High-Benefit, High-Tax Model for Golden State Isn't Working

That's according to this LA Times op-ed by William Voegeli.

The high-benefit/high-tax model can work only if things are demonstrably not equal -- if the public goods purchased by the high taxes far surpass the quality, quantity and impact of those available to people who live in states with low taxes.

Today's public benefits fail that test, as urban scholar Joel Kotkin of NewGeography.com and Chapman University told the Los Angeles Times in March: "Twenty years ago, you could go to Texas, where they had very low taxes, and you would see the difference between there and California. Today, you go to Texas, the roads are no worse, the public schools are not great but are better than or equal to ours, and their universities are good. The bargain between California's government and the middle class is constantly being renegotiated to the disadvantage of the middle class."

That's likely to prompt more than a few heated discussions around here. Before they begin, I suggest reading the whole article. He offers some compelling evidence. And remember how efforts to denigrate South Carolina worked out in the Boeing competition.

More bad news for California, among others. Budget fixes aren't.

Robert Reich's blog is always interesting. This I agree with:

Health-care reform is critically important. But when one out of six Americans is unemployed or underemployed, getting the nation back to work is more so.

No matter how you feel about health care reform, there's no question that job creation must be everyone's top priority.