I'm not sure of the point of this article. If the article wants to point out the challenges that CA faces, then do that! if the article wants to point out how important CA is to the US then do that! But to somehow link it with - maybe a recession is coming and the sky may fall because the next governor is inexperienced.
That's the nature of our democracy - our current president didn't have much relevant experience and for that matter, Pres. Obama had a short stint as Senator and he inherited a full-blown crisis. It seems to me that Lieutenant Governor is as close as you can get to being Governor in training than any another position.
I fear that the NY TImes is becoming as breathless as some less serious pubs, more so if you see what your reporters tweet and like on Twitter. Be the Grey Lady please!!!
61
The article mentions that California grows much of our nation's fruits and vegetables. Of course this employs a lot of people. But in pure economic terms, agriculture is quite small. California's produces about $2 trillion of stuff every year, only $10-15 billion is agriculturally related.
17
California has been run by alien politics for at least the past 30 years. It was once a state in the USA, but now it's just north Tijuana and will soon reflect that economy.
19
The take home message from the cited legislative report (https://lao.ca.gov/LAOEconTax/Article/Detail/265) is inaccurately characterized as California losing younger residents. Rather, it indicates strongly that lower income, lower educated residents are moving to Texas, Arizona, etc., while those with higher incomes and educations are moving to California. Although that trend may exacerbate inequality, it clearly does not bode ill for the state's economy!
23
@backfull
Younger residents are moving here, but do not plan on making roots here. Not at this cost of living. They are here to make money, sleep on couches, and in a few years they will move on to a more realistic set of circumstances out of state.
16
@Eyes Wide Shut
Unlike the information I cited, there is no objective basis for your observation, though I will grant that my observation is that many bitter, prejudiced older Californians who choose to not adapt to modernity do tend to move out.
2
I have spent a lot of time going through my local municipal budget and the state budget. What people are not realizing is that no matter how much money the state collects, most of it is ending up in the paychecks/healthcare/pensions of government employees and in welfare. Very little of it is going to capital improvements in the state or investments that actually generate a return. The costs of Medi-Cal (Medicaid) and the public employee union's healthcare/pensions are growing 2-3 times faster than the economy which means that in the coming years, recession or not, we will not be able to even afford those bills. California is a real example of how hard it is to sustain an administrative state where taxes just end up feeding the people who administer the money and towards little else.
33
If California experiences a recession, you can bet the rest of the country will experience the same thing--possibly even worse. Why fixate on this state, besides the fact it is a behemoth economically. We will be fine. We also have a huge surplus in the state treasury. However, most of us wish Brown could remain governor. He is 80 years old and due for a vacation. We will be fine under Newsom.
25
@kathleen cairns Being fine under Newsom is a hope rather than an expectation.
12
Not mentioned in the article -- and it should've been, in my opinion -- is the likelihood of another statewide drought, and the widespread deleterious effects it would have on the state's economy, most of all its agricultural sector.
Nearly half of California is already in a moderate state of drought at the very *least*, and about 23% of it is experiencing severe-drought conditions -- including the entirety of coastal Southern California, according to the state's own drought monitor, stretching between the Mexican border and the San Luis Obispo area. This also includes inland Southern California, most notably the entire L.A. region (including Riverside and Orange County) as well as the eastern parts of the San Diego vicinity.
On top of further decimating the state's farming industry -- already hurting due to the Trump administration's immigration crackdowns -- droughts, of course, significantly increase the chances of yet another series of wildfires devastating large swaths of the state. Further, the state's Sierra Nevada snowpack -- from which it gets nearly all of its water supply -- may very well be permanently damaged by climate change: thanks to warming temperatures it's likely to keep declining in size, despite an anomalous heavy snow season in 2016-2017. In other words, it's probably only getting worse from here.
Assuming Gavin Newsom wins the gubernatorial race, I sincerely hope he puts water conservation near the top of an undoubtedly lengthy priority list.
29
Our family has been here in the California Sierra foothills since the 1860's, and it concerns me that more and more middle class, blue collar citizens, many born here are being driven from California.
Concerns me that the Silicon Valley and Hollywood areas seem to get all the attention, while the rest of the state is ignored. California may be a powerhouse today in 2018 but ignore the middle class, working class and you do so at your peril.
The State Of Jefferson movement is a case in point. More and more folks from the Oregon Border to below Fresno are mad that the coastal liberal elite areas run the show and begun to seriously organize.
18
@Beth Grant DeRoos - Right, because the right wing politicians in the Central Valley have always done such a good job of running things.
25
@Beth Grant DeRoos
Hey, good luck with that "State of Jefferson" thang. The proposed "State" would comprise the poorest, most sparsely populated, decrepit counties in Southern Oregon and Northern California - a veritable Appalachian Rednecks West that would make West Virginia's impoverished, plundered coal mining country look like paradise.
You folks just can't stop shooting yourselves in your own two feet out of sheer resentment and spite, can you?
24
@Beth Grant DeRoos
Sounds like a nice little right wing fantasy. I don't doubt people may be moving to cheaper locals however, unless they magically change who they are (in your post, blue collar), location won't matter much because unless they can get CA level wages in say, KS or ID, they still will have to deal with what is a nationwide problem. Housing costs and wage stagnation. It is possible that they will only have to work two jobs instead of three, so there is that.
7
As a native Californian, now in my 50s, I can tell you my home state is unrecognizable. It is unlivable for the vast majority of regular people. My friends who are there talk about little else other then when they plan to leave—for good
Unless you are ultra rich or ultra poor, you are far, far, better off almost anywhere else. I, for one, will never return unless things dramatically change.
29
@EX-CALI
Ditto. I am a native Californian from Alameda who lives in Massachusetts. I go back to the Bay Area on business once a month and can't imagine living there again. My home has lost its soul.
9
@Questioner. MA is certainly an inexpensive place to live. No taxes either, right?
3
@EX-CALI so true, "unless you are ultra rich or ultra poor", this state does not work for regular people. California is in a state of extremes. It's all about the takers.
9
My parents came to California as part of that post WWII migration. My father was an aerospace engineer and he had a long and stable career. Jobs were plentiful and the cost of living was affordable. That's the recipe for success.
But that has changed. Los Angeles is one of the least affordable places to live in the country. Incomes are nowhere close to matching the increase in housing costs and people are leveraging highly to gain a toehold. A severe economic bump will ruin a lot of people who are stretched thin.
So people are leaving the state, because it is a bad value for them. They can have a better quality of life elsewhere. It's not a conservative problem or a liberal problem, it's a dollars and sense problem.
A relatively small portion of the state's population is earning a lot of money and this is warping the situation for the rest of the population, who aren't in tech, entertainment, property development, or some other highly remunerative profession.
The price of a house in any major metropolitan area has risen to insane levels. Most people living in those houses probably couldn't afford to buy them if they were trying to get that first house today. Good luck selling them, and enjoy your new property tax amount. Their kids will not be able to buy a house without sacrificing everything to do so. If those kids are smart, they'll live elsewhere and have a better quality of life.
I love California, but I'm outta here after I retire. It's a bad value.
42
Prop 13 takes from the young and gives to the old and wealthy. How is that progressive? In my town, the average young couple on their first starter home pays ~$12,000 per year in property taxes. The investors, retired, and top earning folks in their 50s & 60s are paying $2000 or less per year in property taxes. Why? Because Prop 13 puts a cap on how much property taxes can increase yearly. This is such an incredible deal, investors from all over the world (most recently, China) buy homes here and just sit on their investment. But that’s not all. The folks who profit the most are the commercial property owners, many who live out of state. They are the ones who cried, “Don’t toss grandma out of her home over property taxes!” Well, they fooled all of us and now we can’t even afford to fix our potholes.
100
@Connie: Your observations are correct and well stated.
But Prop 13 is as sacrosanct to the older legacy propertied class (Red-Red ===> Blue-Blue),
as are Social Security and Medicare.
A first start toward financial relief
for young Californians, would be
the unburdening of student loans,
and a property tax holiday (3-5 years)
for the young middle class and those that yearn to be.
Mark R Engel
7
@Connie
We can’t afford to fix our potholes because of public sector pensions and benefits, not because old people aren’t taxed out of their homes.
17
Born and raised Californian. I have never seen an economy like we have now. It is crazy how much construction has been going on and it has been booming for over 10 years now. I am fortunate to be working a good job but, still, I don't know if I can afford to buy here or, if I can, is it the best idea. Maybe I should use my Californian salary to buy in much lower cost States?
Reform Prop 13? Good luck it will never happen. While I totally understand that it absolutely favors those that own real estate and the wealthy, a huge population of elderly people would not be able to afford their property taxes if they suddenly had their basis marked to market. Where are they going to go?
Regarding the Governorship: They should be laser focused on uniting Californians against the completely unfair and unbalanced Federal taxation without proper representation in Washington. Just imagine the monthly taxes that are sent to Washington out of all the paycheck deductions from every Californian. We are 20% of the entire GDP of the USA. That is serious money. We should have many more representatives in the House and like 6 senators not 2. We should have 125 electoral votes not 55. It is the Feds that are raiding our coffers and we are left to deal with the largest population of any state in the union and all the challenges that go with that.
124
@Donovan
Absolutely, we're being robbed. Where's the gratitude and support for what our state contributes. If the federal govt. can't give us equal representation or gratitude, at least an AWARENESS would be an improvement.
11
@Donovan - You speak the conventional wisdom that Prop 13 cannot be eliminated because that would be unfair to the poor and middle class elderly on fixed incomes. That's true only if eliminating it happens all at once with no consideration given to the property owner's gross income or net worth (or whatever metric would be most fair). What if Prop 13 was gradually rescinded on property tax-frozen properties (and have a minimum floor, where poor property owners remained frozen until the property was transferred), and the rate of rescinding was indexed to the ability of the owner to pay taxes?
17
It would be an easy legislative move to repeal Prop 13 for wealthy individuals and commercial real estate while at the same time insuring that homeowners over 55 are protected from “eviction from taxation.”
Otherwise, we’re really just talking about greed.
18
Recession overdue? Where is the evidence?? Very poor reporting--not one shred of economic evidence provided for this assertion. Lots provided against it.
12
I moved away from Los Angeles in 1987 because it was impossible for a teacher to buy a home and live a middle class life in Los Angeles in 1987. It has only gotten worse. Much worse. Hammurabi had it right. Real estate speculation has been destroying California for generations.
21
@mary bardmess YES. Global Real Estate speculation combined with no planning and limited building and restricted development. Homes sitting empty as investments, while people camp out on the streets. This is the reality in San Francisco and Los Angeles. Politicians seem to turn a blind eye to it all.
20
Not a word about public sector pensions that are consuming city and county and state budgets.... defined benefit pensions must be changed ..... read the detailed 2018 report from the League of Ca cities .....
27
How odd not to see a word in this analysis about CLIMATE CHANGE and the ability of the state to prepare for new precipitation patterns. Given the forecasts of even more severe droughts, Los Angeles may be our future Cape Town, and California’s agricultural economy may be in for a reckoning.
22
Deport the 3 to 5 million illegal immigrants living in California and there wont be a housing shortage and wages will go up. Look I just solved the problem of homelessness and affordability. Also educational expenditures and school over crowding solved. Pollution, significantly reduced. No more water shortage. Highway congestions, solved. What's the real problem? You are more concerned with illegal immigrants needs than you are with solving any other problem. And the sad part is illegal immigration doesn't solve any long term problem. The world's population grows by 60 million people a year. They can't all illegally immigrate. We should deport the illegal immigrants and seek to help them in their home countries.
21
@Mike Illegal immigration is not the problem; California suffers from an imbalanced system of taxation. Did you know that most services are not taxed in this state? Taxation on high income earners and property values are the major sources of funding in this state. And as housing prices climb into the stratosphere, people stay put (or move out of the state) to minimize that cost. Also, illegal immigrants use far less taxpayer funded resources than legal residents; the high cost of living and low wages force citizens to seek out assistance to make ends meet.
@Mike The housing shortage is not from immigration, illegal or otherwise. In SF, it’s speculaotors buying property, laws against building up in many neighborhoods, and severe income inequality that forces people out of reasonably priced homes so that owners can make a greater profit. Not once have I ever seen a Hispanic person begging on the streets of SF. They are too busy working hard! I’m sure it’s the same in SoCal too. Funny how people who don’t live in California love to make this erroneous claim re immigration.
56
@Mike Here is an interesting statistic about the state of California, over 51% of public school population (CA) is Hispanic/Latin Am. What a change in a couple of decades. Open borders are a good thing right? Wondering if all entitlements should be shifted to the new minority. Kamala?
10
There is no starter housing in the places where the jobs are. Except for those who are directors or higher, you're either in by now, or you're out.
There are only three things you can do with housing: pack them in tighter, spread them out more, or price them out. That's it.
I suppose you could bus people in from Stockton or Modesto, but that counts as "spreading them out", and when the job market cools and the busing stops, their houses are going to drop like a rock. Besides, where are you going to bus them? This isn't like New York; the jobs are evenly spread across over three counties; the "last mile" problem will kill that scheme.
19
The worst possible scenario is to have the voters elect a completely inexperienced GOP businessman as Governor. This would guarantee a down turn. The GOP hates government and will be unwilling to make the political sacrifices necessary in a downturn with a 2/3 Democrat majority in Sacramento.
Just ask Herbert Hoover or George Bush about the GOP answer in a crisis.
20
@The 1% great, we’ll get a vapid, vain, seat-warming dilettante instead. How inept politicians from the worst-run large city in the county ascend to higher office in this state still eludes me. Gavin didn’t have a lot of efficacy in being mayor of San Francisco, and spent the second half of his second term - in which he ran basically unopposed- gaming for higher office. His transparency is something to behold.
17
Ah yes! Another dystopic economic prediction for the engine of the U.S. economy. Our impending doom has many of us wringing our hands and checking out real estate in the 'corn belt'. Aside from a progressive state government, near perfect weather, a vibrant and diverse population, 840 miles of coastline, a tech industry that leads the world, agriculture that feeds vast portions of the U.S. and a wonderful state run higher education system .... I'm just not sure why any of us stay.
81
As a native Californian in my seventies I can promise you one thing, California is not going away the cast of people making up California will change dramatically though. I like many natives started complaining in the seventies that housing, traffic etc. etc. etc. was getting terrible, so much so that people would flee the state and it would fall into the ocean: only one problem with our prophecy we were talking about and comparing everything to the California we had grown up in and loved, many of us had been no further from San Francisco than San Jose or the occasional drive to Palm Springs, the big, make that huge oversight on our part was that the new people moving to California were coming from much worse places: in the fifties and sixties from places like New York with terrible winters in the seventies it accelerated and people started arriving in mass from Asia as a result of the war we started and later to get on the Silicon Valley gravy train, the eighties onward immigration in earnest started and very poor people started arriving in mass from Mexico to service these newly wealthy types, many poor Indians and Chinese arriving to a place that for the first time in their lives had indoor plumbing, to them living four to a room was not unusual, winding your way down city streets littered with trash and homeless was nothing new, indeed some countries in the world have dead people in the streets as a matter of course so to them California is a dream, just not our dream.
40
One other key point about California's income tax collections from the wealthy. They derive very heavily from taxing capital gains and option exercises. Capital losses are, or course, deductible against gains. Guess what happens if the stock market is weak for a little while? Jerry knows this well.
13
The California economy is great, but it is built on unsustainable foundations; Prop 13, illegal immigration, a regressive tax system, the erosion of public education, and a Democratic legislature that is beholden to the tech industry and other big businesses.
The end is near.
14
The gas and sales tax are clearly regressive, but the income and cap gains taxes the state levies are obscenely progressive. If California lost maybe 500 or 600 of its top earners it would most likely face a budget crisis. And the Legislature is a wholly owned subsidiary of the public unions, not the tech companies, hence the soak the rich tax policy.
17
@Achilles Stop hating on Unions. Unions brought us the middle class. How about we stop giving TRILLIONS of DOLLARS to the 1%. The Koch Brothers don't need a tax break. FYI, The so called tax cut the lying Republicans passed federally, who are now running away from it, is no tax cut for me. I got a tax increase.
2
@Eugene Cerbone the few unions left with any real clout anymore are all public sector unions - who negotiate terms, wages and benefits as if they were fighting against Walmart. In one of the most pro-union states. It’s the sound of one hand clapping. The middle classes are disappearing faster than the ice caps, so to paraphrase Janet Jackson’s hit vis-à-vis unions and their historical legacies; what have you done for me lately?
1
Amazing to realize that Jerry Brown has been the voice of fiscal sanity in this state.
Once Gavin Newsom wins next month, watch for him to rubber stamp every crackpot spending idea Democrats in the assembly cook up. There’s a laundry list a mile long.
Oh, and I just received my LA County property tax bill which has gone up by about 20% in two years. Forget Prop 13 limits. All the add-ons are various ‘fees’ added to the bill. And they still can’t or won’t pick up the incredible amounts of trash and debris along the highways...
37
California needs to build houses away from the hyper expensive coast, which is in limited supply. Instead of first spanning the state with an unneeded and unwanted high-speed train between Bakersfield and Fresno, California should build out the end runs from Fresno to the bay and Bakersfield to LA. This is the polar opposite of what it is doing now! Provide commuter service in from these areas for free or nearly free and then watch affordable housing explode in these livable cities. There is no more available coast on which to build and adding density to an already overcrowded earthquake zone is a fools errand.
18
@AndyW - interesting ideas. In addition, they could provide tax incentives to encourage more businesses to set up in Fresno and Bakersfield.
4
agree. But i think they should stop building anything, no one should live in a dream that have extreme high probability of busted next year.
I am sure legislators did the best they could of done with what was dealt to them. Every government needs a rainy day fund. The crisis should of taught us one thing of importance, the economic considerations in all sector development is the factor, anything most beneficial to the state as whole needs to be directly fed to the committees in Congress so the states can plan accordingly from all input and its transparency. Safety was key, period. I believe the growth of the past deserved just as much attention than our future no matter the direction of a market. There is no reason we can't place preciseness on the table!
1
This piece is right on the mark. Trump and the GOP are making two fundamental mistakes with the national economy: 1) they are exploding the annual deficit during an economic boom (unconscionable) and 2) they are implementing tax policies that hurt the economics of blue states. Without the blue states, the US is almost a third world nation. In the end, the prez and his supporters will killing the national economy, just like the last two Republican presidents. History repeating.....
59
Forgive me.
What are the other 4 top economies?
3
What’s the point of this? Take California down a notch? Not enough real news to report on? To sum up: weak. Your editors should have said thanks but no thanks. It’s not news; just speculation or gossip. Especially unworthy of the NYT when there are plenty of real stories worth spending time on. Yawn.
51
California will be fine despite itself.
With the money we ship one way to DC to fund red states (are they red because they're communist?), we'd be far better off fiscally but our politics would be even more public sector focused. Do we want that?
5
@Ejgskm
No, they’re red and blue because someone at the USAToday didn’t have a clue when the color designators were ascribed to various states.
3
Gavin Newsom’s Controller is a hack known as Ben Rosenfeld. He was appointed ten years ago and terms out this year and will be Newsom’s Budget Director. I know him personally. He used to be a good guy and defended Judy Bari when she was bombed by the FBI for opposing Michael Milikin’s pump and dump scheme with Sierra Pacific. Unfortunately, Rosenfeld sold out to Strada Development and Mike Cohen (a different one: this one is in bed with Angus McCarthy and redeveloped a brownfield known as HH Ship Service Facility that has children playing on top of Arsenic black sludge. SF Seawall lot 337 if you want to verify the deed. Noreen Ambrose handled it-and she goes back to old Gambino types in Jersey. That was before the leaning tower) and later the SEIU. Back in 2004 Rosenfeld concocted this educational “funding” scheme called PEEF that put restrictions on funds that should be going to the schools anyway and actually took funds away from the schools and gave them to the police. Newsom Rik credit for saving education when he did the opposite. The whole thing was swept up by the city auditor (who works for the Controller!!!) and there’s the matter of the $35M in SF school bonds that simply disappeared under Newsom and ended up funding the insurgency in Kabul via a company called Siddiqi & Karimi in a joint venture with the nephew of US Representative Barbara Lee. You can check the pleadings in US District Court. Not that the local media reports any of this - they are so bought off.
15
The United States consists of California and the seven squared dwarfs (7*7=49). A good contrast contrast is New York and California. New York has about half the economy of California. New York's economy is to a large extent based on casinos, the New York stock exchange, Amex, Nasdaq, etc. New York was at the center of the global economic crash. New York produced Donald Trump.
California's economy on the other hand is based on things we build and sell; for example computers, hardware, software, food, and movies. California is at the center of the tech boom. California produced Steve Jobs. California has a great educational system, and we can take care or ourselves. However it would help if we got as much money back from the federal government as we send in.
56
@Keith
I'll give you certain things (the blame for the crash, definitely started here no question) however, CA also gave us Nixon and Reagan, the beginning of many terrible economic and fiscal policies (though to be fair Nixon at least created the EPA) as well as conservative courts which continue to work against the vulnerable. NYC's economy is much more diverse than you note. It had to diversify a while back because of that over reliance on Wall St. Sure CA's public university and community college system is great but the pre-K through 12 is not great at all particularly in the L.A. area. CA's biggest issue to me (aside from the education/infrastructure thing) is that housing crunch. The state really needs to tackle that quickly. Not only does it drive obvious problems stemming from the wealth gap but is also a public health issue. Remember that (what was it? cholera? TB?) recent outbreak they had in the L.A. area? All because of homelessness not being seriously dealt with.
8
California’s education system is not in great shape. Check the facts. CA is rated among the lowest.
12
California is the world's fifth largest economy. It has about 40 million residents and two U.S. Senators. Wyoming (600,000 residents), North Dakota, South Dakota and Alaska (about 700,000 residents each), Montana (about 1 million residents), Idaho (about 1.5 million), West Virginia (about 1.8 million) et alia, each have two U.S. Senators. These benighted, backward little states also have disproportionate representation in the Electoral College.
As a direct result, California -- like New York and a few other large, economically vibrant states -- pays an enormous share of the total tax revenues gathered by the U.S. Treasury. A disproportionate amount of those tax dollars goes to the backward little states - the real 'takers' the Republicans love to denigrate. And those backward little states set federal policy, wielding power over California with a vengeance, making absolutely no effort to govern by consensus and instead taking every opportunity to stick a thumb in California's eye.
Indeed, the Trumpublican White House, Congress and now even the federal court system, right up to the U.S. Supreme Court, have been stacked with apostles of the right wing, directly against the popular will of citizens of California, New York and the majority of the people of the "United' States.
If you think this situation can exist in perpetuity, you've got another think coming.
158
@chambolle
Exactly, well said! As a life-long, hard-working, tax-paying Calif. very under-represented in the federal govt I do not appreciate the takers' slights. For every $1 taxes CA pays to the federal govt. (Trumpland) we receive .80, whereas Alabama receives $1.20 for every dollar. Instead of them voting against OUR best interests, out of spite, it would behoove them to just say "thank you"!
CALEXIT!
44
Are you sure you are including all the deductions that are an effective subsidy that the Federal government grants?
4
70% of revenue is income tax? If the jobs go even a little down then boo m
4
I recently relocated to the East Coast from Northern California and the view from outside the state is entirely different than the smug confidence Californian's exude. From an external perspective, California looks to be headed towards a very different & difficult future. Many Californians (individuals and companies) are sensing the state's bleak future and are looking to leave the state for more affordable housing, lower state and local taxes and a more tolerant/balanced political environment. This exodus of people and companies will only accelerate when the inevitable next economic slowdown hits, leaving California with an even greater economic and social challenges.
21
@Bob Smith
Where are they going? AL? KS? TX? I can understand the frustration of those who leave because of the housing issue but they should be aware, there are trade offs. AL or KS is cheaper but will you find work that pays enough to live in the area? The problem remains the same wherever you live in the U.S. Rural and urban. If you move to red states like those two or TX, expect as poorer person to be hit with higher taxes, they just don't hit the same way as blue states with state/local taxes. Every gov't has to pay their public servants something and they need to keep the roads functional. Where do you think that money comes from? If you are in a red state, the burden falls much more heavily on the economically burden. Republicans are fond of saying "there is no free lunch" but they often whisper under their collective breath "unless you are well off" then you get the gov't to pay for it. They are the real so-called "takers" while being perfectly happy with demonizing the more vulnerable who are just trying to survive.
18
I don't get the point of this article. The downturn looms on the whole nation, not just CA. CA, which has been socking away its surpluses, is the least of the worries; it is not only doing best, it's best prepared. Maybe NYT should instead worry about KS which is almost bankrupt in these good times. Or TX with its huge deficit, if the size is the issue.
53
How is prop 13 a progressive tax? It allows wealthy landowners to lock in a lower tax rate while young working people make up the deficit with ridiculous income and property taxes.
10
@Todd It isn't. I think you misread the quote. The professor's comment was strictly about the income tax system in California.
Reports of California’s downfall have been coming since the gold rush, and they’ve proven to be widely off the mark every single time.
54
As usual there is pressure to give the ubervrich tax cuts while cutting critical support to the needy.
When are we going to have fairness to all the rest of us who are getting poorer as we work harder and harder justvto keep a roof over our heads and feed our families. California lucky GB has been a brilliant Governor. His father also was a brilliant public servant. Neither candidate has the experience but perhaps GB might be willing to be informal advisor.
5
California is too crowded and “operating” way beyond its natural economic capacity. Do not come here. If you’re already here and can’t afford it, please move away. Don’t ask for denser housing. Texas will take you. Not everyone can live anywhere they choose.
24
@Mark Stone There are plenty of places in the world that are more crowded than California, and doing quite fine (such as most of the EU, Japan, Singapore, South Korea). Denser housing is better for the environment too.
18
@Mark Stone
You forgot to add that if you are already in California: please, please, please baby, please no family, no family baby, no baby.
2
@Mark Stone
You forgot to add, if you are already here, please do not start a family.
6
I'm a California native.
This article is interesting but is almost entirely speculation, about future economic trends and events, about future behavior of individuals such as Newsom in response to hypothetical future events, etc.
We'll see.
Meanwhile, assuming Newsom wins, I hope he will put a big focus on directing some of the state's growth and development to its poorer communities and citizens. There are state level policies that could help neglected areas, such as the inland north and parts of the Central Valley, with their own economic development. This is badly needed. California could be a good example of what a Left leaning government can do, with regard to economic growth for ALL citizens, fiscally responsible governance, and social justice. But it needs to end its fascination with the volatile and stratified wealth created by the tech industry.
22
Um, I don't think that photo shows "high density housing," at least not as it might appear in low income communities. Those are single family homes and cost a fortune!
64
Thank you! That the picture of San Francisco dwellings somewhat close together is labeled "high density" housing is a NYT mistake. Manhattan is 4x more dense.
California has plenty of space and water (the alfalfa crop uses more water than all the homes combined). Balancing preservation of lifestyle for those living here with housing/economic development is fiendishly difficult. How much should those of us here pull up the ladder behind us?
6
The suggestion that Newson doesn't have enough experience to be a successful governor is ridiculous and offensive. He has over a decade experience as mayor of San Francisco and Lieutenant governor of California. Is he as adroit a politician as Jerry Brown? No, but no one in the United States is. Too bad Brown is too old to run for president. In debate he could tear Trump to shreds.
134
@phil
Which of San Francisco's many problems did Newsom solve or even ameliorate while he was mayor? As for the claim that being lieutenant governor qualifies one to be governor, you must have missed the long running joke about Newsome's current office: "Capitol insiders contend the job is mostly “get up, read the paper, see if the governor is dead; if not, go back to sleep."
Newsom is certainly better qualified than Cox, but that is a very low bar.
11
The answer to the title is "Yes, if that governor is Gavin Newsome"
4
High density housing photo is laughable! Those units may be quite large by most standards—like NYC standards.
Gavin Newsom is not nearly as inexperienced as stated. He has been Lieutenant Gov since 2010 and from listening to him in interviews I believe he is very well-versed on policy.
63
California has a spending problem: 34% of our country’s welfare recipients and bloated government payrolls, salaries, and pension obligations. California’s solution? More government and immigration
California has a revenue problem. Much of the productive class has already departed for better states. Public schools are a self- induced disaster. California’s government driven anti-business sentiment has driven out many companies - watch the Governor target the state’s tech darlings and entertainment sectors for higher taxes until they leave, too. It is inevitable.
The culture war is ideological, political, racial, and economic. California’s political class served up this disaster from which the state cannot recover. Like a broken company asset fire sale, its various geographical pieces may eventually be partitioned into several new states. The two new senators each state receives will please the Left’s remaining rulers.
Neither California nor our country can afford to continue on this suicidal path any longer. The USA breakup will be breathtaking.
12
@Tiger shark I frequently see this type of uninformed drivel, with people claiming companies and people are fleeing the state in droves. This critique is entirely fact-free. Companies like Google and Apple certainly aren't fleeing. And even though state taxes are high, people most affected by them, the very wealthy, are also likely to stay, as the California economy is also making them wealthy. In fact, California recovered more quickly from the last recession than any other state.
27
@Tiger shark - Interesting. California is the 5th largest economy in the world and it doesn't seem to match your description (I'm a native who spent most of my life there).
I suppose you could always move to a red state utopia like Kansas.
31
34% of all US welfare recipients live in CA?
Well, it has about 15% of the population, so yeah, more ppl on “welfare” than in So Dakota. It is also more generous with benefits than red states.
Also take into account that 2/3 of “welfare” recipients are disabled or elderly, it makes sense that the most populous state would have a good chunk of them.
You also have huge swaths of the northern and eastern parts of the state with no functional economy past recreational activities, filled with rugged individuals determined to live their lives in isolation (including the ridiculous idea of breaking off as Jefferson) who end up on welfare as they age out of the economy...
So I can believe that 15% x twice the benefits = 34% of US “welfare” spending, if not ppl
But yeah, its all the Democrats fault
6
Did Prof. Musso just get quoted as implying that Prop 13 is PROGRESSIVE tax policy?
Prop 13 releaves corporations of market-rate increases on their property in perpetuity. And landowners in almost every municipality get the same benefit, while getting to charge renters whatever the market will bear.
24
@Len Arends No. The professor described income tax as progressive, not Prop 13 or the property tax here as progressive.
1
Jerry Brown should hired by Newsom as a consultant. His experience is irreplaceable.
60
Not surprised you highlight how important you think agriculture is to our state's economy. The agricultural sector uses 50% of the developable water to produce 4% of state gdp. (highly subsidized water, I might add). The state could more easily solve the "housing crisis" using that water to provide housing and support more productive industries.
29
Agriculture uses 80% of California's developed water for 1.5% of GDP (2x as ag intensive as the US for which agriculture is 0.7% of GDP). California Alfalfa uses more water than all the homes combined to produce a rounding error on GDP. Much of this is grown with water billed at 0.1% of the rate of a homeowner. Even better, we ship California alfalfa to China to feed livestock.
13
@ mbass100
Abolish agriculture there's no money it? What will people eat? Sand? You must be a MBA.
4
No mention of the state's looming pension crisis. Only 66% of the state’s pension obligations are funded, and that figure assumes unrealistically high investment returns. Consequently, only three states have worse credit ratings than California; for comparison, California's credit rating is the same as Louisiana’s and lower than Alabama’s.
On the plus side, the climate is great. So far.
18
@Hugh
Yep, the weather is great. We new Californians hope to eat as much (very expensive) lotus as possible before fleeing when the whole edifice comes crashing down.
3