michigan vs california
June 10, 2009, 11:55 am
am i crazy to think that michigan’s problems are actually less worse than california’s? obviously the numbers right now don’t reflect that, but it seems that michigan’s problems, besides detroit’s city governance, are very clear: the state needs more jobs, more economic growth.
california, on the other hand, is deeply dysfunctional and humungous. the government feebly tries to fix overcomplex system, and what happens?
Confused and bored by the wonky and tangled wording on the ballot, most voters ignored the election entirely. Those who did turn out rejected all measures except one that freezes legislators’ pay during budget-deficit years—a ritualised form of venting general anger.
the budget, which they haven’t been able to pass on-time in years, leaves state agencies near broke for months, and the number of ballot initiatives it puts forward each year is absurd (12 in 2008? what normal person can keep track of that?) california actually has viable industries, yet it still is in a severe budget crisis. plus, no one in michigan wants to split the state into four parts. i’d much rather be jennifer granholm than arnold swarzenegger.
i love the phrase “less worse.”
Without a doubt Michigan’s state finances are in better shape than California and its ridiculous political system (See: Prop 13). Michigan is rated nearly triple-A and has been planning for this downturn for years. California, on the other hand, has the lowest debt rating of any state.
That said, it will not declare bankruptcy, since states can’t. It also likely won’t default on its debt either, because the state constitution says GO bond repayments must be paid ahead of all other obligations other than K-14 education.
prop 13 is an abomination.
Michigan is the new Hollywood.