California Becomes the World's Fourth-Largest Economy, Overtaking Japan (cnn.com) 165
"Only the United States, China and Germany have larger economies than California," reports CNN.
In fact, they add that California "outpaced all three countries with growth of 6% last year," according to the California governor's office (which cites new data from the International Monetary Fund and the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis): In 2024, California's growth rate of 6% outpaced the top three economies: U.S. (5.3%), China (2.6%) and Germany (2.9%)...
With an increasing state population and recent record-high tourism spending, California is the nation's top state for new business starts, access to venture capital funding, and manufacturing, high-tech, and agriculture. The state drives national economic growth and also sends over $83 billion more to the federal government than it receives in federal funding. California is the leading agricultural producer in the country and is also the center for manufacturing output in the United States, with over 36,000 manufacturing firms employing over 1.1 million Californians.
The data shows that last year California accounted for 14% of America's GDP, CNN points out, "driven by Silicon Valley and its real estate and finance sectors."
In fact, they add that California "outpaced all three countries with growth of 6% last year," according to the California governor's office (which cites new data from the International Monetary Fund and the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis): In 2024, California's growth rate of 6% outpaced the top three economies: U.S. (5.3%), China (2.6%) and Germany (2.9%)...
With an increasing state population and recent record-high tourism spending, California is the nation's top state for new business starts, access to venture capital funding, and manufacturing, high-tech, and agriculture. The state drives national economic growth and also sends over $83 billion more to the federal government than it receives in federal funding. California is the leading agricultural producer in the country and is also the center for manufacturing output in the United States, with over 36,000 manufacturing firms employing over 1.1 million Californians.
The data shows that last year California accounted for 14% of America's GDP, CNN points out, "driven by Silicon Valley and its real estate and finance sectors."
Not what the narrative says (Score:5, Informative)
Most conservatives keep repeating the mantra that California is a failed state. The basis for that is that 15 years ago, for one year out of decades, California got one cent more in federal dollars than then put in. One year over a decade ago. And they insist it's' a failed state. A state with a lower homicide rate, and a lower drug OD rate, than Florida is somehow a failed state in the MAGA brain.
This narrative by cherry-picked selective reposting is the same way MAGAs are made to believe Biden imported 10 million illegal immigrant rapists and murderers, yet somehow the homicide rate reduced. They make you believe that because they only go into a frenzy about murders by illegal immigrants .. they don't tell you that 16 people are murdered every day by citizens -- do you know even one person? Same way people are afraid of plane crashes more than driving though airplane travel is the safest form of transportation per mile AND per trip, with an average annual injury rate of just 0.01 injuries per 100 million passenger miles traveled. Nowadays the FBI and federal govt. resources are chasing easy-to-catch immigrants while ignoring investigations of rape and murder. Immigrants not only have a lower crime rate, but actually reduce the probability of a native becoming a crime victim.
Re:Not what the narrative says (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
"I've seen things you people wouldn't believe."
It really is a third world country down there.
Re: Not what the narrative says (Score:2)
Oklahoma: the answer to the question "where is the worst place we can put the Indians?"
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Oklahoma: the answer to the question "where is the worst place we can put the Indians?"
I'll give those fuckers credit- they nailed it.
Re: (Score:2)
It's because we're not awful people.
The fact that partisans on both sides... (Score:3)
like to cherry pick stats and use the ones that favor their viewpoint is a known thing, AND it also does NOT mean the stats they choose not to push do not exist. If both sides paid more attention to each other instead of closing their eyes and plugging their ears, they'd each have to confront the stuff they like to ignore and thus would both have to align more closely to reality.
Now, having said that, I note that you are clearly a partisan of the left in need of facing some of the stuff you chose to ignore,
Re:Not what the narrative says (Score:5, Informative)
"Descended into a lawless hellscape"... sure. [missionlocal.org]
Time to turn off AM talk radio and live a little.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
It's a virtual paradise, barely 5000 crimes a month and only 10% involve physical violence!!!
https://www.civichub.us/ca/san... [civichub.us]
Last time I was in the city, a guy took a dump in front of the window of the coffee shop I was in, but that was performance art, I just misunderstood it at the time.
Re: (Score:3)
Well if that happened it must be the worst city ever, right?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The Tenderloin area is objectively the least safe in San Francisco. That said if you think that's bad I suggest you lock your bubble wrapped self in your house and never come out. It's a scary world outside. San Francisco while not the safest city in America is in the top quartile in terms of low violent crime incident rates. And California is objectively just behind Arizona and Alaska as the 3rd safest state overall.
Go find your big-boy pants and ask your mommy if you can play outside.
Re: (Score:2)
The Tenderloin area is objectively the least safe in San Francisco.
Actually, that's not true. But it's the least safe area that tourists have easy access to, or would have any reason to visit.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes Ive been to SF recently. Many times in fact, I live near there. I shouldn't have to tell you this if you've been to the city any time recently but that area you're talking about is only a tiny part of a large city.
Yes SF currently has some problems. Your assessment of the city being a "lawless hellscape" is clearly ideologically driven though and you sound like an idiot to anyone who's been to SF recently and doesn't actively want it to be the worst ever.
Re: (Score:2)
Have you ever actually been to SF?
Yes, I've lived in the City by the Bay for 30 years.
Re: (Score:2)
Has the homicide rate increased? No. https://www.sanfranciscopolice... [sanfranciscopolice.org] Has the rape rate increased? No. https://www.sanfranciscopolice... [sanfranciscopolice.org]
So what the fuck are you on about?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Not what the narrative says (Score:2)
Sure the income disparity is higher, but the poor people make way more money. California is to the US what the US is to the rest of the world: an expensive region that's tough to break into from outside but almost guarantees improved future wealth if you can cut it.
Re: Not what the narrative says (Score:2)
Homelessness is also rampant in California, and the state employment rate is 25% higher than the rest of the US. It's no panacea. It has its own share of problems. Anyone who has ever been to Sam Francisco knows that.
Re: Not what the narrative says (Score:2)
There are definitely issues with homelessness, but I would point out it's nowhere near the worst. Vermont has higher homelessness, for example, and is economically sort of the opposite of California - a tiny libertarian state heavy on agriculture, compared to a giant progressive state dominated by tech. And the difference in weather would make that situation way worse for Vermountaineers.
Re: Not what the narrative says (Score:2)
"There are huge swaths of SF that look like they could be plucked right from the dystopian film Escape from LA."
Citation needed. This makes me believe you've never been to San Francisco. I have no doubt it has its own issues, but I've been there like three times in the last few years and I've never been able to find these Fox News zones where there are homeless people and shit.
Unpossible! (Score:4, Funny)
Re: Unpossible! (Score:2)
It's true. If you watch Fox News, you should definitely not come to California. Everything is on fire, homeless bands roam the coast shitting on beach towels and masturbating, executives are living in their cars, everyone has to pick one of the LGBTQIA+ letters, the guns have all been taken away, and bears are starting to eat people now that no one can afford food and there's no trash for them rummage in.
For the love of God, Fox News viewers, stay away...
Re: (Score:2)
Wait a minute! (Score:3)
Can I move to California in order to avoid King Trump?
Re: Wait a minute! (Score:2)
Unfortunately not, but maybe when the rotten cheeto decides to cut us off for some imagined slight, we'll cut of the money we pay the feds in return
Re: (Score:3)
Don't the feds collect mostly directly?
But more importantly, he who controls the purse strings controls all. If California decided to secede, it would instantly cripple the US economy. Sending in the military wouldn't help at that point, because you can't force a region to be highly productive at gunpoint.
It's strange to me to watch large populations willingly funding their own oppression.
Re: Wait a minute! (Score:2)
"Sending in the military wouldn't help at that point"
Also, who says the military chooses to side with the US? The current deployment of American troops in California makes it the second most powerful military in the world. Add the geographic advantage of being behind a mountain and it's not even clear the US could take California without levelling the entire thing and destroying its value to the union.
Re: (Score:2)
>Also, who says the military chooses to side with the US?
Well, the fact that there are a lot of right-wingers in the military and Trump is doing a pretty good job of replacing the top levels of command with those who will follow his direction without a care for the constitution, country, or people.
Secondly... whichever way the military goes, it's siding with the US. The country's split, both sides have a valid claim to be 'true Americans'. It's just that one side's a bunch of ignorant hateful fascists
Re: (Score:2)
You can move there but GDP is a poor measure of how good your life would be. If GDP was a metric of quality life then you should move to China. Their official GDP has been going nuts for 20+ years.
Lol. Typically dumbshit take from you.
Of course, raw GDP isn't what you want to look for. We want per-capita.
Even that isn't completely fair, since GDP isn't distributed perfectly evenly, but frankly, it's the best we've got.
IMF numbes follow.
US: GDP per capita: $89,105
China: GDP per capita: $13,688
Now, let's do states!
California: GDP per capita: $104,916
Florida: GDP per capita: $73,784
Texas: GDP per capita: $86,987
You are of course right that the cost of living is higher in places like that...
Re: (Score:2)
The best I can give is the GINI coefficient, where CA is about equal to the average for the entire US.
Not great, because the US isn't great, but also not abnormally bad.
Source. [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
So you agree with me that GDP isn't a good measure and call me a dumb shit for saying the same thing you spent 2 posts agreeing with me.
lol- I actually didn't attack your use of GDP, I attacked your use of gross GDP (non per-capita), because you're an idiot.
And you're too fucking stupid to even see that, lol
Re: Wait a minute! (Score:2)
"high taxes on everything"
I mean, you're not exactly wrong, but the tax burden of Texas is higher than in California. They just hide it from people who aren't good at math. The property tax alone in Texas makes it a raw deal in wealth creation, since most wealth in American households come from that house being held.
The reality is California is around the middle of the road among other states when it comes to success. Harder than some (Midwest), easier than others (New England). But because all the prices a
What, then, is "an economy". (Score:4, Interesting)
More bullshit from people who don't care any more.
Re: (Score:2)
Europe, Southern China, and Eastern US don't have governments and they don't report economic numbers. So you can't really report them easily. I suppose one could estimate them.
But the US and California both report economic numbers, so you can do rankings.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's just a comparative measure of the state's size. Not a statement about its independence as a country. And yes, EU's economy as a whole is bigger than China... so count California as 5th.
Re: (Score:2)
Top 5, if we count DC, which isn't a state, and full of Government lobbyists and politicians making between an 8th and a quarter of a mil at the low end.
Re: (Score:2)
If the US and China and California all count as "economies" then why does Europe not count? Southern China? Eastern US?
More bullshit from people who don't care any more.
Erm... the Eurozone certainly does count, although like the US the EU is a loose confederation of different states, far looser than the US as each country has their own government independent of all the others, few common laws and even those are very, very loosely enforced.
China is a different kettle of fish as their entire government is centralised. The UK publish statistics for each country (Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland), Australia for each state, same with Germany, it's just that most
Median wage (Score:5, Insightful)
Median wage in California is 10th place, not of the world, but of US states and territories. It's between Minnesota and Colorado.
California's GDP has nothing to do with the people of California. A bunch of big tech companies and media conglomerates have their HQ there and that's where the income of all their US revenue is registered. Their foreign income is usually registered in some tax haven. This talk about agriculture is nice, but at $60 billion it is barely relevant for the so called 'GDP' number.
Of course there is a large amount of medium to high income people in California, but overall these numbers just reflect some tech bro/billionaire dream rather than anything that is useful for normal people. Median wage is the best indication of how people of a state actually do.
As for the comments saying cities in California are a shithole... well they kind of are aren't they?
The summary makes a big deal about tourism, but with 15 million international tourists per year it's barely even registering on the charts. It's a number similar to croatia. National tourism might be bigger but it's hard to get numbers, compare them or even define it.
Re: (Score:2)
No idea where you got your 10th from, but I'm guessing it's "median income*********"
Re: (Score:2)
Nope. If you are going to correct someone please be accurate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
I specifically stated median wage for states and territories for which my number is accurate.
I think you took median household income for only states, which is not what I stated at all and I can go into a whole reasoning here, but the short version is that I believe wage is more representative because it matters more for this number what people get paid for doing a job than how many people are in a household.
Re: (Score:3)
Dude you messed up, just admit it that you confused wage and household income and stop digging that hole. It's ok. Everyone makes mistakes.
Here you go with that source you were unable to Google: https://www.bls.gov/oes/specia... [bls.gov]
To my knowledge, the only real statistical collection of median income numbers in the US is Household Median Income, collected by the Census.
What do you mean with 'real statistical collection'? You seem to mix up 'census collection' and 'real statistical collection'. Like damn, you don't even know what you are talking about. BLS does real statistical collection using sampling. If you think sampling does not work or is no
Re: (Score:2)
For that last line I meant median wage.
Re: (Score:2)
Here you go with that source you were unable to Google: https://www.bls.gov/oes/specia [bls.gov]... [bls.gov]
Oh, man. If you had actually opened that, you would have seen what I was trying to tell you, lol
What do you mean with 'real statistical collection'? You seem to mix up 'census collection' and 'real statistical collection'. Like damn, you don't even know what you are talking about. BLS does real statistical collection using sampling.
lol, incorrect.
Educate yourself. [bls.gov]
That one has the same numbers I posted with California 11th for median household income.
Incorrect.
That's per-capita, which is average, not median. 5th, median household. There is no median individual (particularly because such a statistic is not collected in the US)
What is your point even?
That you're a dumbfuck, lol.
Re: (Score:2)
It's always a little sad when people resort to swearing at you if their arguments run out. Like it just make you look bad really. And I even asked you to stop digging and then you do that one.
Not only did I open that, I even made a little script to verify that the numbers were the same as the other ones. You asked for source, I provided you source
Re: (Score:2)
Well I guess it was just a coincidence then that you started swearing when you ran out of arguments. Take care dude.
Re: (Score:2)
By the way, I didn't reconstruct anything, those numbers are literally in that data.
Re: (Score:2)
Here, I will help you though-
In the list of jobs that the BLS tracks in its surveys, and pretending like other jobs do not exist, California is ~10th in median wage for those jobs.
That makes the following statement:
Median wage in California is 10th place, not of the world, but of US states and territories. It's between Minnesota and Colorado.
False, because the omitted information is critical to the assertion.
It makes the following statement:
California's GDP has nothing to do with the people of California. A bunch of big tech companies and media conglomerates have their HQ there and that's where the income of all their US revenue is registered. Their foreign income is usually registered in some tax haven. This talk about agriculture is nice, but at $60 billion it is barely relevant for the so called 'GDP' number.
Fucking absolutely laughable.
As you point out- agriculture is only $60B.
And yet, every big tech company and media conglomerate combined are a small fraction of
Re:Median wage (Score:4, Interesting)
California's GDP has nothing to do with the people of California.
California has been a tremendous beneficiary of the integration of China into the US supply chain. There are many, many parts of the economy of California that exist largely because they are the US portal to China, including the tech company presence in the state.
We are entering a world where China will increasingly be cut out of US economic policy, for better or ill. There's a fantasy that the trend will reverse, but there is a reason the Biden administration didn't reverse all the Trump policies on China from Trump's first term: it's broadly recognized in US intellectual circles that China has for decades gamed the economic landscape in hopes of leveraging that into political and military power. The prevailing view has become that China represents an existential threat to the US so long as the US cannot manufacture its own critical wares without it. Not just things as trivial as phones, but things like grid scale transformers for delivering power are basically entirely Chinese at this point. That's not good.
Trump is a blunt instrument, and frankly I don't much like him. But I think his China policy in particular is representative of where all the winds are blowing politically in the US. That's extremely bad news for California, whatever other challenges it may face. Best case scenario for California is that trade shifts to other southeast Asian nations, and they stay the portal for trade. But that doesn't appear to be where things are headed. If I had to guess I'd say the future is a mix of more local suppliers with a very strong Indian manufacturing base. Trade from India currently comes predominantly through the East coast of the US, not the West.
My bets wouldn't be strongly on California going forward, and its politics are the least of that calculation. That said, inertia is a powerful thing. I don't think California is going to fall apart tomorrow, but I do think its going to have to reckon with a steadily harsher economic landscape. Maybe it will navigate that well, but historically that transition has been unkind to trade nexus'.
congrats! (Score:2, Insightful)
California also has nearly 50 times as many homeless people than Japan, with a quarter of the population! So congrats, I guess. Keep winning at what matters.
Re: (Score:3)
California also has nearly 50 times as many homeless people than Japan, with a quarter of the population! So congrats, I guess. Keep winning at what matters.
At least 10% of them came here after becoming homeless, because their home states won't provide them with social services. For example, Texass is one of the five states that decided they didn't want their people to have health care, so they didn't expand Medicaid to people from 18-65. A lot of states make it a nightmare to stay on SNAP, by implementing optional property limits even for people with broad-based categorical eligibility [usda.gov] (Texas is one of those, too, surprise surprise.) California has to bear the
Wait until (Score:2)
The USD-JPY valuation settles in a bit. It can tip the scale either way.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Silliness. Cali doesn’t count. (Score:3, Informative)
Lede. Burying the lede.
https://www.merriam-webster.co... [merriam-webster.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Lede. Burying the lede.
https://www.merriam-webster.co... [merriam-webster.com]
If people have been burying the lede for centuries, why don't we find ledes when we go digging in the garden?
Re: (Score:2)
They're all hidden in Leeds.
Re: (Score:2)
These feral pigs will dig up almost anything not buried deep enough and could potentially be a source of food.
Mmmm, bacon!!!
Re: (Score:2)
These feral pigs will dig up almost anything not buried deep enough and could potentially be a source of food.
Mmmm, bacon!!!
Just wrap the lede in bacon and put in the oven for 30 minutes.
I think that's more indictment of China (Score:2)
They are now the target of the next Cold war (got to keep that military industrial complex going since Russia is pretty obviously not a threat, given that they can't even take a single small country). That means a lot of the manufacturing is going to be gradually shifted over to India.
That's probably a
Re: (Score:2)
Pakistan has twice now looked the other way at Major terrorist attacks happening in India rather than warn the government and twice now nothing has come of it because they're not allowed to go to war when it would screw with capitalism.
Well, there's also the idea of mutual assured destruction. Each country has around 170 nuclear warheads, along with missiles and bombers. That's enough to destroy each other's major cities. Also, war on one's own soil tends to sink one's own economy, at least in the short term. Oh, and people die. And the winning side, if there is one, would have the completely unmanageable and very costly challenge of governing a large, antagonistic territory (think of the challenge of Gaza multiplied by a million).
California roll (Score:2)
Re: I think that's more indictment of China (Score:2)
Only one thing, does Russia really have any operational tanks from 50 years ago... or anything for a land war?
I'm reading that they are really stretched thin, the idea of that fat American gangster suggesting a ceasefire, is just a cherry on top, because they are running on fumes. No?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Only one thing, does Russia really have any operational tanks from 50 years ago... or anything for a land war?
Russia is fielding T-55 tanks [forbes.com] in Ukraine [forbes.com]. This is on top of early model T-72s which are 50 years old and T-60s which were last updated in the 80s.
Even worse, Russia has been pulling tanks from storage in a desperate attempt to replace the thousands which have been destroyed, captured, or are unrecoverable, and those stocks appear to be running out [newsweek.com]. Analysis suggests at current destruction rate, Ru
Re: (Score:2)
Just because Russia thought they could ignore the advice to never start a land war in Asia does not mean their navy and air force do not pose a threat to the USA.
Right, that's not why. The reason why is that Russia is broke AF, and we have a sonar network spread around the planet to find their subs, which are the only really dangerous element of their military to anyone not right next to them.
Our 1970s era jet fighters are still quite impressive compared to whatever anyone else has but they have a lot of hours on them and countries like China are working to develop new stuff that could prove to be better in a fight.
Agreed, it's much more rational for the USA to be concerned about direct military action from China than it is to be worried about it from Russia. Nobody can reasonably manufacture drones faster or in larger quantity than China, and they have quite a few more soldiers than we d
Re: (Score:2)
Russia has almost 5000 nuclear weapons.
They have thousands of nuclear bombs, but only about 200 actual ICBMs. Now, those can generally carry multiple warheads, but it's still nowhere near enough to attack most of the US (and the most populated city in Alaska only has about a quarter of a million people). So, they certainly could attack the US with nuclear weapons, but they would need to be able to use their bombers and subs to actually get the vast majority of their nuclear weapons to the US.
Re: (Score:2)
There's about 2000 deployed warheads as of 2022 according to this paper [thebulletin.org]. I'd say losing the top 2000 US cities would make the US a non-factor in geopolitics going forward. Heck, even losing the top 100 would do it.
Re: (Score:2)
Not sure where they got that 5% number. The US government says 2.8% [bea.gov]
Independent and Chinese sources say China's growth was about 5% in 2024. [merics.org] Maybe they got them backwards.
Re: Silliness. Cali doesn’t count. (Score:2)
Probably nominal vs real GDP. Real is adjusted for inflation, so it's typically more useful, but nominal is the actual top line number and how it changed.
Re: (Score:2)
Possibly. That would explain the 5% for the US, and the numbers for Germany and California, but not the 2.6% for China.
Using nominal GDP growth, presumably denominated in each country's own currency, the numbers are pretty meaningless, never mind the mystery value for China.
Re: Silliness. Cali doesn’t count. (Score:2)
China is experiencing deflation which puts a drag on its GDP growth.
Re: (Score:2)
which is half of China's entire budget serving 4x the population.
well- serving about 5% of the population, really, lol.
Re: Silliness. Cali doesn’t count. (Score:2)
Pretty sure they're looking an nominal GDP, not real GDP, and the numbers seem about right from what I can tell (different sources have slightly different numbers)
Re: Ouch (Score:5, Interesting)
I mean, first of all, âoethe big oneâ isnâ(TM)t expected in California, itâ(TM)s expected in Washington/Oregon, when the cascadia subduction zone next slips.
Secondly, assuming youâ(TM)re thinking of next time the San Andreas fault slips, thatâ(TM)s certainly wonâ(TM)t result in any small part of the state becoming a reef, let alone the whole state. The San Andreas fault is a strike/slip fault, it moves sideways, not up and down.
Re: Ouch (Score:4, Funny)
Damn you science!
Re: (Score:2)
It's fake news. Don't believe the grandparent post.
Re: (Score:2)
Pacific plate coming in, not going out (Score:3)
That's going to be a hell of a loss when the big one hits and California becomes the next great barrier reef. One the plus side more room for whales.
Sorry, the plate tectonics are working in the other direction. The "Pacific" plate is crashing into the "North American" plate. California is going to get more hills and higher mountains.
Re: Pacific plate coming in, not going out (Score:2)
Maybe in a few thousand years at the earliest. Right now it's just going to get more Captain Kirk rocks.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe in a few thousand years at the earliest. Right now it's just going to get more Captain Kirk rocks.
That would be good, the current one is getting worn out by tourists. :-)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Would anything of value be lost if Fecebook, Twatter, and all the rest suddenly went away?
You forgot Hollywood. What all those things give America is what some would call an undue influence on the cultures of other nations, plus a bunch of revenue. Pretty much everyone can agree that revenue coming in to the country from other nations is a good thing. There's even an animated cheeto shouting about the balance of trade regularly on TV.
Re: fo cali haters (Score:2)
Re: fo cali haters (Score:2)
I'll take CA over FL any day of the week.
Re: (Score:2)
At least we can spell. Here in California.
Re: (Score:2)
Lots of repubs.
32. Edmund G. "Pat" Brown (1959-1967)
33. Ronald Reagan (1967-1975)
34. Edmund G. "Jerry" Brown (1975-1983)
35. George Deukmejian (1983-1991)
36. Pete Wilson (1991-1999)
37. Gray Davis (1999-2003)
38. Arnold Schwarzenegger (2003-2011)
39. Edmund G. "Jerry" Brown (2011-2019)
40. Gavin Newsom (2019-Present)
Re: (Score:2)
Lots of repubs.
I referred to the legislature as one party. Republican governors cannot do much with a 60%+ Democrat legislature.
Also, your list contains many democrats.
Re: (Score:3)
Lots of repubs doesn't mean no dems. Lots of dems too. My point is, you were wrong. 4 Repubs. 5 Dems. Again, you were factually wrong. Stop writing with feelings and start writing with facts.
From ballotopedia:
Republicans controlled the state Senate with majorities from 1896 to 1956. Democrats split the chamber 20-20 in the 1956 elections, and they won a majority in 1958. From 1958 to 2022, Democrats controlled the chamber except for when it was split evenly in 1968 and 1972, both years when native Cal
Re: (Score:2)
Lots of repubs doesn't mean no dems. Lots of dems too. My point is, you were wrong.
Nope. Sorry, you are talking Governors and I am talking State Legislature, two very different things. Its the legislature that has been royally f'd up in California for decades.
Democrats split the chamber 20-20 in the 1956 elections, ....
Nope. You are talking about what I referred to as the more conservative era, Post WW2 through 1960s. The legislature getting royally f'd up with far left liberals occurred 1980s and later.
Re:And now someone from California ... (Score:5, Insightful)
The days you miss are the days when California was not the 4th largest economy in the world. The best time to be a Californian is NOW. I love my state and would never move anywhere else. It has it's problems, but the reason we are so powerful and have the best economy is not because of Republicans; its the Democrats, and their economic policies, which have been running the show, which are responsible for why were where we are.
Re: (Score:2)
The days you miss are the days when California was not the 4th largest economy in the world.
We are only the 4th largest economy because of transshipping China's product to the rest of the US. The best time to be a Californian is NOW.
LOL. That is why California has experienced a decline in population?
I love my state and would never move anywhere else.
Some of the best weather. Some of the best landscapes. Some of the best beaches. Etc.
But politically it is pretty f'd. The fact that so many abandon all this is telling.
...have the best economy is not because of Republicans; its the Democrats, and their economic policies ...
The best policies for Silicon Valley elites. However for the working class and many others, not. Jobs are a big problem. Housing
Re: (Score:3)
LOL. That is why California has experienced a decline in population?
That decline only lasted two years and ended several years ago. Do better at keeping your irrational California hate up to date.
Re: (Score:2)
LOL. That is why California has experienced a decline in population?
That decline only lasted two years and ended several years ago. Do better at keeping your irrational California hate up to date.
Wrong. You are including illegal immigrants. I am referring to citizens and legal immigrants. The mass departure from California of citizens and legal immigrants continues.
Re: (Score:2)
We are only the 4th largest economy because of transshipping China's product to the rest of the US.
You're off by 2 orders of magnitude.
Revenue from all shipping in California is $11 billion. Professional and business services make up $550 billion. IT is $475 billion. Real estate $450 billion.
Re: And now someone from California ... (Score:2)
"built during a far more conservative era"
Back when "conservative" meant someone with Hillary Clinton's politics.
Re: (Score:2)
"built during a far more conservative era"
Back when "conservative" meant someone with Hillary Clinton's politics.
Nope. Bill Clinton maybe, but not Hillary. In general moderate republicans but post WW2 through 1960s there was a lot of collaboration between conservative democrats and moderate republicans.
Re:Waste of wealth (Score:5, Interesting)
They pay about the most per student but the rankings are near the bottom.
Where'd you get that from? According to the data [edweek.org] I could find [worldpopul...review.com] on academic achievement, California is right in the middle of the list, and exactly matches the national average. The actual worst states are, starting from the bottom, Alaska, New Mexico, Louisiana, West Virginia, and Oklahoma. A lot of red states in there.
Re: (Score:2)
They just overtook the 4th largest economy on the planet- but they're just falling the fuck apart.
That's not wealth- that's income.
Re: (Score:2)