Okay, riddle fans, here’s a toughie: What’s the difference between California voters and the passengers on the Titanic?
The passengers on the Titanic didn’t vote to hit the iceberg.
Most Americans understand that California is sinking. What is almost incredible is that it has voted to sink.
Advertisement
On Election Day 2010, Californians voted Democrats into every statewide position (one is still undecided). This is the party that single-handedly has brought one of the world’s greatest economies to near-ruin. There may well be historical parallels to what Californians did — but I cannot think of any.
A listener called my radio show two days after the elections to tell me that his business is booming — thanks to Californians. His occupation? He’s a real-estate agent in Phoenix, Ariz.
The middle class has begun to leave California. It is, of course, impossible for most members of such a large group to leave a state; few people leave their family, their friends, their job, and their home except under the most dramatic circumstances. But this fact makes all the more noteworthy the exodus from California that has been taking place.
You have to wonder how many businesses and individuals would leave California if their friends and family could also leave, if they could find a comparable job elsewhere, and if they could sell their homes without losing money. What you don’t have to wonder about is who would stay under those conditions. The state of California would eventually be left largely to those groups who voted Democrat in this election: rich liberals (such as those who live in Nancy Pelosi’s Marin County, in the Bay area, and in West Los Angeles); state and municipal workers (who vote Democrat in as direct a pay-for-vote scheme as a law-based society allows); those who rely on state and city governments for entitlements; and those Latinos who either fall into the last category or who unfortunately identify the Republican party with anti-Latino sentiments because it opposes illegal immigration.
Those who believe in individual responsibility, the free market, and personal liberty are a minority in California. We greet each other as Americans would greet each other meeting in a foreign country.
We watch as one of the greatest places in the world — with its extraordinary natural beauty, almost uniquely beautiful weather, and agricultural abundance — wastes all of this as a result of having become a left-wing experiment. What is particularly saddening is to see a state whose success was achieved because it was a mecca for the adventurous in spirit do everything possible to crush that spirit and drive away those who have it.
There is a silver lining here: clarity. Americans living elsewhere need not elect liberal Democrats to know what will happen if they do. They need only examine California to see what happens to a state governed by the Left (and, for that matter, they can look at Texas to see what happens to a state’s finances when governed by the Right).
I am not so sure the Titanic metaphor is apt. After all, the Titanic was destroyed by the impact. These true believers think they are saving California; they are driving the useful and productive out so they lazy and shiftless can reap the benefits. Greenies would love to have the place to themselves. They don't care about finances, growth, etc. Imagine how much smaller the carbon footprint will be after the folks who work for a living leave!
I'm guessing Friedman will not be writing a book entitled "What's Wrong With California?" or "What's Wrong With New York?" or even "What's Wrong With The New York Times?"
California has had Republican governors for 23 of the past 28 years. It is hard to see how one can then argue that Democrats are "the party that single-handedly has brought one of the world’s greatest economies to near-ruin."
My wife and I left California in 2007, after living there for 30 years. I've seen a couple of quotes to the effect that about 3000 people leave the state each week. Comparisons of U-Haul rates into vs. out of California show that people who can afford to leave the state are doing so and have been for some years now.
@ David Klein: Can the statists ever address the merits of an issue? Is their only argument, in support of the harmful things they do, that "the other guy does it too/is a hypocrite/is self-interested"? I get so sick of this infantile response on *every* issue. To answer your question, Klein, read the list of things that Prager points to as the causes of Cali's eminent demise. They are all Democratic priorities. Foolish Republican governors may have signed off on the enabling legislation, but that doesn't change the fact that the legislation itself would never have passed if Democrats had not been in control of the Legislature. Just once, statists, just once address the merits of an issue.
Cloward and Piven. Overload the system with demands and requests until it breaks. That's what's been going on in CA, and I commend you Dennis for your insightful analogy. From illegals and sanctuary cities to anti-business policies and looming tax hikes and energy costs for regressive "global warming" policies. This state is screwed. The ultimate problem: too many immigrants still view Republicans as the party of the rich, evil white men. In the Bay Area there are Indians, Afghans, Chinese, Filipinos, and Mexicans, mixed right in with blacks and whites - throughout the Bay. Besides whites, which are now a minority, all those groups vote almost 100% Democrat. This is the real problem. The Republicans have not been able to re-brand their values and ideals to appeal to these voting blocs, and unfortunately, it doesn't look like they will be able to do so any time in the near future. Schwarzenegger will go down as a failure for Republicans.
I forgot to add that I won't feel sorry for CA until after they drop such pork-barrel boondoggles as state (as in the state of California) funded embyonic stem cell research.
I think the part of California that is north of the San Francisco metro area should break off from the rest of the state. It should be part of Oregon because it is culturally of the northwest instead of like the rest of California.
I think the eastern part of California should be added to Nevada and Arizona. Again, those parts of California are culturally part of the western U.S. and the governments of Nevada and Arizona are a better fit for those people.
The rest of California should then secede from the U.S. and become a hyper-liberal failed state. In a generation, the people of southwestern California would gladly agree to be re-united with us as a territory of the United States with limited sovereignty. This would minimize most of the damage that California currently does to our nation.
The way things are going as California goes so goes the rest of the country, but they still keep saying illegal immigration is not a problem, we can afford to take care of the whole world...NOT
I am born and raised in California. I am sad to see what has happened to my beautiful state. I breathe the cool air, ponder the vast blue sky...and then, bamn! Reality hits. I may have to leave this beautiful home since I can't stomach the idea of being taxed into the Democrats policies and ideas. Sad, indeed.
Nominee for funniest thing written on the Internet for 2010: "for that matter, they can look at Texas to see what happens to a state’s finances when governed by the Right"
Nominee for laziest writer: Dennis Prager.
It is a two-fer folks.
Texas faces a $28 BILLION deficit created by that noted Anti-American and strident secessionist (and noted traitor if Prager reads the US Constitution and a history book not approved by the Texas Board of Education) Rick Perry. The RepubliCANTS created this mess thanks to a majority in both houses and holding the governor's mansion.
Texas' deficit as a percentage of tax revenue is larger than California's. Texas' deficit was created by tax cuts and other budget gimmicks that were used to close the last RepubliCANT budget mess in 2003.
California's deficit was created by the voters who capped property taxes (a nice sop to older, retired folks and a burden for younger folks) and then dedicated roughly two-thirds to budget mandate. Yes, two-thirds of California's budget is mandated by state law. Laws that were passed by the people.
Too bad Prager cannot be bothered to do some research before he starts writing. I guess that's why he is a commentator and not a person who argues facts.
As it turns out, the Titanic most likely wouldn't have sunk had it hit the iceberg head-on. The first couple of compartments would have filled with water but the others would have done their job.
I wonder if California may be saved by hitting the iceberg head-on. Perhaps they'll see the damage sooner rather than later and be shocked back into reality before everyone who remembers capitalism and self-sufficiency is dead or moved away.
