DO THEY THINK THAT THEY CAN KILL THE GOLDEN GOOSE AND KEEP GETTING THE GOLD?

The SEIU is running a full page ad in todays Long Beach Press Telegram headed "The Final Chapter" Broken Promises with the http://www.seiu1000.org/ website.



Arnold Schwarzenegger came into the governorship because California was headed for fiscal disaster and was obviously mismanaged. Tom McClintock has written a letter dated June 9, 2009 about what we need to do to fix what he had been warning Californians about for years.



Those who blame the recession for California’s budget crisis profoundly misunderstand the nature of that crisis. Even before California’s revenue began to shrink, the state government was running a chronic $10 billion deficit and piling up unprecedented debt. The recession is merely the catalyst; the underlying cause is rampant mismanagement of the state’s resources. California spends $43,000 to house a prisoner while many states spend just half that. California spends over $11,000 per pupil, but only a fraction of that ever reaches the classroom. California has one of the most expensive welfare systems in the country and yet one of the worst records of moving people off welfare. And that’s never seemed to bother California’s governor and legislature.



http://mcclintock.house.gov/2009/06/tough-love-for-california.shtml



This is no surprise to those who paid attention and cared more about the state's welfare than their own because they recognize that all is better by looking out for all rather than taking advantage of short term opportunities. The parasite will eventually kill the host unless the burden is limited.



Schwarzenegger took reform to the people of Califronia and the unions waged a very successful campaign to defeat what was good for California, but would head California in a more fiscally responsible direction. They defeated the super hero and kept California on course. We made good time on the wrong road and now they want an exemption from the consequences of their campaign. I have asked for input to show me why I am the mooreon or WIIer which I define on



http://factsforreality.net/



in my looking at a state which would be one of the largest economies in the world if it were a separate country and has had a real estate and dot com booms. The politicians grew the amount of government and rewarded the groups supporting them with unrealistic pay raises and opposed developing the states natural resources.


Peak Oil News and Message Boards post, "US government to loan Petrobras $10 billion
The U.S. government is prepared to provide up to $10 billion in loans to finance the development of massive hydrocarbon reserves off Brazil’s coast, a Brazilian official said Wednesday.
President Barack Obama’s national security adviser, Gen. James Jones, discussed the matter with officials this week during a visit to the South American country, Brazilian Planning Minister Paulo Bernardo da Silva told reporters." at

http://peakoil.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=50486

and Aug. 15 (Bloomberg) -- Billionaire investor George Soros bought an $811 million stake in Petroleo Brasileiro SA in the second quarter, making the Brazilian state-controlled oil company his investment fund's largest holding.
As of June 30, the stake in Petrobras, as the Rio de Janeiro-based oil producer is known, made up 22 percent of the $3.68 billion of stocks and American depositary receipts held by Soros Fund Management LLC, according to a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Petrobras has since slumped 28 percent.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601086&sid=aFHPjfeUvtl8


as opposed to Sarah Palin giving money back to state taxpayers and promoting the development of natural resources to help the state economy and create energy independance. Something to think about for a person capable of objective analysis. We might ask ourselves if California had adopted the type of proposal, a portion of which is quoted next,



"I’ve heard it said by some politicians that Alaska doesn’t have enough oil to make a difference. I can tell you honestly that we do have enough. And while consultants and experts debate the current energy crisis, Alaska is already preparing for its next role—providing American consumers with a safe and secure domestic source of crude oil and natural gas. In fact, if energy imports were curtailed completely, Alaska could provide our nation with seven years of crude oil independence and an eight-year supply of natural gas. These are numbers that reflect known and recoverable oil and gas deposits.
To repeat, Prudhoe Bay has produced 15 billion barrels of crude oil, and there’s more where that came from in ANWR, which is home to more than ten billion barrels of oil and nine trillion cubic feet of natural gas. I know this is a controversial issue. But most Americans do not realize that of the 20 million acres that make up ANWR, we are asking for the right to access just 2,000 of them—a mere 1/10,000th of the total area. Opening up just that sliver of ANWR—which would create a footprint smaller than the total area of Los Angeles International Airport—could produce enough oil (an estimated one million barrels per day) to ease America’s fuel crisis and greatly reduce our dependence on foreign oil." from



http://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2008&month=09



as opposed to our current strategy, would we be better off?