Comments on: California: a bastion of sanity http://whereswalden.com/2008/12/22/california-a-bastion-of-sanity/ Mozilla, politics, economics, law, backpacking, cycling, and other random desiderata Fri, 27 Apr 2012 03:03:18 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Jeff http://whereswalden.com/2008/12/22/california-a-bastion-of-sanity/comment-page-1/#comment-124403 Jeff Fri, 26 Dec 2008 23:49:06 +0000 http://whereswalden.com/?p=84#comment-124403 For future reference, a lawyerly friend claims the following is the correct method for citing the supreme court case, at least for now: Van Horton v. Watson, No. S152360, 2008 WL 5246046 (Cal. Dec. 18, 2008) We're currently at the pre-publication stage, so it make sense that it might change by publication. (See also how Supreme Court decisions refer to internal dissents, using ___ to refer to as-yet-undetermined page numbers.) For future reference, a lawyerly friend claims the following is the correct method for citing the supreme court case, at least for now:

Van Horton v. Watson, No. S152360, 2008 WL 5246046 (Cal. Dec. 18, 2008)

We’re currently at the pre-publication stage, so it make sense that it might change by publication. (See also how Supreme Court decisions refer to internal dissents, using ___ to refer to as-yet-undetermined page numbers.)

]]> By: Ran http://whereswalden.com/2008/12/22/california-a-bastion-of-sanity/comment-page-1/#comment-123934 Ran Wed, 24 Dec 2008 00:10:07 +0000 http://whereswalden.com/?p=84#comment-123934 "Keynesian Economics Is Wrong: Bigger Gov't Is Not Stimulus" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoxDyC7y7PM [Ah, Dan Mitchell of Cato. A great guy who's made some awesome videos on economics in the past couple years! I heartily approve of any video he's made so far and suspect I'd approve of pretty much any video he'd ever make. :-) ] “Keynesian Economics Is Wrong: Bigger Gov’t Is Not Stimulus”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoxDyC7y7PM

[Ah, Dan Mitchell of Cato. A great guy who's made some awesome videos on economics in the past couple years! I heartily approve of any video he's made so far and suspect I'd approve of pretty much any video he'd ever make. :-) ]

]]> By: California: a bastion of sanity - jwalden’s blog - RedState http://whereswalden.com/2008/12/22/california-a-bastion-of-sanity/comment-page-1/#comment-123802 California: a bastion of sanity - jwalden’s blog - RedState Mon, 22 Dec 2008 21:53:39 +0000 http://whereswalden.com/?p=84#comment-123802 [...] cross-posted at my personal site [...] [...] cross-posted at my personal site [...]

]]> By: Ran http://whereswalden.com/2008/12/22/california-a-bastion-of-sanity/comment-page-1/#comment-123800 Ran Mon, 22 Dec 2008 21:30:56 +0000 http://whereswalden.com/?p=84#comment-123800 " ... during an economic downturn, the legislative needs to invest money so that the economy gets the funds to get going again - which, of course, is ... " Keynesian economics, a disaster of human thought and completely wrong. ” … during an economic downturn, the legislative needs to invest money so that the economy gets the funds to get going again – which, of course, is … ” Keynesian economics, a disaster of human thought and completely wrong.

]]> By: Mardeg http://whereswalden.com/2008/12/22/california-a-bastion-of-sanity/comment-page-1/#comment-123791 Mardeg Mon, 22 Dec 2008 19:28:54 +0000 http://whereswalden.com/?p=84#comment-123791 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicaricacy is the English equivalent of schadenfreude (and redirects to it) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicaricacy is the English equivalent of schadenfreude (and redirects to it)

]]> By: Robert Kaiser http://whereswalden.com/2008/12/22/california-a-bastion-of-sanity/comment-page-1/#comment-123790 Robert Kaiser Mon, 22 Dec 2008 19:19:49 +0000 http://whereswalden.com/?p=84#comment-123790 One thing you omitted when saying "the only other option is that you should spend less money" is that during an economic downturn, the legislative needs to invest money so that the economy gets the funds to get going again - which, of course, is another problem in this precarious situation: the state of the budget presses to raise taxes (if possible) and spend less money, the state of the economy dictates to lower taxes and invest money. Fun, isn't it? I'm pretty glad I'm not a decision maker in that state, I feel the pressure that fellow Austrian-born politician and others like him in California are facing. It's quite tough. As for that plan of legislation: I fully agree, that's wrong as well, even though I think that section in that constitution is probably something that should have never got written in there. [That there is a "need" to invest money so that the economy gets the funds to get going again is eminently debatable. Also, from a practical standpoint is it clear that such an investment would be successful if attempted now, at the scale of California, within California? Analyses of the last federal fiscal stimulus, for example, showed that it was primarily saved, and the return on investment was not what was hoped for nor was it enough to make the stimulus worthwhile. The hope was that it would be spent and thus kick-started things, but people chose not to do so. Perhaps the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permanent_income_hypothesis" rel="nofollow">permanent income hypothesis</a> has something to say about this, like maybe that a permanent tax cut would be a better tool than a temporary rebate? Frankly, I happen to think it's great that taxes can't be raised without super-majority approval. :-) If a tax is really necessary that approval will happen; if it's not, then it won't. I don't believe politics is so partisan that this requirement can't be overcome in situations where it truly matters.] One thing you omitted when saying “the only other option is that you should spend less money” is that during an economic downturn, the legislative needs to invest money so that the economy gets the funds to get going again – which, of course, is another problem in this precarious situation: the state of the budget presses to raise taxes (if possible) and spend less money, the state of the economy dictates to lower taxes and invest money. Fun, isn’t it? I’m pretty glad I’m not a decision maker in that state, I feel the pressure that fellow Austrian-born politician and others like him in California are facing. It’s quite tough.
As for that plan of legislation: I fully agree, that’s wrong as well, even though I think that section in that constitution is probably something that should have never got written in there.

[That there is a "need" to invest money so that the economy gets the funds to get going again is eminently debatable. Also, from a practical standpoint is it clear that such an investment would be successful if attempted now, at the scale of California, within California? Analyses of the last federal fiscal stimulus, for example, showed that it was primarily saved, and the return on investment was not what was hoped for nor was it enough to make the stimulus worthwhile. The hope was that it would be spent and thus kick-started things, but people chose not to do so. Perhaps the permanent income hypothesis has something to say about this, like maybe that a permanent tax cut would be a better tool than a temporary rebate?

Frankly, I happen to think it's great that taxes can't be raised without super-majority approval. :-) If a tax is really necessary that approval will happen; if it's not, then it won't. I don't believe politics is so partisan that this requirement can't be overcome in situations where it truly matters.]

]]>