The Sacramento City Council discussed its 2009/2010 budget Tuesday, but the news of the night was the city’s forecast that it will have a $30 million projected deficit in the 2010/2011 fiscal year. Sacramento’s proposed budget for the 2009/2010 fiscal year would resolve the city’s current project $50 million deficit, but a new deficit is on the horizon. Leyne Milstein, the city’s finance director, said the city is balancing its books for the 2009/2010 fiscal year in part by using $8.3 millio... KathleenHaley Seth Sandronsky comment-8116 2009-05-22T17:34:47Z 2009-05-22T17:34:47Z Jim, share the evidence for your case, you know, something other than an opinion. Seth Sandronsky 2009-05-22T17:34:47Z Kenneth Miller comment-8052 2009-05-22T01:56:23Z 2009-05-22T01:56:23Z There seems to be this assumption (amongst some social-minded thinkers) that everything will fall apart if the Government stops spending. I disagree, but I can certainly understand how such assumptions are formed. Truth be told, it's hard to say what will or will not happen if the Government stops spending money since it never really manages to do so. I contend that things can and will be just fine if the government cuts spending and we as citizens dig deep and contribute time and energy to the benefit of our neighbors. There is much talk of a "Return to Prosperity" - what is "Prosperity" exactly? It's an abstract term for sure. I prefer simple statements, like: "It sucks to be taxed" - and, "It sucks to go hungry" - "Constructive hard work feels good", and "Giving to your friends and neighbors feels good". So, Seth, and Jim - the end results you're both aiming for don't need to be mutually exclusive. We just need to start with a list of what we all want and work backwards rather than relentlessly clinging to some ideological approach we foolishly trust will deliver satisfaction. Now, that's common sense. Kenneth Miller 2009-05-22T01:56:23Z The Parrhesiac comment-8045 2009-05-22T00:27:45Z 2009-05-22T00:27:45Z yes I can Seth.... Common sense. And basic principles of economics. Now Seth it's your turn, can you show any examples of how a state that is $21 billion dollars in debt due to overspending on public employees and insane retirement packages and spending billions on illegal immigrants can have a strong economy? The Parrhesiac 2009-05-22T00:27:45Z Seth Sandronsky comment-8010 2009-05-21T18:59:09Z 2009-05-21T18:59:09Z Can you provide one example based on your assumption, Jim? Seth Sandronsky 2009-05-21T18:59:09Z The Parrhesiac comment-8007 2009-05-21T18:09:43Z 2009-05-21T18:09:43Z Seth...thanks for trying to speak for me...but let me do it myself... one thing is 100% certain...economic growth & prosperity will not return to California until our government controls spending and lowers taxes. Despite what some Utopian socialist thinkers would have us believe, government cannot borrow and tax their way out of a deficit and recession. The Parrhesiac 2009-05-21T18:09:43Z Seth Sandronsky comment-8005 2009-05-21T17:33:39Z 2009-05-21T17:33:39Z According to Jim, too much local and state government spending is what ails us. Once they balance their budgets, the economy will grow, job losses will end and prosperity will return. Seth Sandronsky 2009-05-21T17:33:39Z savemidtown comment-7998 2009-05-21T06:54:44Z 2009-05-21T06:54:44Z Jim- you are incorrect on the wage disparity - private to public comparisons are apples to lemons because the public sector has fewer part time workers (disproportionately skewing the avg salary up) and has fewer low wage service jobs like hospitality jobs (hotel cleaner, clerk, food server, etc.) again skewing the average. The public sector employs a much larger share of professional and highly educated workers than the private sector. There is a whole lotta research out there to back this up. Many public workers are also offered the dignity of health benefits. savemidtown 2009-05-21T06:54:44Z Kasey Cotulla comment-7980 2009-05-21T16:05:21Z 2009-05-21T16:05:21Z I also sat through the city council meeting last night and the finance director's presentation of the future was economically bleak, but probably accurate. The key message was that the city can not bridge future budget deficits without making very hard spending cuts. The state government is also likely to swoop in and appropriate more of the city's revenue, further aggravating whatever budget plans are approved. Difficult choices are ahead for city government. Kasey Cotulla 2009-05-21T16:05:21Z The Parrhesiac comment-7977 2009-05-20T21:40:58Z 2009-05-20T21:40:58Z William..seems like you have a rationalization for almost everything...Who cares how much we pay out or get back...we elect represtatives to congress to worry about this..if they are not doing their job, we should replace them. California does not need a bailout...we need to stop spending...we would have no budget deficit if we stopped paying $13 Billion a year for services to illegal aliens and stopped paying public employees 45-125% more than their counterparts in the private sector. The Parrhesiac 2009-05-20T21:40:58Z The Parrhesiac comment-7976 2009-05-20T21:36:51Z 2009-05-20T21:36:51Z It's good policy to borrow so much money that our grandchildren will be in debt? Seth even the Communist Chinese balance their own budgets...in fact they have a huge budget surplus. The Parrhesiac 2009-05-20T21:36:51Z William Burg comment-7971 2009-05-20T20:41:30Z 2009-05-20T20:41:30Z The folks in Idaho are actually being bailed out by us...if you look at the federal taxes paid by the states to the federal government compared to the returns, many states have a big imbalance one way or the other. Idaho receives $1.21 in federal funds for every $1 it sends to Washington DC. Texas gets 94 cents per dollar back. Nevada only gets 65 cents for every dollar. California gets 78 cents back for every dollar of federal taxes it sends east. If we were able to bump that number up a bit--say, 81 or 82cents per dollar, CALIFORNIA WOULD HAVE NO BUDGET DEFICIT. Instead, the excess federal funds from California (and Nevada, and to a lesser extent, Texas) goes to federal projects in states like New Mexico, Mississippi, Alaska, West Virginia and Louisiana, who receive between $1.76 and $2.03 in federal funding per tax dollar sent. Californians subsidize federal projects in other states. So in asking for a federal "bailout," we're really just asking for our own state's money back. For more detailst: http://www.taxfoundation.org/press/show/22659.html William Burg 2009-05-20T20:41:30Z Seth Sandronsky comment-7967 2009-05-20T20:20:39Z 2009-05-20T20:20:39Z The last I checked, Dems and GOPsters in CA and DC had their hands in the $10 trillion loss from the crashes of the housing and stock markets. Borrowing taxpayer dollars to halt declines in our living standards helps those who are the least to blame for the slowdown. I call that good public policy. Seth Sandronsky 2009-05-20T20:20:39Z The Parrhesiac comment-7963 2009-05-20T19:26:21Z 2009-05-20T19:26:21Z Yeah ..Rocket Science...lol... the people in Idaho and Nevada..or Texas should be forced to bail out the irresponsible people of California? We shouldn't have any wars against those who want to kill us? Should we hug them? The fault all lies in the laps of California voters who keep voting in the same left wing tax-and-spend imbeciles. The People of California deserve what they have gotten. The Voters of Sacramento deserve a City budget deficit..we keep voting in council members who are owned by unions that have gotten very fat off our wallets. All City's and Counties in California need to take heed of yesterdays election...70-80% of voters sent a loud and clear message... STOP SPENDING! Borrowing more money from the tax payers through a federal bail-out is simply ludicrous! I see Seth that you are the editor of Because People Matter... a socialist/communist publication. The Parrhesiac 2009-05-20T19:26:21Z Seth Sandronsky comment-7961 2009-05-20T18:57:31Z 2009-05-20T18:57:31Z The federal government is deficit spending for wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, while shoveling below-market loans to the AIGs of the world. These financial firms are too big to fail, according to the appointed and elected officials involved. What about taxpayers in harm's way? Are we the sized right to fail? Now is the time for a federal bailout of local and state governments. Otherwise, the current downturn will be deeper and longer. The triggers for that will be local and state government spending cuts. They will further destabilize the private economy. This is not rocket science. Seth Sandronsky 2009-05-20T18:57:31Z Jenn Walker comment-7936 2009-05-20T18:22:11Z 2009-05-20T18:22:11Z $30 million deficit is pretty discouraging. I'm interested to learn how this deficit is going to be handled. Jenn Walker 2009-05-20T18:22:11Z The Parrhesiac comment-7930 2009-05-20T17:32:43Z 2009-05-20T17:32:43Z You mean that Johnson has not already learned the "details of the budget" already? you've got to be kidding me...I hope this is a misquote...seriously dude whats up with that...you've had months. The Parrhesiac 2009-05-20T17:32:43Z