I take insult to the 'Ummm, field part' of that picture! Tons of good wind farms up there supplying tons of energy now. And Texas Tech Univserity is in Lubbock Texas ;-;
I mean, we did stop UT from going to the #1 vs #2 game that year when a defense player from UT let a ball fall right through his arms =D
Haters keep on hating.... but this report begs to differ. Enjoy
Horribly biased article. Even the zaniest of conservative pundits would (maybe) be able to gather that.
Yes, Texas offers significant incentives for businesses to "set up shop" on its soil. Your state would too if 50% of said soil (and Texas is a BIG place) was classified as arid (desert) or semiarid (desert-like).
A lot of the statistics cited in the OP article are heavily-weighted by the petroleum industry in Texas. When an economy falters, it's always raw materials and commodities that tend to suffer the least. Petroleum is the life-blood of the modern industrialized economy, so it's really not shocking that Texas has endured the depression fairly well when compared to California, where the real estate and construction industries (which were extremely profitable in California pre-recession) were totally flattened by the "housing bubble burst". The oil industry has been in a boom-bust-boom cycle for decades in Texas. Just because it's in a "boom" phase coincidental with the nationwide depression does NOT mean Texas is "superior" to other parts of the country.
Lastly, it needs to be said that while Texas offers the transparent luxury of zero income taxes, please remember that Texas has a very high property tax rate. A Texan pays 4.5 times as much in annual property taxes (per $100k of property value) when compared to a Californian.
I don't (personally) care for Texas or California. Neither is "the way of the future". Both state cultures and economies are unsustainable long-term. California needs to be more conservative, and Texas needs to be more liberal.
Here's a (far) more balanced "snapshot" of the two State economies than the rubbish offered by the OP's quote:
Quote:
California v. Texas: The economy
Where Texas beats California
Lower median home: $148,000 vs. $297,000
Lower income tax rate: 0% vs. 9.3% avg.
Lower jobless rate: 8% vs. 12.4%
Where California beats Texas
Bigger paychecks: $51,566 vs. $45,692
Lower real estate taxes: $477 vs. $1,817 per $100,000 (2005)
Stronger per capita GDP growth: 3.0% vs. 1.6% before recession, 1997-2007; tied at -4.1% during recession
Lower average tax burden for businesses: 4.7% vs. 4.9%. (The lower average tax rate is partly because California's "effective" tax rate - the percentage of tax that actually gets paid - is much lower than its "marginal" or official tax rate, especially for large businesses within the state.)
More college graduates: 29.6% vs. 22.9%
Sources: UCLA Anderson Forecast, U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Census Bureau, California Association of Realtors, Texas Association of Realtors, Council on State Taxation.
Taking the average incomes, 1500 in property taxes is paltry compared to 4500 in income taxes (this is the differences mind you). Also, taking mean incomes, 6000 less in income is insanely better than 150,000 more for a home
In all honesty, there are definitely some financial troubles that are extremely avoidable here. I'm not sure about my whole state, but at least at my University. Texas should come fix it for us! There's been a lot of panic over our budget in the last few years.
For one, much as it's rotten school spirit to say so, our football team is really not that great. At all. Yet our football coach is the highest-paid employee in the entire STATE of Idaho. He makes more than the governor, more than the Uni president, more than the state's other football coaches.
We recently (within the last 5 years) paid thousands of dollars to some designer to change our school symbol and motto. It went from "From here you can go anywhere" to "Wide open spaces" or something like that. Most people liked our old symbol and motto better, and the change was completely unnecessary and outrageously expensive.
We have spent over a year renovating the football stadium. No one that I ask seems to know why. It was an old stadium, so it's perfectly possible that they had to make some changes to be up-to-date on safety codes. And I would accept that, except that they've also been redecorating the outside of it with new tiles and such for about a year as well. We're in such drastic financial trouble that we're going to spend thousands of dollars to make the outside of a building more aesthetically pleasing, heck yeah!
Along those same lines, we've spent all summer so far ripping our perfectly good track and field lot up so we can replace it with another track and field lot.
Also, the English department is declining. Fewer people are majoring in English. But we flew in four candidates for a job opening (no one has retired or left recently, so this has apparently been open for a very long time) and hired one. For what? To be a new poetry teacher. There are 3 poetry-writing classes-- beginning, intermediate, and advanced. There are 3 (at least) professors capable of teaching all three of those classes. I have no idea why we need another poetry professor. There's fairly few people that even choose their emphasis to be poetry because frankly there's not a lot of money to be made there. So hiring a new professor for a major that nearly no one does when we have other professors fully capable of doing it... I suppose that makes about as much sense as anything else here. >.>
Yet the University is in such 'dire need' of money that we cut the entire physics program and the German major. ><
Also, our cheerleaders recently (a few years ago) decided to go behind the university's back to buy new uniforms that were rather skimpy and made them look like a cross between NFL cheerleaders and Las Vegas strippers. They wore them to a total of one single game before the university realized they were wholly inappropriate and made the girls buy new, less skin-showing uniforms. The uniforms they had before buying the Vegas ones were perfectly fine. So we wasted not one large sum of money for new uniforms, but two, when zero were necessary. That's just great.
I don't know, maybe I'm just jaded or don't understand things. But if it were up to me, if the school was in such dire need of money, the first thing that would go is sports. University is for getting a higher education. Sports is a nice side bonus. We pay ENORMOUS sums of money to our coaches, spend outrageous amounts on unnecessary renovations to sports facilities, buy new uniforms every other year, pay to fly our teams all over the US to compete, and cut physics? Seriously? Sports don't even bring in enough money to cover their own costs. Well over half the people who watch the games are students, who get in for free.
What's more annoying is that the engineering department where my husband works spends almost no money. Most of the computers and things they use are donated by engineering firms around here, such as SEL. Plus the department brings in quite a decent amount just in patents alone. And the money the engineering department makes goes where? Back into the engineering department? Hardly. It goes to help fund the football team. That's unfair on the surface, but when you add it to the fact that last year the university implemented a new practice to charge engineering students a LOT more tuition under the reasoning that 'engineering students will make more money when they graduate so they'll be able to pay it back,' giving the engineering department's earned money to the football team is downright infuriating.
Yes, Texas offers significant incentives for businesses to "set up shop" on its soil. Your state would too if 50% of said soil (and Texas is a BIG place) was classified as arid (desert) or semiarid (desert-like).
Have you been to Texas? No one really sets up shop in a Desert place unless it's El Paso, Midland or Odessa. The only thing going in the desert areas is oil property or old ranches. The booming parts of Texas are in the big cities which have room to actually expand and build an infrastructure (sp) worth a damn. I don't think Baltimore can vouge for anything like that. It's only known for the slowest stretch of Interstate in the Nation.
But yea, there's alot of room to grow. I would have to stay that good road construction is helping it grow. Everytime I drive in MD all I see is road construction equipment sitting around gathering dust.
The oil industry has been in a boom-bust-boom cycle for decades in Texas. Just because it's in a "boom" phase coincidental with the nationwide depression does NOT mean Texas is "superior" to other parts of the country.
We're also opening up one of the nation's largest natural gas pipelines in East Texas.
I beg to differ as far as your assumptions about our economy being carried on the backs of oil tycoons. This isn't 1910 anymore.
This. We're the only (or one of the) State that can fly our flag equal height with the US Flag. Texas could break off from the US and be fine (not that they should/would)
Edit: Texas is also helping lead the way in Wind Energy! Sucky story about the Cheerleading and Engineering thing. Ive heard that sports get so much $$$ cause it bring the most in (or whatever...)
Yes, Texas offers significant incentives for businesses to "set up shop" on its soil. Your state would too if 50% of said soil (and Texas is a BIG place) was classified as arid (desert) or semiarid (desert-like).
Have you been to Texas? No one really sets up shop in a Desert place unless it's El Paso, Midland or Odessa. The only thing going in the desert areas is oil property or old ranches. The booming parts of Texas are in the big cities which have room to actually expand and build an infrastructure (sp) worth a damn. I don't think Baltimore can vouge for anything like that. It's only known for the slowest stretch of Interstate in the Nation.
But yea, there's alot of room to grow. I would have to stay that good road construction is helping it grow. Everytime I drive in MD all I see is road construction equipment sitting around gathering dust.
Who the hell said this? I have to agree with Inuyushi! You probably have never been here! Only about an 1/5 of this state could be considered arid. You watch too many westerns.
EDIT: Elanabelle, after I compliment you and what not, you go about saying something like what Inuyushi quoted.
Yes, Texas offers significant incentives for businesses to "set up shop" on its soil. Your state would too if 50% of said soil (and Texas is a BIG place) was classified as arid (desert) or semiarid (desert-like).
Have you been to Texas? No one really sets up shop in a Desert place unless it's El Paso, Midland or Odessa. The only thing going in the desert areas is oil property or old ranches. The booming parts of Texas are in the big cities which have room to actually expand and build an infrastructure (sp) worth a damn. I don't think Baltimore can vouge for anything like that. It's only known for the slowest stretch of Interstate in the Nation.
But yea, there's alot of room to grow. I would have to stay that good road construction is helping it grow. Everytime I drive in MD all I see is road construction equipment sitting around gathering dust.
Dont forget military training/bases... Im from the midwest states so when I did my tour in El Paso (Ft Bliss), I was disturbed by how all the houses looked the same and had the same sand color made out of the same stone material. But what really cracked me up is how 90% of theses houses and apt complexes had stone/pebble lawns. Dreadful.
This. We're the only (or one of the) State that can fly our flag equal height with the US Flag. Texas could break off from the US and be fine (not that they should/would) Edit: Texas is also helping lead the way in Wind Energy! Sucky story about the Cheerleading and Engineering thing. Ive heard that sports get so much $$$ cause it bring the most in (or whatever...)
Dont forget military training/bases... Im from the midwest states so when I did my tour in El Paso (Ft Bliss), I was disturbed by how all the houses looked the same and had the same sand color made out of the same stone material. But what really cracked me up is how 90% of theses houses and apt complexes had stone/pebble lawns. Dreadful.
Yea, this is true but Fort Bliss/El Paso/Midland/Odessa only makes up one of the seven region in Texas. That's the Big Bend Region. That house layout/style is of Spanish Origin. Basically alot of Texas closest to the border has Spanish Origins due to the history. Really the amount of Military land around there is small in comparison to the size of the state in all. Fort Hood is one of the two I can name in Military bases.
And I do agree, that part of Texas is not my favorite. I prefer the plains/hill country region.
This. We're the only (or one of the) State that can fly our flag equal height with the US Flag. Texas could break off from the US and be fine (not that they should/would) Edit: Texas is also helping lead the way in Wind Energy! Sucky story about the Cheerleading and Engineering thing. Ive heard that sports get so much $$$ cause it bring the most in (or whatever...)
Yes, Texas offers significant incentives for businesses to "set up shop" on its soil. Your state would too if 50% of said soil (and Texas is a BIG place) was classified as arid (desert) or semiarid (desert-like).
Have you been to Texas? No one really sets up shop in a Desert place unless it's El Paso, Midland or Odessa. The only thing going in the desert areas is oil property or old ranches. The booming parts of Texas are in the big cities which have room to actually expand and build an infrastructure (sp) worth a damn. I don't think Baltimore can vouge for anything like that. It's only known for the slowest stretch of Interstate in the Nation.
But yea, there's alot of room to grow. I would have to stay that good road construction is helping it grow. Everytime I drive in MD all I see is road construction equipment sitting around gathering dust.
Who the hell said this? I have to agree with Inuyushi! You probably have never been here! Only about an 1/5 of this state could be considered arid. You watch too many westerns.
EDIT: Elanabelle, after I compliment you and what not, you go about saying something like what Inuyushi quoted.
/facepalm
There was your problem. Complimenting Elana lol. Mostly talks just to hear himself speak. Texas is expanding exponentially (economically) and it has little to do with oil tycoons. The best part was saying Texas as a state was economically "un-sustainable long term"...sighs lulz for all
The main point of this article was to highlight Texas's quality as a state in terms of governing the free market. Texas excels at this and yea a lot of other states should take notes.
Taking the average incomes, 1500 in property taxes is paltry compared to 4500 in income taxes (this is the differences mind you).
You've assumed that all properties are valued @ $100k in Texas. If that were the case, then yes, $1500 more in property taxes in Texas outweighs the cost of $4500 more in income taxes in California.
However, if your Texas property value totals $300k, then you're paying $4500 more in property taxes than you would in California, which is equivalent to the $4500 income tax difference we've previously cited.
If your property value exceeds $300k, then you are now paying more in Texas property taxes than you would in California income taxes.
"Mind you".
zahrah said:
Bismarck.Elanabelle said:
The oil industry has been in a boom-bust-boom cycle for decades in Texas. Just because it's in a "boom" phase coincidental with the nationwide depression does NOT mean Texas is "superior" to other parts of the country.
I beg to differ as far as your assumptions about our economy being carried on the backs of oil tycoons. This isn't 1910 anymore.
Beg all you wish. I did not say the Texas economy is being "carried on the backs of oil tycoons". I stated that the oil industry is more impervious to economic recession than most industries. And since Texas has a large oil industry, and California does not, it's unsurprising that the Texas economy has suffered less. You're right about one thing though: it isn't 1910 anymore. Thanks for clarifying that.
zahrah said:
Siren.Inuyushi said:
Quote:
Yes, Texas offers significant incentives for businesses to "set up shop" on its soil. Your state would too if 50% of said soil (and Texas is a BIG place) was classified as arid (desert) or semiarid (desert-like).
Have you been to Texas? No one really sets up shop in a Desert place unless it's El Paso, Midland or Odessa. The only thing going in the desert areas is oil property or old ranches. The booming parts of Texas are in the big cities which have room to actually expand and build an infrastructure (sp) worth a damn. I don't think Baltimore can vouge for anything like that. It's only known for the slowest stretch of Interstate in the Nation.
But yea, there's alot of room to grow. I would have to stay that good road construction is helping it grow. Everytime I drive in MD all I see is road construction equipment sitting around gathering dust.
Who the hell said this? I have to agree with Inuyushi! You probably have never been here! Only about an 1/5 of this state could be considered arid. You watch too many westerns.
EDIT: Elanabelle, after I compliment you and what not, you go about saying something like what Inuyushi quoted.
/facepalm
I watch no westerns.
I have been to Texas.
I stated that 50% of Texas is classified as arid OR semiarid. You said about 20% of Texas could be considered arid.
Those two statements are not contradictory. We are both correct.
This. We're the only (or one of the) State that can fly our flag equal height with the US Flag. Texas could break off from the US and be fine (not that they should/would)
Edit: Texas is also helping lead the way in Wind Energy! Sucky story about the Cheerleading and Engineering thing. Ive heard that sports get so much $$$ cause it bring the most in (or whatever...)
I let the first time slide, but I won't a second. I agree with most you have said, but: Wind Energy is NOT the future. If we are to alleviate our dependence on fossil fuels, the first step is solar energy.
Wind energy is created on a base 'break even' of thirty years. This calculation is done assuming 100% run efficiency and 5% of initial investment maintenance costs. Wind actually runs at roughly 30% efficiency with a maintenance cost of 20% of initial investment. All that jargon essentially means a wind turbine would pay itself off in 360 years assuming today's energy costs. That is including the current tax breaks on renewable energy sources (which account for more than 50% of wind energy's profits). If tax breaks were to stop (which is under fire every year), the wind push would leave altogether, but even if it didn't you could safely assume that wind would pay itself off in 500 years.
Now, back to solar. Solar systems have an actual payoff of roughly 18-22 years. The calculations were done properly on them, using real world variables. They look to be a viable way to hedge some of our fossil fuel dependencies. They alone cannot replace our thirst for crude and natural gas, but they will help. We are probably still 50 years away from any sort of technology that can compete with fossil fuels and a decent century away from said technology being able to compete in a price point.
I'm all for conservation, and I'm not trying to pick at you Inuyushi, just stating some facts so you can spread the truth. To validate my responses, I work at an electric cooperative, my father is a manager and has been in the business for over 30 years, and I am a personal friend of a generation and transmission cooperative. These facts have come from national meetings where the biggest of the big in respective industries, research groups, and government agencies have all spoke.
This. We're the only (or one of the) State that can fly our flag equal height with the US Flag. Texas could break off from the US and be fine (not that they should/would) Edit: Texas is also helping lead the way in Wind Energy! Sucky story about the Cheerleading and Engineering thing. Ive heard that sports get so much $$$ cause it bring the most in (or whatever...)
So wrong...
We account for 70% of the national GDP...I think we'll be fine
I have little faith in Solar Energy really. Although there was one invention that had me going that was both Solar and Wind (hear me out). A picture would make a world of difference, but no luck finding one. The idea was to put a fan at the top of a stack to rotate as wind escape due to the heat from the sun. The base was rather large and got smaller rather quickly about 15' from the ground (or higher) and the rest looked like a normal smoke stack. Just a different concept that wouldn't require alot of expensive materials for solar panels. Althought Wind Generators are having trouble cause the Engineers didn't calculate in alot of stuff that they're having to go back and fix (broken gears due to fluctuating wind speeds). I wish I could find a picture of what I'm talking about with the Power Stacks.
Also, iirc the highest efficiency that a Solar Panel could put out under the power of 100 suns was (overestimating) 5% no? I just don't have much faith in that.
Haters keep on hating.... but this report begs to differ. Enjoy
Quote:
So what example should America follow, that of deficit-slaughtering, budget-cutting, seriously limited government in Texas, which has added 730,000 jobs in the past decade, or that of regulation-happy, spend-mercilessly, owe-everything, flee-this-place-quickly California, which has lost 600,000 jobs during the same period?
While not a hard question in a nation where unemployment recently shot up over 9 percent again and is dramatically expanding its unfunded entitlement promises on top of its accumulating debt, let's continue to look at some astounding facts about Texas after noting a much-repeated analysis of how it got there.
It has no state income tax, low corporate taxes, does just enough regulating to get the job done, cares for the environment without making a fetish of it, lets its legislature meet for a relatively short period just once every two years, keeps the executive branch slim and trim and is a right-to-work state where unions don't get to grab dues through governmental coercion.
Businesses love all that, varied researchers tell us. A number point out that, in 2008, Texas accounted for fully 70 percent of all new jobs created in America, and if you think that's great, which it is, don't suppose this was a one-shot deal. Businesses are reported to rate Texas the single best state in which to operate. Give them a chance and many will pull up stakes from yonder plunder-and-abuse venue and follow the Lone Star to high profits, sharing prosperity and opportunity as they resettle.
Meanwhile, what glitters is definitely not the Golden State. California is faced with a $26 billion deficit, cripples businesses with unconscionable taxes and rules, has dreamt up environmental objectives that in effect are combat tactics against the common good and is faced with a cost of living that is only part of the reason why citizens are deserting the place like the hordes that once upon a time rushed to enjoy its splendor.
Recently, even Governor Jerry Brown described his state as "fantasy land," and he wasn't talking about movies issuing from Hollywood. He was talking about the sort of thing various publications have documented -- The Washington Examiner, The Weekly Standard, The Economist, The National Review, Newsweek and more -- such as the second highest personal state income tax in the country and public employee pensions there is no way to honor.
There are liberals who hate the mention of any of this, especially when conservatives point out how the two states are so much alike in population and demographic mix, and to be sure, there are some non-political factors at play. The liberals vastly overreached, though, with some making a major point earlier this year about how Texas was faced with a budget it couldn't handle and others bemoaning a service deficit.
Texas, with a vastly increasing inflow population that makes it even tougher to deal with employment and governmental growth, has nevertheless been fighting back successfully against budgetary expansion, using some gimmicks but mainly necessary program reductions to keep taxes down to a level instigating entrepreneurship. Services there are hardly in as much jeopardy as in California, whose overcrowded prisons the Supreme Court refuses to tolerate, and nothing helps the poor like jobs. Texas does not shine in public education, but outdoes California in national testing, it's reported.
The Texas example is basically the way America has to go, the way Republicans in the House of Representatives insist we go, and the way too many Senate Democrats and President Barack Obama resist, their clear preference being the California model of spend yourself into misery, soak-the-upper-middle-class and businesses with tax hikes, tie the businesses up with so many regulations they can't compete anymore and offer no remedy but mush and demagoguery on anything truly serious in scope.
It won't work in part because, as a new USA Today report shows, the government's entitlement pledges (mainly to Medicare and Social Security) grew so much last year that they now exceed anticipated revenues by $61.6 trillion, or $534,000 per household. Does anyone actually believe that, even if some tax increases done through reform might help, we can tax our way out of this?