Liberal Forum

sunburn » 11 May 2023, 7:21 pm » wrote: ↑

11 May 2023, 7:21 pm

hope they don't come to Texas!!!!

Why wouldn't you want businesses to come to Texas?
 

thgolfboy » 11 May 2023, 7:55 pm » wrote: ↑

11 May 2023, 7:55 pm

Why wouldn't you want businesses to come to Texas?

they'd probably bring their liberal views.
how hard would it be for a Republican to win if Texas goes blue?
 
 

golfboy » 08 May 2023, 7:02 pm » wrote: ↑

08 May 2023, 7:02 pm

Newsom can't pay his bills.
California Defaults on $18.6 Billion Debt, Now Businesses Have to Pay

California borrowed approximately $20 billion from the federal government to cover unemployment benefits during the pandemic, and with Gov. Gavin Newsom’s recent decision to not pay it back, employers are now saddled with the expense, according to experts.

“The state should have taken care of the loans with the COVID money it received from the government in 2021,” Marc Joffe, policy analyst at the Cato Institute—a public policy think tank headquartered in Washington, D.C.—told The Epoch Times.In the proposed 2023–2024 budget, $750 million was allocated to start paying down the loan, but Newsom made changes to the plan in January and withdrew the funding.

 Newsom’s office didn’t respond by press time to a request by The Epoch Times for comment.

 The decision leaves businesses in the state responsible for the loans—as mandated by federal regulations—so the federal unemployment tax rate of 0.6 percent is set to increase by 0.3 percent annually, starting in 2023, until the loan is extinguished.

“California is just not really an employer-friendly state,” Joffe said. “This one thing will not be a difference between a business remaining open or closing, but it’s just another burden on top of the many burdens the state puts on employers.”

 Twenty-two states borrowed money for unemployment insurance from the federal government during the pandemic, with all but four—California, Colorado, Connecticut, and New York—paying back their debts.

 California owes the most, by far, with approximately $18.6 billion outstanding as of May 2, followed by New York’s $8 billion, Connecticut’s $187 million, and Colorado’s $77 million, according to U.S. Treasury Department data.

The discrepancy in amounts borrowed and owed by states lies in the different approaches to managing the pandemic, with California’s stricter lockdown causing unemployment to remain higher for longer, according to experts.

 Initially, the state borrowed from its reserves to pay the benefits, but after exhausting its coffers, it borrowed to cover expenses, analysts said.

 Exacerbating the situation were unprecedented levels of fraud occurring across the state because of limited oversight and antiquated computer systems, according to Lee Ohanian, professor of economics at the University of California–Los Angeles.Analytics firm LexisNexis estimated the total cost of the fraud at $32.6 billion.

 Investigations have since uncovered that illegitimate unemployment benefits payments were paid to convicted felons, with one address receiving 60 separate fraudulent payments.

 Fraud is a persistent issue historically with the program, and a $2 million federal grant in 2013 sought to address the issue with new computer software systems.

 The upgrade successfully stopped instances of fraud, but further improvements stopped with the end of the grant in 2016, reportedly because of the agency’s reluctance to take on the annual expense for the third-party service.

 “They were penny wise and pound foolish,” Ohanian told The Epoch Times.  

Continued next post...
 
 

At a cost of $2 million annually, the program would have cost $14 million to operate over the period since it was terminated.“Sadly, this is just a trifecta of bad decisions,” Ohanian said. “The [Employment Development Department] made a bad decision to not renew its lease for the fraud detection software, the state government took out a loan and chose to welch on the debt—which is outrageous—and now businesses are repaying more in taxes for the incredibly unwise decisions and mistakes of the state government.”

 Reports that the state is seeking forgiveness from the federal government were met with resistance by policy experts, including Ohanian.

 “We’ve made a lot of bad decisions and we expect the rest of the country to pay for it,” he said. “It also raises questions about the future: If the state is going to default on the $20 billion federal loans, how safe are municipal bonds from California?”
 

golfboy » 08 May 2023, 7:02 pm » wrote: ↑

08 May 2023, 7:02 pm

Newsom can't pay his bills.
California Defaults on $18.6 Billion Debt, Now Businesses Have to Pay

That little bastard desantis gave newsome a national stage from which to launch his shadow campaign. Now the democ rat base is alerted and will not be spooked when they substitute him for biden at the last moment. 

Pretty cute way to avoid the damage of a primary - and pretty cute of desantis to help the democ rat establishment out. 

golfboy » 08 May 2023, 7:02 pm » wrote: ↑

08 May 2023, 7:02 pm

Newsom can't pay his bills.
California Defaults on $18.6 Billion Debt, Now Businesses Have to Pay

This is actually a BIG story.  I wonder if the Federal Government is making California pay the default rate of interest?
 

Cannonpointer » 04 Jan 2024, 5:14 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Jan 2024, 5:14 pm

That little bastard desantis gave newsome a national stage from which to launch his shadow campaign. Now the democ rat base is alerted and will not be spooked when they substitute him for biden at the last moment. 

Pretty cute way to avoid the damage of a primary - and pretty cute of desantis to help the democ rat establishment out.

****, he exposed Newsome in the best possible way......right in front of the American public.

RebelGator » 08 Jan 2024, 10:36 am » wrote: ↑

08 Jan 2024, 10:36 am

****, he exposed Newsome in the best possible way......right in front of the American public.

While there is some merit to what you've said, Cannonpointer is not wrong.  DeSantis is a genuine presidential candidate.  Newsom is not.  The question is: why does DeSantis feel compelled to debate with Newsom?  There is a case to be made that by doing so, DeSantis lends credibility to Newsom being the Democrats' shadow candidate.

There are 2 things going on here:

• Points made by DeSantis and/or Newsom during the debate
• Whether it is necessary or even advisable for DeSantis to debate Newsom. 

One really has nothing to do with the other.
 

People are leaving California for a reason. And it is not because of the area. **** up Dem politics are running good people out of town.

Skans » 08 Jan 2024, 11:25 am » wrote: ↑

08 Jan 2024, 11:25 am

While there is some merit to what you've said, Cannonpointer is not wrong.  DeSantis is a genuine presidential candidate.  Newsom is not.  The question is: why does DeSantis feel compelled to debate with Newsom?  There is a case to be made that by doing so, DeSantis lends credibility to Newsom being the Democrats' shadow candidate.

There are 2 things going on here:

• Points made by DeSantis and/or Newsom during the debate
• Whether it is necessary or even advisable for DeSantis to debate Newsom. 

One really has nothing to do with the other.

There is no way in hell that Biden will run again.....he'll either croak or the party bosses will decide he can't beat anyone with his dismal record.

RebelGator » 08 Jan 2024, 12:37 pm » wrote: ↑

08 Jan 2024, 12:37 pm

There is no way in hell that Biden will run again.....he'll either croak or the party bosses will decide he can't beat anyone with his dismal record.

It's a little late in the game to replace him if he's alive. According to the actuarial tables, the life expectancy for an 81 year old male is 7.25 years.  But, then again, the life expectancy (according to the actuarial tables) for someone 110 years old is 1.05 years.
 

RebelGator » 08 Jan 2024, 12:37 pm » wrote: ↑

08 Jan 2024, 12:37 pm

There is no way in hell that Biden will run again.....he'll either croak or the party bosses will decide he can't beat anyone with his dismal record.

unless he dies there is no going back now 

RebelGator » 08 Jan 2024, 10:36 am » wrote: ↑

08 Jan 2024, 10:36 am

****, he exposed Newsome in the best possible way......right in front of the American public.

So you think democrats were embarrassed, rather than tipped off, do ya?

You are one of the simplest mother **** I've met on these boards - benson simple. 
 

Cannonpointer » 08 Jan 2024, 6:18 pm » wrote: ↑

08 Jan 2024, 6:18 pm

So you think democrats were embarrassed, rather than tipped off, do ya?

You are one of the simplest mother **** I've met on these boards - benson simple.

Hey, ****,  I don't give a flying **** about a Democrat's state of mind.....the object was to expose Newsome and his failed policies to the group of voters who really decide an election, not the left or the right, but the **** middle that can't make up it's mind.

If you think Biden is going to be the Party's nominee only if his insanity is kept hidden, you're nuts, too.

 

RebelGator » 08 Jan 2024, 6:36 pm » wrote: ↑

08 Jan 2024, 6:36 pm

Hey, ****,  I don't give a flying **** about a Democrat's state of mind.....the object was to expose Newsome and his failed policies to the group of voters who really decide an election, not the left or the right, but the **** middle that can't make up it's mind.

If you think Biden is going to be the Party's nominee only if his insanity is kept hidden, you're nuts, too.

You're a moran.
 

Skans » 08 Jan 2024, 12:50 pm » wrote: ↑

08 Jan 2024, 12:50 pm

It's a little late in the game to replace him if he's alive. According to the actuarial tables, the life expectancy for an 81 year old male is 7.25 years.  But, then again, the life expectancy (according to the actuarial tables) for someone 110 years old is 1.05 years.

He could get ****-canned at convention time if the power brokers decide it.
 

RebelGator » 08 Jan 2024, 7:10 pm » wrote: ↑

08 Jan 2024, 7:10 pm

He could get ****-canned at convention time if the power brokers decide it.

He could easily get ****-canned, but for Jill Biden.  Jill has her hooks into the Progressives who are running the Oval Office.  And, she's got lawyers.