fairlycrazy23
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 27, 2010 23:55:19 GMT -5
Posts: 3,306
|
Post by fairlycrazy23 on Apr 4, 2013 23:38:45 GMT -5
The report does list assets, net assets just appears to be assets minus liabilities. It lists assets followed by liabilties then net assets.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Apr 5, 2013 0:01:49 GMT -5
Also, dare we point out that assets like parks, courthouses, highways, fire stations can't be sold to settle a state's debts, unless you relish living in a state where you pay monthly bills to your road provider, parks provider, fire protection provider, Proctor & Gamble pay-as-you-go courthouse, etc., etc. If you sold even a tenth of state assets to creditors, you'd see such a rapid exodus from California that the book value of the remaining assets would tank faster than Enron. why would you sell them to creditors? if they are assets, you could borrow against them, at ultralow interest rates, right? is anyone here a businessperson, or is everyone just a policy wonk? Why on earth would any creditor want assets like highways and courtrooms as collateral for a loan? If CA reached the point of mortgaging it's highways to raise cash, no lender with half a brain would expect it to handle future loans more responsibly. And if (when) the state did eventually default, it would either make up some last-ditch law to bar creditors from confiscating public assets (which might be needed for... I don't know... driving) or else CA would experience the aforementioned exodus and the assets would lose half their value overnight. I suppose it would work if you could find some truly braindead lenders. The ECB might still be accepting applications.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 5, 2013 0:03:21 GMT -5
The report does list assets, net assets just appears to be assets minus liabilities. It lists assets followed by liabilties then net assets. but it is not showing any fixed assets that are not "liquid". that is a really weird way to do a balance sheet. edit: what this "balance sheet" is basically saying is that the countless billions that CA has spent on things like infrastructure have NO VALUE. that is like saying that the mojave desert and the LA freeway system have the same value. it is absurd at the proximate level, and yet i am seeing people here argue that it makes perfect sense.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 5, 2013 0:05:44 GMT -5
why would you sell them to creditors? if they are assets, you could borrow against them, at ultralow interest rates, right? is anyone here a businessperson, or is everyone just a policy wonk? Why on earth would any creditor want assets like highways and courtrooms as collateral for a loan? you are joking, right? why wouldn't they? seriously. here, let me give you an example: usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-07-15-u.s.-highways_x.htmsurely you have not been sleeping while all this has been going on, Virgil. it is only a matter of time before courts will also be administered by foreign entities.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 5, 2013 0:08:29 GMT -5
why would you sell them to creditors? if they are assets, you could borrow against them, at ultralow interest rates, right? is anyone here a businessperson, or is everyone just a policy wonk? Why on earth would any creditor want assets like highways and courtrooms as collateral for a loan? If CA reached the point of mortgaging it's highways to raise cash, no lender with half a brain would expect it to handle future loans more responsibly. bullpuckey.And if (when) the state did eventually default, it would either make up some last-ditch law to bar creditors from confiscating public assets (which might be needed for... I don't know... driving) or else CA would experience the aforementioned exodus and the assets would lose half their value overnight. bullpuckey.I suppose it would work if you could find some truly braindead lenders. The ECB might still be accepting applications. bullpuckey. anyone who has lived through the subprime fiasco knows that banks would loan on a mountain of toxic waste if S&P gave it a AAA rating. moreover, with yields this low, junk is king. honestly, i wonder if Canada is in a different universe sometimes.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Apr 5, 2013 0:08:32 GMT -5
Why on earth would any creditor want assets like highways and courtrooms as collateral for a loan? you are joking, right? why wouldn't they? seriously. here, let me give you an example: usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-07-15-u.s.-highways_x.htmsurely you have not been sleeping while all this has been going on, Virgil. it is only a matter of time before courts will also be administered by foreign entities. They're buying assets because they need to do something with their increasingly worthless US dollars. In other words, they're already in the process of redeeming existing loans. I have no doubt that sizable chunks of the US will be owned by foreign interests. You surely didn't think they were going to sit on their trillions while they wasted away to nothing?
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Apr 5, 2013 0:15:50 GMT -5
Why on earth would any creditor want assets like highways and courtrooms as collateral for a loan? If CA reached the point of mortgaging it's highways to raise cash, no lender with half a brain would expect it to handle future loans more responsibly. bullpuckey.And if (when) the state did eventually default, it would either make up some last-ditch law to bar creditors from confiscating public assets (which might be needed for... I don't know... driving) or else CA would experience the aforementioned exodus and the assets would lose half their value overnight. bullpuckey.I suppose it would work if you could find some truly braindead lenders. The ECB might still be accepting applications. bullpuckey. anyone who has lived through the subprime fiasco knows that banks would loan on a mountain of toxic waste if S&P gave it a AAA rating. moreover, with yields this low, junk is king. honestly, i wonder if Canada is in a different universe sometimes. Your optimism has blinded me with it's intensity. Junk also tends to have remarkably high interest rates, as the PIIGS are learning. But let's not get ahead of ourselves. For now, let's just keep an eye on that FY 2014 "balanced budget".
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 5, 2013 0:16:26 GMT -5
They're buying assets because they need to do something with their increasingly worthless US dollars. you mean their dollars which have risen 10% in the last two years? those worthless dollars?In other words, they're already in the process of redeeming existing loans. sure.I have no doubt that sizable chunks of the US will be owned by foreign interests. You surely didn't think they were going to sit on their trillions while they wasted away to nothing? of course not. thanks for conceding the point. CA has more assets than most NATIONS.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 5, 2013 0:19:01 GMT -5
bullpuckey. anyone who has lived through the subprime fiasco knows that banks would loan on a mountain of toxic waste if S&P gave it a AAA rating. moreover, with yields this low, junk is king. honestly, i wonder if Canada is in a different universe sometimes. Your optimism has blinded me with it's intensity. your cynicism makes my optimism look like realism. having witnessed worthless paper sold as AAA+ in the last 5 years, i have ZERO doubt that such a thing could happen again. if that strikes you as unrealistic, then i might suggest that you get your groundwater tested.Junk also tends to have remarkably high interest rates, as the PIIGS are learning. junk pays about 5% right now. that is the state of things.But let's not get ahead of ourselves. For now, let's just keep an eye on that FY 2014 "balanced budget". i promise i won't rub your nose in it- but i will remind you of it when you claim i am being wild eyed in the future.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Apr 5, 2013 0:19:29 GMT -5
Against other major currencies, certainly.
Against hard assets, dream on.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Apr 5, 2013 0:26:43 GMT -5
Your optimism has blinded me with it's intensity. your cynicism makes my optimism look like realism. having witnessed worthless paper sold as AAA+ in the last 5 years, i have ZERO doubt that such a thing could happen again. if that strikes you as unrealistic, then i might suggest that you get your groundwater tested.Junk also tends to have remarkably high interest rates, as the PIIGS are learning. junk pays about 5% right now. that is the state of things.But let's not get ahead of ourselves. For now, let's just keep an eye on that FY 2014 "balanced budget". i promise i won't rub your nose in it- but i will remind you of it when you claim i am being wild eyed in the future. I won't hold my breath.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 5, 2013 0:27:13 GMT -5
Against other major currencies, certainly. Against hard assets, dream on. hard assets? like gold? gold is about the same as it was 2 years ago, so yes, against gold. not in my dreams. in reality.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 5, 2013 0:27:58 GMT -5
i promise i won't rub your nose in it- but i will remind you of it when you claim i am being wild eyed in the future. I won't hold my breath. that's fine, as long as you don't hold your wallet, either. edit: virgil- name me one instance when i have been caught out on a losing bet. one. i won't hold my breath.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Apr 5, 2013 0:36:48 GMT -5
I'm with you, dj. I believe California will pull out of this. Is going to be a rough road, but I believe they'll do it.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Apr 5, 2013 0:38:53 GMT -5
We're talking about the same gold that's been leveraged 100-to-1? That "hard asset"? I'll call gold a "hard asset" when 99% of the supply on the market isn't a paper fiction. Physical gold is a hard asset, and heaven only knows what the price will be when the crap hits the fan and 100 hands reach for one bar. I could ask you to do the same for me, although I technically took both sides of the 2012 election bet. Let's just say that past performance is not a guarantee of future results.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 5, 2013 0:41:37 GMT -5
I'm with you, dj. I believe California will pull out of this. Is going to be a rough road, but I believe they'll do it. i think it would be an exercise in pure foolishness to sell assets to make that happen, but they could absolutely do it. i happen to think that the assets are significantly UNDERVALUED, for the record. there are stretches of pristine coastline, for example, that would go for BILLIONS, if the state were desperate enough. and they would sell overnight. make no mistake about it. 90% of the planet would love to have a piece of that action. but we are never going to get that desperate. it is against our nature.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 5, 2013 0:42:55 GMT -5
We're talking about the same gold that's been leveraged 100-to-1? That "hard asset"? I'll call gold a "hard asset" when 99% of the supply on the market isn't a paper fiction. Physical gold is a hard asset, and heaven only knows what the price will be when the crap hits the fan and 100 hands reach for one bar. i was talking about physical gold, bro. and yes, the dollar has outperformed it in the last two years.I could ask you to do the same for me, although I technically took both sides of the 2012 election bet. Let's just say that past performance is not a guarantee of future results. what does "guarantee" have to do with it. i asked a simple question. ftr: i always give odds. nothing is impossible, with the possible exception of you saying anything positive about CA.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Apr 5, 2013 1:16:19 GMT -5
We're talking about the same gold that's been leveraged 100-to-1? That "hard asset"? I'll call gold a "hard asset" when 99% of the supply on the market isn't a paper fiction. Physical gold is a hard asset, and heaven only knows what the price will be when the crap hits the fan and 100 hands reach for one bar. i was talking about physical gold, bro. and yes, the dollar has outperformed it in the last two years.I could ask you to do the same for me, although I technically took both sides of the 2012 election bet. Let's just say that past performance is not a guarantee of future results. what does "guarantee" have to do with it. i asked a simple question. ftr: i always give odds. nothing is impossible, with the possible exception of you saying anything positive about CA. Touche. I just... I'm like Jim Carrey in that movie "Liar Liar", where he picks up a blue pen and tries with all his heart and soul to say "The pen is red." but can't do it because he knows it's a lie. California will be Okeeee ee hhh eeeee eeyyy aaa California. Will. Be. Fii eeee hhhee iiee oooo hghehh hhe CALIFORNIA. WILL. BE. FFF EEE EOO O OE OOOA AAHH HH HHE EIEEEEE EIIE EOOOIUEUU NEE EE E AAAANKRUPT.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 5, 2013 1:20:08 GMT -5
what does "guarantee" have to do with it. i asked a simple question. ftr: i always give odds. nothing is impossible, with the possible exception of you saying anything positive about CA. Touche. I just... I'm like Jim Carrey in that movie "Liar Liar", where he picks up a blue pen and tries with all his heart and soul to say "The pen is red." but can't do it because he knows it's a lie. California will be Okeeee ee hhh eeeee eeyyy aaa California. Will. Be. Fii eeee hhhee iiee oooo hghehh hhe CALIFORNIA. WILL. BE. FFF EEE EOO O OE OOOA AAHH HH HHE EIEEEEE EIIE EOOOIUEUU NEE EE E AAAANKRUPT. LOL! well at least i have the satisfaction of sizing up the flow of this conversation right.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Apr 8, 2013 23:08:20 GMT -5
They're buying assets because they need to do something with their increasingly worthless US dollars. you mean their dollars which have risen 10% in the last two years? those worthless dollars?In other words, they're already in the process of redeeming existing loans. sure.I have no doubt that sizable chunks of the US will be owned by foreign interests. You surely didn't think they were going to sit on their trillions while they wasted away to nothing? of course not. thanks for conceding the point. CA has more assets than most NATIONS. No, it doesn't. California's net assets are <$127,200,000,000.00> California, including adding together all of its assets has one hundred twenty seven billion two hundred million dollars less than nothing. It's the WORST state to do business in- and that's really saying something with Illinois, New York, and New Jersey out there... chiefexecutive.net/california-is-the-worst-state-for-business-2012Texas not only doesn't charge businesses to be there, but actually PAID Apple to be there ( www.bizjournals.com/austin/news/2012/03/09/apple-to-build-304m-campus-hire.html  (and btw- I'm not in favor of this sort of thing, but it is a clear indication Texas is a state that understands it's the businesses, not the state government, that have the cookie), is taking in the battered refugees from California. In fact, a whole host of states are fairly brazen in answering the cries for help coming from California, and promising refugees a stable home where they won't be abused: latimesblogs.latimes.com/california-politics/2012/11/california-arizona-taxes-business.htmlarticles.latimes.com/2013/feb/12/business/la-fi-perry-jobs-20130213www.hanfordsentinel.com/news/local/midwest-states-woo-california-dairies/article_701bc16a-76c5-11e2-9c08-0019bb2963f4.htmlI have a fairly decent CPA, and she says she would get a call here and there over the last several years- but today, she says that she has added a full time assistant JUST to handle the requests for advice concerning the feasibility of relocating a business to Florida. She says that it's pretty evenly divided between requests from California and Illinois with a smattering of requests from NY, and the New England states.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 9, 2013 1:03:59 GMT -5
of course not. thanks for conceding the point. CA has more assets than most NATIONS. No, it doesn't. California's net assets are <$127,200,000,000.00>. rubbish. that report is absolute crap. they are not accounting for MOST of California's assets in it- only the liquid assets, Paul. it is more like the kind of appraisal that an auctioneer would make than a business owner. as a business owner, you should know that.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 9, 2013 1:06:26 GMT -5
I have a fairly decent CPA, and she says she would get a call here and there over the last several years- but today, she says that she has added a full time assistant JUST to handle the requests for advice concerning the feasibility of relocating a business to Florida. She says that it's pretty evenly divided between requests from California and Illinois with a smattering of requests from NY, and the New England states. that's nice. i know some folks that have moved from CA to FL, as well. mostly for retirement. there are more places to buy Burmuda shorts there.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 9, 2013 1:16:10 GMT -5
by the way, Paul.....one of my businesses has a branch office in Manhattan. i have to say, without a shred of doubt, that it is about 6x worse than CA in terms of bureaucracy and taxes. if you want to rail endlessly against how shitty things are here, you really should start there, instead. CA is a wet dream compared to NYC. but, if you happen to be in advertizing, there is no better place to be.
and that really is the point. it doesn't matter how shitty of a place it is to do business, if virtually all of what you do is located there. there is no sense opening a gold mine in New Jersey. there is no sense drilling for oil in North Carolina. there is no sense opening a commercial fishery in Nevada. there is no sense going into the tomato business in Idaho. you don't go into the advertizing business in Utah. etc. unless you are a complete loser or some sort of bottom feeder, you go where the action is, and you meet the expenses of doing so.
there is no way on God's Green Earth that CA is going bankrupt. there is just too much wealth here for that to happen. or perhaps i should put it another way: if we go, so goes the US. after all, we are 1/8th the economy.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Apr 9, 2013 8:54:58 GMT -5
by the way, Paul.....one of my businesses has a branch office in Manhattan. i have to say, without a shred of doubt, that it is about 6x worse than CA in terms of bureaucracy and taxes. if you want to rail endlessly against how shitty things are here, you really should start there, instead. CA is a wet dream compared to NYC. but, if you happen to be in advertizing, there is no better place to be. and that really is the point. it doesn't matter how shitty of a place it is to do business, if virtually all of what you do is located there. there is no sense opening a gold mine in New Jersey. there is no sense drilling for oil in North Carolina. there is no sense opening a commercial fishery in Nevada. there is no sense going into the tomato business in Idaho. you don't go into the advertizing business in Utah. etc. unless you are a complete loser or some sort of bottom feeder, you go where the action is, and you meet the expenses of doing so. there is no way on God's Green Earth that CA is going bankrupt. there is just too much wealth here for that to happen. or perhaps i should put it another way: if we go, so goes the US. after all, we are 1/8th the economy. It's funny that while it is patently obvious that there no way CA isn't bankrupt in the present tense, you are saying there's no way it "will". Buddy, it IS.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Apr 9, 2013 8:56:28 GMT -5
No, it doesn't. California's net assets are <$127,200,000,000.00>. rubbish. that report is absolute crap. they are not accounting for MOST of California's assets in it- only the liquid assets, Paul. it is more like the kind of appraisal that an auctioneer would make than a business owner. as a business owner, you should know that. With the condition CA is in, the auction is all that's left. So, I'd say it's a valid appraisal.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 9, 2013 10:12:22 GMT -5
by the way, Paul.....one of my businesses has a branch office in Manhattan. i have to say, without a shred of doubt, that it is about 6x worse than CA in terms of bureaucracy and taxes. if you want to rail endlessly against how shitty things are here, you really should start there, instead. CA is a wet dream compared to NYC. but, if you happen to be in advertizing, there is no better place to be. and that really is the point. it doesn't matter how shitty of a place it is to do business, if virtually all of what you do is located there. there is no sense opening a gold mine in New Jersey. there is no sense drilling for oil in North Carolina. there is no sense opening a commercial fishery in Nevada. there is no sense going into the tomato business in Idaho. you don't go into the advertizing business in Utah. etc. unless you are a complete loser or some sort of bottom feeder, you go where the action is, and you meet the expenses of doing so. there is no way on God's Green Earth that CA is going bankrupt. there is just too much wealth here for that to happen. or perhaps i should put it another way: if we go, so goes the US. after all, we are 1/8th the economy. It's funny that while it is patently obvious that there no way CA isn't bankrupt in the present tense, you are saying there's no way it "will". Buddy, it IS. Mittmentum......
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 9, 2013 10:13:50 GMT -5
rubbish. that report is absolute crap. they are not accounting for MOST of California's assets in it- only the liquid assets, Paul. it is more like the kind of appraisal that an auctioneer would make than a business owner. as a business owner, you should know that. With the condition CA is in, the auction is all that's left. So, I'd say it's a valid appraisal. of course you would! and that is fine for YOU to accept it. and it is fine for me to NOT accept it.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Apr 9, 2013 10:27:00 GMT -5
With the condition CA is in, the auction is all that's left. So, I'd say it's a valid appraisal. of course you would! and that is fine for YOU to accept it. and it is fine for me to NOT accept it. Mittmentum was a political prediction. This California business isn't a prediction. It's a statement based on the math.
|
|
fairlycrazy23
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 27, 2010 23:55:19 GMT -5
Posts: 3,306
|
Post by fairlycrazy23 on Apr 9, 2013 10:42:02 GMT -5
I don't think CA is bankrupt, they are 'upside down' I guess,but they do have a lot of revenue coming in.
and it does appear that report does include 'real' assets such as roads and buildings;however, it is not easy to tell that because they don't really care about them because they are needed to support current services and can not be auctioned/sold etc.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 9, 2013 17:29:13 GMT -5
of course you would! and that is fine for YOU to accept it. and it is fine for me to NOT accept it. Mittmentum was a political prediction. it was a perception of fact that was not fact.This California business isn't a prediction. let's see.....you are guessing what will happen in the future......that is usually called.....what?It's a statement based on the math. it is a statement based on really bad math. it also employs some seriously faulty logic. which is what Mittmentum was.
|
|