It doesn't take 17 working synapses to figure this out

In my state (California), the government is about to go broke. On first examination of that scenario, one might think, oh no! But after a very brief reflection it occurred to me that this is exactly what we need. We have a democratically controlled legislature which has expanded its expenditures and government programs by almost double in 19 years. Revenues, obviously, have not doubled. Hence the $42 billion with a B deficit. The legislature is in need of a collective financial full-blown intervention (you heard of that TV show Intervention, right? With the drug and alcohol abusers? Yeah). They remind me of the girl in that movie Shopaholic. They just can't stop increased spending. And the notion of shrinking spending, shutting down programs, thinning the ranks of government so-called "workers" (there's an oxymoron for you) - it is completely foreign to them. In fact, the current slate of propositions on the May 19 ballot represent behavior analogous to the Shopaholic main character pulling her last usable credit card (which is encased in a brick of ice) out of the freezer, and applying all necessary tools to break that card free from its cryogenic state and resume spending like it was the next needed fix of heroin. Which is pretty much what these propositions are, to this State government.

So in any effective intervention, if you are going to break the addict free from his bondage, you have to permanently separate him from the powers that enslave him. In this case, those enslaving powers are led by the State's teachers' unions (paid 25% above the national average), the correctional officers' union (paid 35% above the national average), and the state service employees' unions (not paid so great, but way way too many of them). These unions have big money, are aggressive lobbyists, and their lobby money and contribution money is the crack that keeps the ho's of our state's legislature enslaved. These unions do not hesitate to use their pimp hand on our legislature.

When I noodle all this for a moment, when I lend about 17 synapses to the problem at hand, I realize that these two won't separate. It's systemic. Which is why I stated at the beginning that going broke is exactly what this state needs. We need a good bankruptcy. This will be the only thing that detonates the link between the unions and the government. A bankruptcy will negate the power of all contracts (as in labor contracts), and put the state into the place where everything is vulnerable, nothing is sacred. It will allow the government to do what it cannot do with these forces looking over its collective shoulder: drastically and permanently change state government's labor contracts and expenditures to align with the harsh reality of its financial situation. It is a needed step, but it is only the first step.

There's much more that needs to happen, and the only way to properly catalog it is to write a book, which was not my intent when I started this post. But just to throw a list out there (since I cannot resist at this point)...

...We need to open up K12 education to private competition in order to change its behavior, through vouchers. Yep, I just dropped the V word. Competition changes behavior, and behavior is our big K12 education problem, not funding. When private schools can deliver a far superior education at a fraction of the expense the state doles out per student, our education problem is not insufficient funding. So, competition changes behavior because it brings this unpleasant kind of accountability. That would be the first issue; the second issue is transparency. Transparency of meaningful performance metrics is the second part of California's K12 problem.

...The lack of transparency and accountability are also the root problems in our correctional system, and our state government at large. If you knew the crap that is going on, you would hit the roof. Opening up the correctional system to competition from the private sector would be a good start too. When a private contractor can function as the steward of a state inmate for materially less than the State can do it, it's time to change the model to drive out the cost. Why not get the Maricopa County Sheriff, and make him the Corrections Czar of California? I think if we did, we would see alot of changes here, changes we would like. Costs would plummet. Return customers would plummet. Crime rates would decrease. You get the idea.

...The third part is we need to give businesses cause to want to do business here. From a cost and regulation standpoint, we are giving businesses left and right plenty of reasons to not want to do business here. And guess what? As a result, they are leaving. That trend only gets reversed when it becomes more attractive to stay here than it does to leave here. If the state wants a growing tax revenue base to fund its operation, it needs an economy, and it's really hard to have an economy with businesses leaving, which means jobs are leaving too. Basic 2 + 2 stuff. At least for you and me.

...The fourth part is budgeting. As long as the State has a spend-it-or-lose it budgeting and spending model, which disallows the carrying forward of budget dollars, the State will continue each fiscal year to empty its checking accounts of all left over funds. That practice rarely results in good investments and a good use of tax dollars. Who does that? You don't behave this way. I don't treat my finances this way. What the heck?

...The fifth piece is retirement. This needs to get scaled back to reality. The main reason so many deadbeats run to the state employment payroll is because after barely working for a period of time less than you and I by about 10 years, they can retire at 55 without having to really do much of anything in the way of saving. As a hard-working tax-payer, how's that grab ya? I am not suggesting we take away the retirement of those that have worked for many years and are now 54 and a half, getting ready to retire. But I am saying drastically change that retirement scale now. Push it to 65, and scale the retirement benefits payout package way back. In fact, why not tie their retirement in a meaningful way to their financial contributions toward retirement so that they only get out something related to what they put in? Imagine that. Real world scenarios. Wow. What'll I think of next?

Alright, enough cataloging for now. I am getting angrier and more hostile as I contemplate this whole mess. So with that said, let's all get back to work. There are alot of able-bodied welfare recipients in this state depending on us, not to mention all the part-time workers otherwise known as government and education employees. You ticked off yet? I am.

Thanks for playing.

:^\