<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Is the State of California bankrupt?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2008/10/is-state-of-california-bankrupt.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2008/10/is-state-of-california-bankrupt.html</link>
	<description>Finance, Economics and Markets</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 00:37:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: BOB EDDY</title>
		<link>http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2008/10/is-state-of-california-bankrupt.html#comment-59597</link>
		<dc:creator>BOB EDDY</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 May 2010 15:20:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2008/10/is-the-state-of-california-bankrupt.html#comment-59597</guid>
		<description>state employ should get maximum $10 an hour, no benefits ,they are very big liability to tax payer, when you go to any state office big line because they are very lazy and unionized. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>state employ should get maximum $10 an hour, no benefits ,they are very big liability to tax payer, when you go to any state office big line because they are very lazy and unionized.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BOB EDDY</title>
		<link>http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2008/10/is-state-of-california-bankrupt.html#comment-59596</link>
		<dc:creator>BOB EDDY</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 May 2010 15:18:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2008/10/is-the-state-of-california-bankrupt.html#comment-59596</guid>
		<description>WHY THEY ARE GIVING ANY STATE EMPLOY BEST BENEFITS,BEST SALARY AND VACATION AND RETIREMENT PLAN WHEN PRIVATE COMPANY CAN NOT EVEN EFFORD TO PAY MORE THAN MINIMUM WAGES, THEN CUT THEIR SALARY 10 OR 15% IS JOKE , THEY SHOULD HIRE THE MOST $10 AN HOUR, BENFITS WILL BE NEW OBAMA HEALTH PLAN CAN BE CO-PAID. UNLESS THEY DO THAT COUNTRY,STATE CAN NOT COME OUT OF RECESSION.

BOB</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>WHY THEY ARE GIVING ANY STATE EMPLOY BEST BENEFITS,BEST SALARY AND VACATION AND RETIREMENT PLAN WHEN PRIVATE COMPANY CAN NOT EVEN EFFORD TO PAY MORE THAN MINIMUM WAGES, THEN CUT THEIR SALARY 10 OR 15% IS JOKE , THEY SHOULD HIRE THE MOST $10 AN HOUR, BENFITS WILL BE NEW OBAMA HEALTH PLAN CAN BE CO-PAID. UNLESS THEY DO THAT COUNTRY,STATE CAN NOT COME OUT OF RECESSION.</p>
<p>BOB</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Marshall Auerback</title>
		<link>http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2008/10/is-state-of-california-bankrupt.html#comment-58344</link>
		<dc:creator>Marshall Auerback</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 16:57:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2008/10/is-the-state-of-california-bankrupt.html#comment-58344</guid>
		<description>In a message dated 2/3/2010 09:48:18 Mountain Standard Time,  
 writes:

California IS BANKRUPT, and California must either break

into 4  or five new California&#039;s, or SECEDE from the Union.

Vermont is headed  for SECESSION from the worn-out

U S A , and California MUST do the  same--and SECEDE!!





There is another solution.  See a report I wrote on this last  summer:
 
 
CALIFORNIA’S IOUs OFFER A WAY OUT  OF ITS FISCAL CRISIS 
By Marshall  Auerback 
Republicans and Democrats  alike embraced legislation last week that would 
make California IOUs acceptable  payment for all taxes, fees and other 
payments owed to the state - an action  that effectively would mean that 
California is entering the currency business. Some  commentators, notably Lex of the 
FT, have suggested that the proposed California “IOUs”  “would create a 
vicious circle for the  cash-strapped state, forcing issuance of even more  
IOUs.” 
Quite the contrary:   In fact, California&#039;s innovative IOU proposal  
represents a way of alleviating the state&#039;s fiscal crisis, not  exacerbating it.   
While it might  appear that the new law seems merely to allow California to 
deficit spend just like the  Federal Government - in actuality, the effect 
is far more profound than that.  Allowing the IOUs to become an acceptable 
payment method for state taxes,  instantly imparts value to them - in effect, 
what you have is a state of the  union creating a parallel currency right 
under the noses of the Treasury,  alleviating its fiscal straitjacket in the 
process. 
So why are so  objections being raised? The confusion seems to arise 
because of a mistaken  understanding of the nature of modern money.  Modern money 
has no intrinsic value in  the absence of state sanction. In the words of 
economist Abba Lerner:   
“The modern  state can make anything it chooses generally acceptable as 
money…It is true that  a simple declaration that such and such is money will 
not do, even if backed by  the most convincing constitutional evidence of the 
state’s absolute sovereignty.  But if the state is willing to accept  the 
proposed money in payment of taxes and other obligations to itself the trick  
is done.” 
The modern  state, then, imposes and enforces a tax liability on its 
citizens and chooses  that which is necessary to pay taxes. The unit of account 
has no real value if  not ultimately sanctioned by use from the State.  By 
extension, the state is never revenue  constrained because it alone determines 
what is money.  The tax is what gives the currency its  value insofar as it 
functions to create the  notional demand for federal expenditures  of fiat 
money, not to raise revenue per se. Value has been given to the money by  
requiring it to be used to fulfill a tax obligation, but the money is already 
in  existence, not “created” by the revenue. 
It is in this  context that one has to look at the California IOU proposal. 
 It is important to note that the IOU  would not replace the dollar, but 
operate in parallel to extinguish state  liabilities. And if the IOU becomes 
functionally like a currency, then  California’s  bankruptcy problems are 
over.  By imparting a value to these IOUs (i.e.  letting them be used to settle 
state tax) this will ensure a demand for the  state’s IOUs. Each individual 
vendor, contractor, or even state employee will  accept the state’s new 
warrants up to the individual’s expected tax liability.  Eventually the 
warrants will also be accepted by retail establishments and  others, including 
banks, which also have liabilities to the state of California—meaning that  the 
state could (eventually) issue a number of warrants equal to the total of  
all such obligations owed to the state, on an annual basis.   
There are  other historic examples of local currencies operating in 
parallel with national  ones. As economist L. Randall Wray has noted, in Argentina 
as the  financial crisis deepened after 2000, local governments began to 
issue  “Patacones” (bonds with interest) as local currencies, paying workers 
and  suppliers, and accepting them in tax payment. Utility companies began to 
accept  them—knowing they could pay part of their taxes with them--and 
acceptance spread  even to international corporations such as McDonald’s. 
(_http://wallstreetpit.com/8333-berkshares-buckaroos-and-bear-dollars-what-makes-a-
local-currency-tick_ 
(http://wallstreetpit.com/8333-berkshares-buckaroos-and-bear-dollars-what-makes-a-local-currency-tick) )  
It is true that this  legislation represents a profound break from all 
federal laws. But this is  another instance where Obama’s obliviousness to the 
ramifications of the states’  respective fiscal crises has come back to haunt 
him.  He and his advisors keep thinking that if  they provide “liquidity” 
to banks, the banks will go out and lend. They don’t  seem to understand 
that credit is not a “flow” but a two-way contract between  lender and 
borrower:  Incomes have  to improve first before credit conditions can improve.  
Rising incomes  create improved credit worthiness and ultimately improving 
asset values,  thereby enhancing lending activity. 
Of course, if the Federal  government truly finds California’s proposals 
far too radical, then  there is a simpler solution at hand:  a payroll tax 
holiday and revenue sharing with the states will go a long  way toward 
alleviating the states’ respective fiscal crises and almost  instantaneously improve 
private sector incomes and aggregate demand.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In a message dated 2/3/2010 09:48:18 Mountain Standard Time,<br />
 writes:</p>
<p>California IS BANKRUPT, and California must either break</p>
<p>into 4  or five new California&#8217;s, or SECEDE from the Union.</p>
<p>Vermont is headed  for SECESSION from the worn-out</p>
<p>U S A , and California MUST do the  same&#8211;and SECEDE!!</p>
<p>There is another solution.  See a report I wrote on this last  summer:</p>
<p>CALIFORNIA’S IOUs OFFER A WAY OUT  OF ITS FISCAL CRISIS<br />
By Marshall  Auerback<br />
Republicans and Democrats  alike embraced legislation last week that would<br />
make California IOUs acceptable  payment for all taxes, fees and other<br />
payments owed to the state &#8211; an action  that effectively would mean that<br />
California is entering the currency business. Some  commentators, notably Lex of the<br />
FT, have suggested that the proposed California “IOUs”  “would create a<br />
vicious circle for the  cash-strapped state, forcing issuance of even more<br />
IOUs.”<br />
Quite the contrary:   In fact, California&#8217;s innovative IOU proposal<br />
represents a way of alleviating the state&#8217;s fiscal crisis, not  exacerbating it.<br />
While it might  appear that the new law seems merely to allow California to<br />
deficit spend just like the  Federal Government &#8211; in actuality, the effect<br />
is far more profound than that.  Allowing the IOUs to become an acceptable<br />
payment method for state taxes,  instantly imparts value to them &#8211; in effect,<br />
what you have is a state of the  union creating a parallel currency right<br />
under the noses of the Treasury,  alleviating its fiscal straitjacket in the<br />
process.<br />
So why are so  objections being raised? The confusion seems to arise<br />
because of a mistaken  understanding of the nature of modern money.  Modern money<br />
has no intrinsic value in  the absence of state sanction. In the words of<br />
economist Abba Lerner:<br />
“The modern  state can make anything it chooses generally acceptable as<br />
money…It is true that  a simple declaration that such and such is money will<br />
not do, even if backed by  the most convincing constitutional evidence of the<br />
state’s absolute sovereignty.  But if the state is willing to accept  the<br />
proposed money in payment of taxes and other obligations to itself the trick<br />
is done.”<br />
The modern  state, then, imposes and enforces a tax liability on its<br />
citizens and chooses  that which is necessary to pay taxes. The unit of account<br />
has no real value if  not ultimately sanctioned by use from the State.  By<br />
extension, the state is never revenue  constrained because it alone determines<br />
what is money.  The tax is what gives the currency its  value insofar as it<br />
functions to create the  notional demand for federal expenditures  of fiat<br />
money, not to raise revenue per se. Value has been given to the money by<br />
requiring it to be used to fulfill a tax obligation, but the money is already<br />
in  existence, not “created” by the revenue.<br />
It is in this  context that one has to look at the California IOU proposal.<br />
 It is important to note that the IOU  would not replace the dollar, but<br />
operate in parallel to extinguish state  liabilities. And if the IOU becomes<br />
functionally like a currency, then  California’s  bankruptcy problems are<br />
over.  By imparting a value to these IOUs (i.e.  letting them be used to settle<br />
state tax) this will ensure a demand for the  state’s IOUs. Each individual<br />
vendor, contractor, or even state employee will  accept the state’s new<br />
warrants up to the individual’s expected tax liability.  Eventually the<br />
warrants will also be accepted by retail establishments and  others, including<br />
banks, which also have liabilities to the state of California—meaning that  the<br />
state could (eventually) issue a number of warrants equal to the total of<br />
all such obligations owed to the state, on an annual basis.<br />
There are  other historic examples of local currencies operating in<br />
parallel with national  ones. As economist L. Randall Wray has noted, in Argentina<br />
as the  financial crisis deepened after 2000, local governments began to<br />
issue  “Patacones” (bonds with interest) as local currencies, paying workers<br />
and  suppliers, and accepting them in tax payment. Utility companies began to<br />
accept  them—knowing they could pay part of their taxes with them&#8211;and<br />
acceptance spread  even to international corporations such as McDonald’s.<br />
(_http://wallstreetpit.com/8333-berkshares-buckaroos-and-bear-dollars-what-makes-a-<br />
local-currency-tick_<br />
(<a href="http://wallstreetpit.com/8333-berkshares-buckaroos-and-bear-dollars-what-makes-a-local-currency-tick" rel="nofollow">http://wallstreetpit.com/8333-berkshares-buckaroos-and-bear-dollars-what-makes-a-local-currency-tick</a>) )<br />
It is true that this  legislation represents a profound break from all<br />
federal laws. But this is  another instance where Obama’s obliviousness to the<br />
ramifications of the states’  respective fiscal crises has come back to haunt<br />
him.  He and his advisors keep thinking that if  they provide “liquidity”<br />
to banks, the banks will go out and lend. They don’t  seem to understand<br />
that credit is not a “flow” but a two-way contract between  lender and<br />
borrower:  Incomes have  to improve first before credit conditions can improve.<br />
Rising incomes  create improved credit worthiness and ultimately improving<br />
asset values,  thereby enhancing lending activity.<br />
Of course, if the Federal  government truly finds California’s proposals<br />
far too radical, then  there is a simpler solution at hand:  a payroll tax<br />
holiday and revenue sharing with the states will go a long  way toward<br />
alleviating the states’ respective fiscal crises and almost  instantaneously improve<br />
private sector incomes and aggregate demand.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul Baisgele</title>
		<link>http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2008/10/is-state-of-california-bankrupt.html#comment-58341</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul Baisgele</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 16:26:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2008/10/is-the-state-of-california-bankrupt.html#comment-58341</guid>
		<description>California IS BANKRUPT, and California must either break
into 4 or five new California&#039;s, or SECEDE from the Union.
Vermont is headed for SECESSION from the worn-out
U S A , and California MUST do the same--and SECEDE!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>California IS BANKRUPT, and California must either break<br />
into 4 or five new California&#8217;s, or SECEDE from the Union.<br />
Vermont is headed for SECESSION from the worn-out<br />
U S A , and California MUST do the same&#8211;and SECEDE!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: vivi</title>
		<link>http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2008/10/is-state-of-california-bankrupt.html#comment-56664</link>
		<dc:creator>vivi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 01:33:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2008/10/is-the-state-of-california-bankrupt.html#comment-56664</guid>
		<description>Great but I bet their pleased their GREEN</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great but I bet their pleased their GREEN</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Concerned</title>
		<link>http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2008/10/is-state-of-california-bankrupt.html#comment-56518</link>
		<dc:creator>Concerned</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 05:34:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2008/10/is-the-state-of-california-bankrupt.html#comment-56518</guid>
		<description>This problem is resulting from our jackass politicians who could get their head out of their own pocket book.  The writing was on the wall 10+ years ago when the Internet exploded and sales tax revenue was being lost to out of state resellers.  This has mostly been fixed since but the damage is already done.  This is just a small example of how California politicians can only see 2 feet in front of them.  Insurance requirements, DMV registration, Smog requirements...aka lost vehicle sales (sales tax) these are just a few of the many screwups they have made.  Again these problems go way back in time.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This problem is resulting from our jackass politicians who could get their head out of their own pocket book.  The writing was on the wall 10+ years ago when the Internet exploded and sales tax revenue was being lost to out of state resellers.  This has mostly been fixed since but the damage is already done.  This is just a small example of how California politicians can only see 2 feet in front of them.  Insurance requirements, DMV registration, Smog requirements&#8230;aka lost vehicle sales (sales tax) these are just a few of the many screwups they have made.  Again these problems go way back in time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
<!-- This Quick Cache file was built for (  www.creditwritedowns.com/2008/10/is-state-of-california-bankrupt.html/feed ) in 0.13808 seconds, on Feb 10th, 2012 at 1:16 am UTC. -->
<!-- This Quick Cache file will automatically expire ( and be re-built automatically ) on Feb 10th, 2012 at 2:16 am UTC -->
