Did Bush Policies help Your State?

I don't know what other states have done but here, in California, there has been a steady increase is user fees, applications and the like to help offset budget deficits. I can't imagine California is alone in having taken these steps.

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Texas still has a massive shortfall. We've reduced our budgets on critical services significantly.
Cycloptichorn

Perhaps you have a credible, current source you are referring to verify your statement? Texas being former Bush work, it would be interesting to compare Bush as Governor & as President.

0 Replies

States projected to have budget shortfalls for fiscal year 2006.

http://www.cbpp.org/12-8-04sfp.htm

0 Replies

Quote:

Perhaps you have a credible, current source you are referring to verify your statement? Texas being former Bush work, it would be interesting to compare Bush as Governor & as President.

Do your own research.

All I can tell you is from living here, our police, fire, and ambulance services across the state have been cut. Our Public Education system is in a shambles; right now it looks as if we won't be able to start school on time this fall unless a miracle happens in the State Senate.

We have practically zero money for border defense. We have so little money for highway improvement that if the current plans go through, Texas will have more Toll Roads than the rest of the Nation combined. We're told that the alternative is to have rapidly decreasing quality in the highway system.

No matter how you look at it the financial situation of the state isn't great. A 400 million dollar surplus is a surplus over a greatly reduced budget from just a few years ago; and is chump change compared to the overall budget of a state this big. Hardly anything to crow about.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Do your own research.
All I can tell you is from living here, our police, fire, and ambulance services across the state have been cut. Our Public Education system is in a shambles; right now it looks as if we won't be able to start school on time this fall unless a miracle happens in the State Senate.

Cycloptichorn

I understand, you are posting your opinion and chose not to debate issues by using facts Rolling Eyes

. You are entitled to do that Laughing

.

0 Replies

This isn't a debate forum. It's a discussion forum. There is a difference.

And like I said, if you want to spend the time to find out the numbers, go for it. I don't have any intention of doing so. It doesn't matter to me if you think that is a poor debating tactic, because my purpose isn't to win a debate or change your mind about anything.

Until you find anything contrary, however, my opinion is infinitely better informed than someone who doesn't live in the state.

Cheers

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

From Blaise Daley's link:

Texas is projecting a budget shortfall of 4.9 billion dollars in 2006. that is 16% of the state's general fund!

Not good.

0 Replies

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities blows the cover off Just Wonder's theory!

The report begins.

Center on Budget and Policy Priorites wrote:

Recent press reports may give the impression that the state fiscal crisis is nearing an end.
A recent National Conference of State Legislatures report is headlined "Fiscal Storm Shows Signs of Subsiding,"

Ahhh, but that is hardly the case.

Center on Budget and Policy Priorites wrote:

Revenue growth has begun to increase in the states. But revenues are growing from the extremely depressed level they reached in the depths of the fiscal crisis.

Which is what Blaise, Cyclop and myself have been saying all along.

Center on Budget and Policy Priorites wrote:

Many states used one-time measures to prop up budgets, such as drawing down reserve funds or transferring balances from special funds, borrowing through the issuance of bonds, making accounting adjustments, postponing expenditures, and using the federal fiscal relief.

So things early in Bush's tenure were even worse than we thought!

And now, the real issue.

Center on Budget and Policy Priorites wrote:

The large shortfalls are threatening state services. Many states have already made deep cuts over the last several years. For instance, two-thirds of states reduced K-12 school funding in real per-capita terms from 2002 to 2004. Some 23 states have scaled back state-subsidized child care for working families. States eliminated health insurance for more than one million individuals, including many children, parents, seniors and people with disabilities. Tuition at most state colleges and universities has risen dramatically due to cuts in state funding.

So now, because revenue has risen over projections, Just Wonders goes posting all these rosy messages about how things are getting better. What she never answers is this: Better than what?

Tuition going up, slashed aid to schools, elderly and others losing their medical coverage-that's ghastly. And this is something to brag about?

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Until you find anything contrary, however, my opinion is infinitely better informed than someone who doesn't live in the state.
Cycloptichorn

I do live in Texas Laughing

, born & live in Dallas county. I am one of those who elected Bush to the Govenorship twice & the Presidencey twice.

0 Replies

Welcome, thefederalistusa Smile

Don't mind KelticWizard-person (he's not really a wizard, but he did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night).

He just hasn't learned that attacking a poster rather than addressing the topic is in poor taste. Same with Cyclops, but they're in the ranks of the rabid ABBers here, so don't expect them to use facts in their arguments.

KW - if you seriously think this economy is in the toilet, perhaps you should contact the governor of Arizona and give him a heads-up before he spends all those millions on tourism. Also, all those states that are planning to give lots of money back to the tax-payers, not to mention California will be in big trouble when they slash property taxes of the elderly Smile

You might also want to mention to that CBPP website that they need yet another update to their article (the one you linked to was last revised in February.)

I know it's killing you that the economy is growing by leaps and bounds, spending is up, inflation is holding steady and unemployment is at an almost record low. But, then, if you hate Bush and this administration enough, you can spin it to your heart's content.

Smile

PS I'm such an optimist. I see the DOW at 30,000 by 2010. And, yes, the Republicans will still be in control LOL.

0 Replies

JustWonders wrote:

He [Kelticwizard] just hasn't learned that attacking a poster rather than addressing the topic is in poor taste.

Here we go. The victim card. I have been attacking your theories, and mentioned that you have taken this "states are doing great" argument to several threads, which you have. I make every effort in my posts to respect the rights of the other posters on this forum. But apparently you have decided that vigorous opposition to your assertions count as "attacks".

JustWonders wrote:

so don't expect them to use facts in their arguments.

I have both made and posted several charts in this forum which illustrate my points nicely. If you feel that is not arguing with facts, then you are just not looking.

Just Wonders wrote:

KW - if you seriously think this economy is in the toilet, perhaps you should contact the governor of Arizona and give him a heads-up before he spends all those millions on tourism.

Tourism is an industry in just about every state, and has been since at least the since adoption of the motorcar by the general public. You actually believe that the fact that Arizona spends money to attract tourists bolsters your argument?

Getting a little silly, aren't we?

JustWonders wrote:

Also, all those states that are planning to give lots of money back to the tax-payers, not to mention California will be in big trouble when they slash property taxes of the elderly

California has slashed services and is projecting a shortfall for 2006.

Here is a chart of the states which project shortfalls for 2006.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v645/kelticwizard100/Statebudgetshortfalls2.gif

0 Replies

JustWonders wrote:

I know it's killing you that the economy is growing by leaps and bounds

Growing by leaps and bounds? Ahem, ahem.

For the past year, all these Bush boosters have been beside themselves bragging about Bush raising the GDP 3.8% in the past year. Of course, they never mention that that for his whole term, Bush's increase in GDP has averaged a paltry 2.8%. That's terrible.

But let's put that lousy 2.8% percent a year aside for a moment. You think that 3.8%, for one year, is something to jump and shout about? Try this: For his entire second term, Clinton averaged 4.0% annual increase. Averaged. Not "take my best year and forget the other years". Averaged his whole second term.

And you people cheerlead for Bush as if he has done something wonderful. In point of fact, Bush's increase in GDP is about the best part of his economy-and that isn't even all that much. Compared to Clinton.

JustWonders wrote:

....unemployment is at an almost record low. But, then, if you hate Bush and this administration enough, you can spin it to your heart's content.

An almost record low?

In the very page before you posted your "states are doing great" article, I posted the chart which compared presidents and their unemployment record. the very page before your long post.

I shall repost the chart right here. I know you have seen the chart-yoou asked me in another thread where they came from.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v645/kelticwizard100/BUnemploymentRateGreenspansTenure.gif

Now, exactly how do you go around congratulating Bush on his unemployment record after you have seen this? You can see he took it from 4.2% way, way up past 6%, then gradually dropped down. How is that good?

Even if Bush achieves the low 4's again, that is still not a good record. I would like to see you or anyone explain to a boss why, when you took over, things got terrible for several years but now you are beginning to approach the level of your predecessor. If your predecessor did nothing but improve things bit by bit, you think your boss is going to buy the idea that you can wreck things for years but it's okay IF you begin to get the place back to where it was?

I have news for you. When you are hired, you are expected to to either maintain the same standard as your predecessor, (if that predecessor was good), or improve them over his performance. That is what a boss expects. Did Bush do that? Absolutely not.

But just because Bush is less worse now than when he took over, in some respects, you act as if we are supposed to grateful. Grateful for what-that George Bush finally realized that the idea is todecrease unemployment, not increase it? Good grief.

What I have given you here is not "spin". It is not attacks. I gave you facts. Now deal with them.

0 Replies

JW, I haven't attacked anyone personally at all.

The numbers posted by KW on the last page are accurate in that they show that there are budget surpluses now; now that the budgets are significantly smaller than in 1999. Big Whoop. And I know for a fact that we have less money for education and emergency services.

JW

Quote:

PS I'm such an optimist. I see the DOW at 30,000 by 2010. And, yes, the Republicans will still be in control LOL

I've got a few bridges you might be interested in buying... exactly what forces do you see TRIPLING the DOW in just 5 years?

I'll remind you that it has been fla... well, look for yourself:

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=%5EDJI&t=5y

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

The Dow at 30,000 in 2010?

I usually don't go into the ups and downs of the stock market, because most any economist will tell you that short-term, the Dow Jones is not necessarily a good indicator of what the economy is doing.

But if JustWonders insists, I will post the Dow Jones Industrial Average for the last term of Clinton's tenure and the first term of Bush's.

Once again, we see that Clinton's performance is superior to Bush's. But more to the point-how can anyone look at that chart and come away with the idea that the Dow Jones will be at 30,000 in 2005?

If JustWonders thinks that Bush deserves rah-rahs for his economic performance, then Clinton desrves to have his face chiseled into Mount Rushmore for his economic performance. Very Happy

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v645/kelticwizard100/StockMarketClintonbush.gif

Source

0 Replies

Did Bush Policies help Your State?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know