Well, there is this mantra out there - "live within our means" - and while that sounds really nice . . . and it sounds really responsible, it's meaningless. Our means are completely within our control . . . We have just given away huge corporate subsidies in February; we have given away other tax reductions over many, many years; we've created tax loopholes; in good times, we routinely give away taxes, and then in lean times we never replace those tax deductions or close those loopholes. . . . So "live within our means" doesn't mean anything. The fact is, we have a state with a population that have [sic] needs that we have a moral obligation to provide.Emphasis mine. This is the argument that goes on inside every marriage where money is a problem and one of the two can't control their spending.
In lieu of a divorce from our legislature, some Californians are opting for a trial separation. I wonder why?
(F)or the fourth year in a row, a survey of 543 CEO's found that California's toxic combination of high taxes and intrusive regulations made it the worst place in the nation to do business.Maybe if we nag, harass and abuse our employers and taxpayers a little more, they'll give us more money to spend.
Update: That quote from Noreen sounds like it was dialogue lifted from the last third of Atlas Shrugged.
Who is John Galt?