnt work in politics.

Anywho, it is a moot point because there's more to the story now:

the California layoffs have been revised to include only 1/2 of all caltrans workers. Seems the Japanese have invented a shovel that can stand up all by itself.

ba da bump. Sorry.

[sammyg2]

Originally Posted by Wayne at Pelican Parts

Umm, that's usually the case, but not with California. Spending per student has gone up as test scores have gone way down. In the past decade, California has added something like 25,000 new jobs to the state budget, no one really knows what all of those people have been doing. It all started with the huge budget surpluses from the dot-com era, and we've been paying the price ever since. Research it, it's all true...

-Wayne

I have a theory about California education costs and lower test scores:

According to the california department of education: http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/sd/lc/elprct.asp
in 2002, 25% of all students enrolled in the california public education system were "English learners" and were not fluent in English. That number has steadily increased since 1993 whe it was at 22%. It's probably closer to 27% by now if we can extrapolate the trend.

The number of Spanish speaking English learners has remained fairly steady at around 48%. That means almost one half of all Hispanics enrolled are not fluent in English and almost the same percentage of students enrolled in California are listed as hispanic.

It is very expensive to teach kids who don't speak the language. it is very expensive to try and teach in more than one language. It slows down the teaching of other students who are fluent.

Kids who are not fluent in the native language are not going to score as high on average on test scores. Students who had to share time in class with students who are not fluent in the native language are not going to score as well. Pretty plain and simple AFAIK.

What to do about it? Sue the federal government for all additional costs burdened due to educating illegal aliens and their children.
Kick the illegals out, take away their jobs, make it illegal to employ them and enforce it, just like Arizona did. Stop educating illegal aliens and their clildren for free.

Then the education costs will go down and the test scores will go up. The drop-out rate will also improve significantly.
We'll have plenty of teachers, plenty of classrooms, and the classroom size will go down as well.

[PatrickB]

Originally Posted by PatrickB

Do you really know where your Tax dollars are going? If all the illegal aliens were deported tomorrow, there would be a balance surplus...

I repeat my earlier statement....

[Porsche-O-Phile]

sammyg2, if you keep this up I may just have to nominate you for political office!

I agree wholeheartedly - not out of any disdain for any particular ethnic group but out of a sense of preserving our culture, our economy, our state's solvency and our way of life against an onslaught of thoughtless and inconsiderate users who simply consume resources (which they have no right to, incidentally) without any thought or care - like locusts.

The sooner we start being the Orkin Man to this problem, the better things will get.

[sammyg2]

Originally Posted by Porsche-O-Phile

sammyg2, if you keep this up I may just have to nominate you for political office!

No way. I make Arnold look like a slick wheeler and dealer. I wouldn't be able to last 1 day in politics without climbing a clock tower and bustin caps.

This has nothing to do with racism or attacking one group of illegal immigrants, address the problem. they come here for work, jobs, money.
Take away that motivation and issue is resolved.

Then make it a little easier and more streamlined for them to get here legally.
If we eliminated most of the illegal immigration we could drastically increase the LEGAL immigration and still have it under control and manageble. Good for the country, good for the citizens.
Much better for those who are working very hard to do the right thing and working within a very screwed up system to get here and stay here legally.

[rcecale]

Originally Posted by cab83_750

Again, law of relativity. Would you guys, who agree with the governor, still agree if you (your spouse, your teenage child, etc.) are part of the laid-off group?

I probably agree with the no-compassion attitude toward the copper-thief, but in this case, I suggest we all step back and think before posting our feedback on this subject.

"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few."


Randy

[Rick Lee]

How many more billions of $$ do we need to spend on education until we're smart enough to know that money is not the problem? Wash. DC has well over a 50% drop out rate and they spend far more per pupil than the average private school in the District costs. Lots of places (like the suburbs in VA and MD) spend far less and have pretty good schools, as far as public schools go. No matter how much more money DC spends, it never gets any better. In what other area of life would anyone continue to claim that money is the problem?

[jyl]

Probably has something to do with the students too, don't you think?

Take 100 kids from inner-city Oakland (murder, crime, poverty capital of NorCal) and 100 kids from Lafayette (wealthy suburb with overachieving parents). I think you could spend 3X as much per kid in the Oakland school and still get 1/2X the test scores, graduation rates, etc.

I'm not saying the DC or Oakland schools are well-run, by the way. I know the Oakland schools are a mess - they were put under control of the state, in fact. I'm saying the fact that they aren't doing their job well, doesn't mean the job isn't a very hard one.

[Rick Lee]

Originally Posted by jyl

Probably has something to do with the students too, don't you think?

Take 100 kids from inner-city Oakland (murder, crime, poverty capital of NorCal) and 100 kids from Lafayette (wealthy suburb with overachieving parents). I think you could spend 3X as much per kid in the Oakland school and still get 1/2X the test scores, graduation rates, etc.

I'm not saying the DC or Oakland schools are well-run, by the way. I know the Oakland schools are a mess - they were put under control of the state, in fact. I'm saying the fact that they aren't doing their job well, doesn't mean the job isn't a very hard one.

Which is all the more reason to stop throwing money at problems, hoping they'll go away. I never said it was an easy problem. If it were, throwing money at it would fix it. It is, however, pretty easy for teachers' unions and politicians to clamor for more money "for the children", when it has very little to do with the problem or the solution.

[sammyg2]

Originally Posted by Rick Lee

Which is all the more reason to stop throwing money at problems, hoping they'll go away. I never said it was an easy problem. If it were, throwing money at it would fix it. It is, however, pretty easy for teacher's unions and politicians to clamor for more money "for the children", when it has very little to do with the problem or the solution.

Rick, you know as we ll as I do that the politicians can't come right out and say what the real problem is because it isn't PC. They pretend it is something else. The politicians know that if they tell the truth someone may be offended, but for some odd reason they erroneously think no one is offended by their lies.