Showing posts with label spielberg. Show all posts
Showing posts with label spielberg. Show all posts

Sunday, February 22, 2026

The Race To Bankruptcy Court: An Update On the City and State Government Races

 Over the past few posts we have  made the case that New York City is in  the lead to be the next major U.S. city to go bankrupt. The new mayor, Zohran  Mamdani, is already in budget problems and budget shortfalls, making his campaign promises look moot since he does not have enough money to pay for those promises. In fact, he does not have enough tax revenue to pay for basic city services, being over $5 billion short relative to the next fiscal year budget.


But today let’s see how other prime candidates for government bankruptcy are doing in  their financial death spiral. As you may know, our top state candidates to go bankrupt include New York, New Jersey, Illinois, and California. Our top city government candidates to go bankrupt include New York City, Chicago, Los Amglees, and San Francisco (although a couple of west coast cities are making late moves in this bankruptcy race, Portland and Seattle).


But before reviewing the financial status of the above government entities, let’s review how the financial death spiral and eventual bankruptcy will unfold:


  • A government entity keeps expanding its budget, eventually putting pressure on the tax revenue stream it receives.

  • At some  point, rather than cut government spending or make its programs more efficient financially, the politicians in charge raise taxes  to meet the ever growing government expenditures.

  • The raising of taxes causes some residents and businesses to leave the city or state for less tax burdensome areas, reducing the tax base and  reducing  the revenue stream.

  • Rather than cut expenses and become more efficient to match the reduced tax revenue stream, politicians in the above cities or states raise the tax burden even  more.

  • This causes more residents and businesses to flee the city or state, further reducing the tax base and tax revenue stream.

  • At some point politicians panic and raise taxes more and start cutting vital government services (e.g. police, fire, education) in order to try and balance government spending against the shrinking tax base and  revenue stream.

  • The reduction in quality of government services in particular and quality of life in general  drives more residents and businesses out of the area.

  • Eventually, the expenses, costs and financial liabilities outstrip the reduced tax stream and bankruptcy occurs.


1)Let’s  start this update with the situation out in California:


  • We have already reviewed numerous times how residents and  businesses are fleeing the state due to high tax burdens, high utility costs, high gas costs, high crime rates, high business regulation burdens, etc.

  • Businesses that have moved their operations in total or in part out of California include Tesla, Schwab, Toyota, and other small and large businesses.

  • Residents have  also been fleeing, creating a smaller tax base and  smaller tax revenue  stream for the state government.

  • Rather than reduce taxes and/or make state government operations more efficient  to match the outflow of taxable assets, there is a movement to impose a so-called “wealth tax” on the wealthiest Californians, not an  income tax but a wealth tax on the total  assets of individuals, not their income.

  • Billionaire founders of Google, Facebook, and Paypal have  already moved their operations and lives to Florida to avoid both the current high tax burden of California and obviously not wanting any part of the wealth tax.

  • But it is not just high tech founders moving out of the state with news reports indicating that Hollywood stalwart, Steven Spielberg, has already moved out of California, relocating to Manhattan in NYC.

  • Whether he moved out of California to avoid the wealth tax or it is to stay closer to family,  his explanation for the move, it is another very rich California who will be trying to avoid the wealth tax if it ever becomes a reality.


Whatever the motivation was for Spielberg’s move, in any case California will not be getting his current state tax revenue going forward, never  mind getting his wealth tax bite. Raise taxes enough and those that can most easily afford to move out from under the tax burden will do just that: move elsewhere and take their tax stream with them.


2)One state we have not discussed that is on the path to bankruptcy is the state of Virginia. However, recent actions by the state’s politicians open up the possibility that they will also start down the path to bankruptcy:


  • One of the first things the state politicians did in the state legislature in January was to impose a slew of new taxes on a large variety of products and services.

  • In a stunning  move of hypocrisy, right after politicians imposed a whole host of taxes on every state resident and business, a member of the legislature is proposing that the salary for members of the legislation get tripled.

  • So it appears that the state political class has no problem significantly  increasing the taxation of its residents and businesses while rewarding themselves for no good reason.

  • And as we have  discussed in a recent post, while the states around Virginia have been working at reducing or eliminating their own state income tax programs, giving their residents back some of their earning power, that does not appear to be in the genetic makeup of current Virginian politicians.


And to compound this driving up of the tax burden on state residents, a major company has already announced that it is moving a significant Virginia business presence and tax stream out of state:


  • In a possible leading  indicator of business out migration, Boeing has announced it will move its Defense, Space, and Security headquarters out of its current home in Alexandria, Virginia.

  • It will move this division’s entire operations to St. Louis, Missouri.

  • This will take almost 400 highly paid, and highly taxed, employees out of the state to the benefit of  Missouri.

  • When the transfer to  MIssouri was announced,  Boeing also announced major investments in that area  of their business, a major investment that will not happen inVirginia.


While Virginia is not in imminent danger of going  bankrupt, these latest developments from the state’s political  class are early leading indicators of behavior that drive the out-migration of residents and businesses as the state government increases the tax burden on their tax base.


3)A brief diversion back to New York City’s race to bankruptcy court. The city currently cannot fulfill its current government responsibilities, given it could not remove snow and garbage during a recent snow storm and it could not prevent about 20 individuals from freezing during that storm. Given a $5.4 billion budget deficit for the next fiscal year, Mamadani will have  difficulty implementing all of his free promises he made during the campaign: free buses, free daycare, free college tuition, etc.


And yet he has devoted millions upon millions of dollars towards government equity programs in his budget, programs that will  do absolutely nothing for the  benefit of city residents. And according to Joe Rogan, not only does Mamadani want to waste millions of dollars on  stupid gender, race, and sexual DEI programs,  he  also wants to  spend a whopping $1.2 billion on illegal immigrant care.


Garbage and snow does not get removed. People are freezing on  city streets. The budget will likely require cuts to essential  city services. And he wants to spend over a billion dollars on people that should not even be here in the country in the first place. 


As city residents and businesses see their tax dollars going to waste like this while city services stink, more and more will decide to head  out of the city for more sane, less burdensome taxation areas, making the current $5.4 billion budget deficit look good against future rising deficits.


4)One of our favorite state governments to go bankrupt includes the state of Illinois. The state government has unfunded liabilities extending far into the future at the same time that residents and businesses are fleeing both the state and its largest city, Chicago. 


And as always rather than rein in spending to be in line with the state government’s  shrinking tax base or make  government  operations more  efficient, the latest budget proposal from the state’s governor calls for increased taxes:


  • Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker’s proposed budget calls for the highest level of state government  spending ever.

  • He needs to  close an expected $2.2 billion budget shortfall and thus, as always, he calls for tax increases of over $700  million.

  • He wants a wacky “social media tax” on large  social media  platforms, an idea that likely cannot even be implemented.

  • His tax increase proposals require increased taxes on both businesses and residents.

  • He wants to keep more state money for the state government and deprive local governments of their typical share of state tax money, an action that will  likely result in local government tax increases to make up for the $60 million shortfall.

More taxes, more taxes, more taxes. Do these people never learn? The state has been bleeding businesses, residents, and tax base for years and they still do not understand: when government  services get worse and  worse, when taxes and business regulations get more and more burdensome, people will  look for opportunities to  move to other places where they have more freedom to keep their hard earned wealth.

That will  do it for today: politicians in these financial death spiral cities and states do not get it: you cannot keep rising taxes on residents and businesses without seeing those same residents  and  businesses eventually getting fed up with the process and taking their tax revenue streams elsewhere. It is basic human  nature.


Coming attraction: while our current position is that New York City will be the next major city to go bankrupt, our next post, based on  some in-depth statistical  and  financial analysis, makes a strong case that Chicago will win that race to bankruptcy court. It is  still our contention  that Illinois will be  the first state government to go bankrupt, holding  off California (just barely),  New York and New Jersey.

**********************

If you agree that we need to deseat every member of Congress for their lack of success and accomplishment, then please consider going to the following petition link to help the cause:


https://www.change.org/p/deseat-congress-reset-freedom



**********************


Our book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government - Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom And Destroying The American Political Class" is now available at:


Saturday, March 31, 2012

Obama And Campaign Fundraising - No Different Than The Rest Of The Political Class

As most Americans probably know, we are in the midst of a major political election campaign season that has and will seem like it stretches out forever. We are and will be bombarded by political messages, both via news outlets and paid political commercials. And those paid political messages will have to be paid somehow, which brings us to today's discussion.

Many of my Democrat friends like to point out that President Obama is somehow different than past Presidential candidates. That his campaign in 2008 was mostly funded by average, everyday Americans donating small amounts of money to help him get elected.

That his campaign reflected the way America should be run politically, average Americans having their voice heard above the special interests that manipulate our politicians and political processes. That the President is a man of the people, not of the lobbyists, PACs, and other moneyed interests. According to a recent Associated Press (AP) report, in 2008 President Obama had always been a big critic of "Washington's pay-for-access privileges."

Of course, we know that is more fluff than fact. Although he probably did get a lot of money from small time donations from individual Americans in 2008, campaign donation records also show that large banks like Goldman Sachs, large companies like Google and Microsoft, and a myriad of other large special interest groups donated millions and millions of dollars to his campaign in order to win favor and have a say in any Presidential decisions, policies, and strategies.

And his thirst for big time bucks and the influence it buys continues unabated as we lead up to the November, 2012 Presidential election. According to recent Associated Press reports:
  • A March 28, 2012 AP article, "Obama Rolls Out White House Red Carpet for Big Donors," described how wealthy individuals that contribute to Obama election campaigns get privileged access to White House events and personnel.
  • The article documented how more than 60 of Obama's biggest campaign donors have visited the White House hundreds of times for meetings with Obama top advisers, holiday parties or state dinners.
  • Thirty of his biggest donors were invited to the recent state dinner for Britain's Prime Minister.
  • According to the AP, "the President (has) embraced the big-money, fundraising groups he once assailed as a "threat to democracy" on grounds they corrode elections by permitting unlimited and effectively anonymous donations from billionaires and corporations. Obama was once so vocal about super PACs that, during his 2010 State of the Union speech, he accused the Supreme Court in its 2010 decision in the Citizens United case of reversing a century of law that would 'open the floodgates for special interests.'"
  • Top donors to the Obama Super PAC include Chicago investment manager John W. Rogers Jr. and Hollywood director Steven Spielberg, who each gave more than $150,000.
  • Spielberg has gotten White House access many times including an invitation to a Rose Garden event and a private movie showing with the First Family in the White House.
  • Rogers' donations are also interesting and point out a severe conflict of interest since the AP reports: "Rogers was selected by the administration in October 2010 to head a financial advisory council, and visited the White House more than two dozen times since Obama took office, including one-on-one meetings with former chief of staff William Daley and Jarrett, Obama's senior adviser. Two weeks before Rogers' contribution in January, Obama's campaign paid his firm, Ariel Investments, $600 for "event site rental." Quid pro quo?
  • Lenny Mendonca, a director of consulting firm McKinsey & Co., gave $50,000 to an Obama Super PAC and received access to top Obama advisors.
  • Bill Maher has donated a million dollars to an Obama Super PAC, money that the President has not asked to be returned despite Maher's public, disgraceful and border line pornographic public comments about Republicans that contribute heavily to the sour political class divisions in this country.
  • One of the richest men in the world, Warren Buffet, has hosted at least one fund raising dinner for Obama where the cost of attending was in the tens of thousands of dollars, certainly out of the financial reach of "average" Americans.
  • These "dinners for access" events for the President's campaign have occurred many times in the past year with one of them costing attendees a whopping $70,000 to attend.
  • In early March, First Lady Michelle Obama attended a fundraiser in North Carolina that cost $100,000 per couple to get access.The fundraising event included a dinner with the First Lady, a performance by singer James Taylor, and a photo with the First Lady, reports www.newsobserver.com.
If the typical American household has an average household income of under $60,000, how many "average" Americans do you think got invited to the recent White House state dinner?

How many "average" Americans ever got access and a briefing from top Obama's White House advisors?

How many "average" Americans were invited to the Warren Buffet's dinner for the President?

How many "average" Americans got invited to the the First Lady's fundraising event in North Carolina?

How many "average" Americans get appointed to a White House financial advisory council after making a campaign donation?

How many "average" Americans get to a Rose Garden event or share a movie with the First Family?

I think we know the answers to all of the above questions and that answer is none. This President, despite the hype and fluff, is just as bad and just as corrupted by big money as any other American politician. He has and will receive campaign money from corporations, unions, PACs, Super PACs, lobbyists, and wealthy Americans just like any other politician.

Which is why several steps from "Love my Country, Loathe My Government" are urgently needed to fix this pervasive and perverted problem of money in politics:
  1. Step 6 would allow only individual Americans to contribute to election campaigns. When the Founding Fathers granted us freedom of speech, I do not believe that they had corporations, unions, PACs, and lobbyists in mind, only individual Americans. This step would restore freedom and democracy to "average" Americans and remove the overwhelming influence of organizational money form our politics.
  2. Step 7 would allow individuals to contribute money only to politicians that serve them, e.g. someone in Kansas could not contribute to a New Jersey politician's campaign.
  3. Step 39 would impose term limits on all Federal politicians, "one and done," to eliminate the influence peddling and buying that politicians do with wealthy campaign donors in order to continue their incumbency.
As this campaign season progresses, and the President and other candidates proclaim they are the candidate of the "average" American, remember that you probably have not been invited to the White House for being average, you have not had meetings with White House personnel for being average, and you have not been invited to a $30,000 political dinner for being average.

Until the country implements the three steps listed above, you and I are nothing but a vote to Obama and the rest of the political class, a vote that means little after the election when it comes to resolving the issues we "average" people face everyday.


We invite all readers of this blog to visit our new website, "The United States Of Purple," at:




http://www.unitedstatesofpurple.com

The United States of Purple is a new grass roots approach to filling the office of President of The United States by focusing on the restoration of freedom in the United States, focusing on problem solving skills and results vs. personal political enrichment, and imposing term limits on all future Federal politicians. No more red states, no more blue states, just one United States Of America under the banner of Purple.

The United States Of Purple's website also provides you the formal opportunity to sign a petition to begin the process of implementing a Constitutional amendment to impose fixed term limits on all Federally elected politicians. Only by turning out the existing political class can we have a chance of addressing and finally resolving the major issues of or times.

Our book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government - Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom And Destroying The American Political Class" is now available at www.loathemygovernment.com. It is also available online at Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Please pass our message of freedom onward. Let your friends and family know about our websites and blogs, ask your library to carry the book, and respect freedom for both yourselves and others everyday.
Please visit the following sites for freedom:

http://www.cato.org/
http://www.robertringer.com/
http://realpolichick.blogspot.com/
http://www.flipcongress2010.com/
http://www.reason.com/
http://www.repealamendment/