Why People Are Leaving California?

California is undoubtedly one of the most beautiful states in continental America. It boasts the best weather and one-of-a-kind geographic expanse.  It is blessed with a breathtaking coastline, majestic mountains, and a very beautiful desert country. Many well-maintained state parks welcome millions of visitors each year. It is perhaps the only state where folks can reach the mountain slopes, the inviting beaches, and the intriguing desert in less than two hours to enjoy a variety of sports and outdoor activities.

California is the most populous and the most influential state in the union. Its multi-ethnic and multi-racial population is tolerant, inclusive, and diverse. Minorities  are now the majority. Its culture promotes a harmonious and friendly atmosphere.

California is the economic engine of the nation. Globally the state ranks 6^th in the world economy, ahead of Brazil, Russia, and Italy. Rich in natural resources, the state is home to giant industrial, agricultural, defense, and financial sectors. The agricultural sector is one of the most productive in the entire globe and it is capable of feeding the nation. California boasts the largest and highly regarded public university system. It is home also to world-class private universities. Its vibrant spirit and entrepreneurial acumen have given birth to the mammoth high tech and biotech industries.

California has 53 Fortune 500 companies headquartered in the state including Apple, Google, Facebook, Amgen, Genentech Intel, Qualcomm, Netflix, Sanmina, and Advanced Micro Devices.

Why are then folks leaving?

There is a 40% negative gap between arrivals and departures from the state. It has been reported that the cost of a U-Haul in the San Francisco Bay area is around $ 4,000 one way out, and a mere $ 400 on the way in to the Golden State. Why? Supply and demand!

Some folks are fretting that the exit is starting to look like an exodus.

Why Many Leave?

There are many reasons. Some are more powerful than others. When more than one factor is involved the driving force to depart can be irresistible.

Congestion – the major metropolitan areas are clogged with ever increasing traffic. Folks spend several hours each day commuting to and from work. The state has failed to maintain the major highways, and is decades behind in the improvement of its public transport system.

Affordability – California is becoming too expensive for many people. Housing has become so costly that prevents folks from living close to their place of work. A one-bedroom apartment can cost upwards to $ 3,500 per month in the major cities. Buying a home is out of reach for many. Retirees are encouraged to sell their residence, cash in on their gain, and move to a lower cost state or foreign country.

Taxes – California is one of the 3-4 states in the union when it comes to taxation. The income tax rates already are the highest.  Property taxes have ballooned as a result of the ever-increasing valuation of real estate.  Sales tax system and special taxes attached to gasoline price lead the national prices. Thousands of wealthy Californians are moving across the state line to establish a residence that shelters them from the state’s heavy-duty income tax. Changes in the federal income tax are now limiting the amount of property taxes and mortgage interest people can claim. in their federal returns.

Politics  - California is a blue state, and a one party system to boot. Democrats enjoy a super majority in Sacramento. As a result, Democrats pass any laws they want, no matter how quirky or expensive. The public pension system has over a trillion dollars of unfunded liability. A financial bomb ready to explode if we get into another economic downturn. Several small and medium size cities have declared bankruptcy. Many who don’t share the progressive agenda are subtly encouraged to search for more friendly places to relocate.

Crime – California leads the nation in crimes statistics. Oakland and Stockton, for example, lead in murders. In San Francisco, 81,000 car burglaries were committed last year with only one apprehension. Drug use is widespread. With the three-strike law, state prisons are more than full. Leniency toward crimes committed by illegal aliens makes many voters angry and ready to vote with their feet.

Homelessness – It has been reported than 10% of the nation’s homeless live in California. Many homeless camps can be found under bridges and alleyways. Orange County recently moved the inhabitants of a 7-mile long encampment to shelters. Lack of sanitary facilities, forces the homeless to defecate in the open or in side streets. Panhandlers seem to be at all major intersections.

Inequality – The gap between the rich and the poor has grown to such a level that those who serve the rich must travel 2-3 hours per day to get there. Although the minimum wage has been raised by major cities, it is not sufficient for many to cover the cost of living in those cities. For a progressive state, it is shameful to espouse one philosophy of largesse while practicing another.

Pollution – The rapid growth of the population has magnified the level of pollution.  Rivers and aquifers once pristine are now contaminated and off limits. Although the Los Angeles area is in better condition than it was some 25-50 years ago, other areas lament the increase in smog. More cars means more pollution. More humans means more pollution. 

Quality of Life – When you add all these factors together, a scenario emerges that is not a pretty picture.  Folks, perhaps reluctantly, are forced to relocate. Other states now offer competitive job opportunities and a more affordable housing. As a result these states are becoming magnates for those willing to relocate.

All these factors listed above when they reach the tipping point make the cost of leaving less onerous than the cost of staying.

Then, Why Many Stay?

Many stay put because… best weather ever, geographic majesty, diversity, job opportunities, educational opportunities, recreational amenities, and a welcoming spirit. Others stay primarily for economic reasons. They cannot afford to leave.  For them the cost of moving elsewhere exceeds the cost of staying and the disruption that a move entails. Many stay because that is where they were born or where their extended family resides. A few stay because they fear the unknowns that come along with going to an unfamiliar place.

If the current trend continues, the state’s revenues will take a hit thus affecting the operating budget and the survival of the public employees pension system as we know it. Politicians must take affirmative actions to reverse the trend.

How Has the Democrat Party Changed

Background

I became a US citizen in 1963, although eligible in 1960. I remember that day well. About 50 applicants appeared in front of the federal judge in San Jose, California. I was one of them. Some applicants had been in the US for decades but lacked the literacy required for citizenship. The judge asked me about my service in the US Armed Forces and my recent graduation from San Jose State University.

Upon leaving the hall, the Daughters of the American Revolution gave each new citizen a small American flag. There were also two tables in the hall where new citizens could register to vote. My father-in-law, who had encouraged me to seek the American citizenship, walked me to the Democratic table where I obediently registered as a Democrat.

I remember joining in 1956 the American Paperworker and Papermaker Union. It was my introduction to unions, their philosophy, and their role in American society. I benefitted from my membership in the union and rose rapidly in the job rankings, thanks to my membership.  As a result, I grew up thinking that the Democratic Party was the party of the worker, and the Republican Party the party of business.

Fast forward to 1992 presidential elections. I had a tough time agreeing with and supporting some positions espoused by Bill Clinton and in the Democratic platform. As a result, I decided to change my party affiliation to Republican. 

It was not an easy decision …

I recently (thanks to retirement) began to put the pieces together. 

The Democratic Party started to morph right after the 1968 elections. The Democratic convention, held in Chicago, deteriorated into armed conflict and civil disobedience. The party would rapidly change during the next 20 years, albeit I was too busy working and building my career to pay attention to the metamorphosis.  

It was during the Obama years that I became convinced that I had made the right decision in 1992.

The Democrat Party’s Evolution

Control of the party and its hierarchy began to change after 1968 as intellectuals and students became more involved in the direction and platform of the party. The abuses by the Chicago Mayor's machine and by Tammany Hall in New York served as the tipping point.

Labor unions were experiencing a decline in membership and economic power. As a result, they were consumed by the fear of losing hard won gains. Their preservation strategy was to oppose any changes and resist perceived attempts to take away union prerogatives.

Intellectuals and students, on the other hand, wanted to change what they perceived inequities.  During this period a new role in society emerged … community organizer, although unions had much experience with organizing efforts.

A union organizer from Chicago provided this new group a framework and manual for bringing about radical change.  His name was Saul Alinsky (1909-1973). He wrote two seminal books on the subject: Reveille for Radicals and Rules for Radicals.  These two books would soon become the roadmap for young radicals on how to effect social change. Hilary Clinton wrote her senior thesis on Alinsky’s work, and Barack Obama has written extensively about in his published works.

Alinsky’s Legacy

Alinsky articulated a number of principles and steps to change society, as we knew it then, to a more equitable one. A parody of his eight levers for control and their definition applies to the Democrat agenda:

·      Healthcare – control healthcare and you control the people.

·      Poverty – increase poverty levels as high as possible, poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you are providing everything for them to live on.

·      Debt – increase debt to unsustainable level. That way, you are able to increase taxes, and this will produce more poverty.

·      Gun Control – Remove the ability for people to defend themselves from the government. That way you are able to create a police state.

·      Welfare – take control of every aspect of people’s life (food, housing, income, etc.).

·      Education – Take control of what people read and listen to – take control of what children learn in school.

·      Religion – remove the belief in God from the government and schools.

·      Class warfare – divide people into wealthy and poor. This will cause more discontent and it will be easier to take (tax) from the wealthy with the support of the poor.

Some scholars accuse Alinsky to have operationalized and simplified Vladimir Lenin’s strategy for world control under communism and under Russian aegis. 

Joseph Stalin referred to his converts as useful idiots saying that it is tough to free people from the chains they love. Others acknowledge that Alinsky borrowed from Machiavelli The Prince when discussing the Have and Have-Nots.

Fast Forward

Since Alinsky’s time many social issues have been added to the parody of the rulebook. These are the ones I isolated:

·      Climate change – scare people off that they surely will die unless we did away with certain practices.

·      Immigration – flood the country with illegal immigrants so that you can create an  easier to control underclass.

·      Gender – divide people along gender issues and pit one against the other to generate discord and social conflict.

·      Race – although not a recent issue, generate anger and frustration based on skin color so that minorities will look to government for relief.

·      Voting – Split folks into two camps; those against vote fraud and those against vote suppression, so that you create a stalemate.

My Take Away

This analysis, although not in-depth, has put some things in perspective for me.  

The political discourse has changed during the past 35 years. What at one time was a hidden agenda is now in the open. The Democrat platform pretty much mirrors the 8 levers advocated plus the five I added.

Critical Incidents Summary 

President Obama, in his attempt to “transform” America, pretty much worked through the parody of principles. As a community organizer he was quite familiar with the rulebook. He did take control over the healthcare system. During his tenure, the poverty level grew substantially. The national debt doubled. He extended welfare payments to millions claiming some form of disability. He belittled and ridiculed  less educated and religious people.  His party enacted the death tax (inheritance) law as a way to expropriate 45% from a single estate in excess of $ 5 million, as a way to redistribute wealth. And he used identity politics to pit people against one another, often ridiculing people based on wealth.

Today, much unfinished business remains for the Democrat machine.  The Second Amendment folks so far have managed to resist all attempts to take away their rights. 

The new agenda includes:

·      Separating people based on illegal immigration by depicting Republicans as lacking  compassion. Democrats see the influx of poorly educated immigrants as their ace in the hole when it comes to future voters.

·     Separating people into pejorative groups such as misogynist, xenophobe, homophobe, and racist so that voters become loath to vote for anyone Republican. 

·    Accusing Republicans of wanting to destroy our planet because they question not that the climate is changing, but why.

   Lacking from this list are bread and butter issues. History teaches us that when push comes to shove folks favor the party that brings the old bacon home, e.g., more jobs, better wages, better working conditions, and a more comfortable life style.

*******

   Post Script

     Since publishing this post two dear friends unfriended me. One because she said that I was offending Canadians with my parody, and the other because she could not support Trump. I regret the loss of these two long time friends for two reasons: (1) I did not intend to offend anyone, and more specifically a country I don't know, and (2) I was not asking to support Trump with whom I also have my issues. So much for freedom of expression! Disappointed to say the least ...

From the "I need' to the "I gotta have"

Since the Great Depression Americans’ relationship with money has evolved. The nation has  “progressed” from rugged individualism (to each according to his abilities) toward egalitarianism (to each according to his need).

The ideal has slowly morphed from independence from governmental largesse to dependence on social programs.  Some advocate a more interdependent relationship between the citizen and the State.

A recent study of Americans’ retirement plans revealed that 48% of Americans have less of $ 10,000 put away.  As a result, most are dependent on Social Security benefits for their old age needs. Many struggle financially at a time when they should be enjoying the “golden years,” forcing many to move to low cost States or to cheap foreign domiciles.

Most Americans live from paycheck to paycheck. They are burdened by heavy mortgages or rents, car loans, insurance premiums, ballooning credit card balances, and the “gotta haves” of modern day living.  This continual juggling between money inflows and outflows makes it for a precarious existence.

What ever happened to the values of post Great Depression to be thrifty, self-reliant, and prudent? How did we get hooked on entitlements? How did we morph into an immediate gratification society? And most importantly, where do we go next?

I suggest that we re-visit the wise principles of our predecessors:

·      You do not buy things if  you don’t have the money to pay for them.

·      You should set aside 10-15% of your net income for future needs and contingencies.

·      You should not charge anything to your credit card if you couldn’t pay off the balance when the monthly bill arrives.

·      You should clearly separate those things you need from those things it would be nice to have.

·      You should stay away from getting personal loans, especially payday loans that charge usury interest.

·      Perhaps the most important, you should live within your means.

Frugal people don’t go and spend thousands of dollars for a big flat TV, if they do not have the money. They are content with one car, if that is all they can afford. Smart people do not run out and spend a thousand dollars or more on a fancy cellular phone just to use it for social media nor do they sign up for contracts costing hundred of dollars for so-called convenience.

Smart people resist the urge to:

·      Buy an R.V., timeshare, second home or boat because everyone else is doing it. These purchases will require money to maintain that you might not be able to afford. Depreciation wipes out much of the value immediately after the purchase.

·      Do not charge dinner outings, travel and vacation to their credit card unless they have the ability to pay off the credit card balance at the end of the billing cycle.

·      Do not buy a home if the mortgage payments will eat up more than 1/3 of their take home pay. Home ownership costs more than just the mortgage: property taxes, insurance, maintenance and repairs, just to name a few.

·      Stop keeping up with Joneses. The Joneses might have more money that them or they might be more foolish. Either way not a good decision.

Stop listening to false prophets:

·      California House Representative Maxine Waters, for example, pushed for easier mortgage loans in the late 1990’s saying that “even poor people” should be able to buy a home.” We all know what happened when the economy went south in 2007-2008. Poor people and illegal (although ineligible) aliens were the first to lose their homes.

·      Madison Avenue bombards us with a variety of come-ons, some for non-essential and luxury items. Do not get trapped in the cycle of materialism. They will try to make you feel that if you don’t get on the bandwagon, you might fall behind your peers.

Cash flow management and household budgeting are important skills we should all learn in high school. Many successful people and business go into bankruptcy every year because they do not know how to manage their cash flow. Some people, tongue in cheek, attribute happiness to a positive cashflow.

Prudent and frugal financial management reduces the pressure and stress of modern day living. It is also an important ingredient to household harmony and peace of mind.

Lessons for Our Political Leaders

The shift in our values post WWII was aided and abetted by populists in our political milieu. Some might even go as far as blaming our politicians for having taken us astray from the fundamental principles of our ancestors. Others might suggest that politics is merely a reflection of prevailing values and customs – a sort of chicken and egg question.

Regardless of what came first, the egg or the chicken, our politicians, the stewards of the nation’s checkbook, would be wiser if they took time to reflect on what the long term consequences of their fiscal actions will be on the nation and its progeny. For example:

·      What is the long-term impact of periodically lifting the national borrowing limits? On our currency and our standing in the world?

·      What are the long-term effects for the nation to live beyond its means? Monetarily and politically?

·      What would the benefits be of generating small annual surpluses? A kind of rainy day fund?

·      How can we best prioritize our expenditures and separate essential from not essential expenditures? Increase the discretionary while reducing the mandatory spending?

·      How do we help the constituency get back to the “what I need” and away from the "gotta-have” mentality?

*****

Footnotes

Many Americans have burdens that others do not have. If you have more than one family to support, you will undoubtedly be burdened by the financial consequences. It is quite expensive to raise one family. Raising more than one can leave you destitute.

College students are encouraged to get student loans. Properly executed these loans can make the difference between finishing and graduating or dropping out. However, many students frit the benefit away by spending the loan money to buy a car, a TV, take a vacation or other non-essential items.  

Faulty Assumptions About Immigration

As an immigrant, I stand in defense of immigration and its immense contribution to the advancement and prosperity of our nation. However,  I find many statements by proponents and opponents of immigration to be faulty or inaccurate.  We do not need exaggerations, lies, and half-truths to defend what really stands tall on its own.

A Historical Footnote

Large immigration to the U.S. started around 1850. With the advent of the Industrial Revolution, mass production required millions of unskilled and semi-skilled men and women to staff newly built factories.

Millions of laborers were needed to build the emerging infrastructure: railroads, highways, roads, sewage systems, bridges, homes, universities, and skyscrapers. They came in droves primarily from Europe, some from China, and others from Mexico. There were plenty jobs to go around.

In the post WWI era, assimilation was encouraged. Immigrants were told to become Americans, often setting aside their national customs, culture, and language.

Through the early 1920’s immigrants needed a sponsor in order to receive a visa to come over. Most, if not all, immigrants came over legally. Later in that decade, the immigration rules began to change. Some immigrants were deemed to be more desirable than others. Stricter rules of immigration were enacted. Quotas were set aside for specific geographic areas of origin. Some suggest that it was a prelude to the Great Depression.

Soon after WWII the system began to morph again. Preference in the chain migration was granted to parents, spouses, and children.  Brothers and sisters were eligible to compete within the annual quotas. The quota for Southern Europe was 30,000 per year. Northern European immigrants were not subject to the quota system and were given preference, e.g., more desirable.

Sponsors had to vouch to the U.S. government that newly arrivals would not be a burden financially on the state. Immigrants were not eligible for welfare, disability, healthcare, and other governmental assistance programs. This policy continued until the system was liberalized later on in the century.

Fast Forward

Things have changed dramatically during the past 50 years.

The need for semi skilled and unskilled jobs began to decline. Many natives found these low level jobs undesirable. Soon the country began to morph from a pair of hands labor market to a knowledge society. Scarcity of highly educated applicants forced the government to come up with a fast track visa, the HB1.

Globalization contributed to the disappearance of many skilled and semiskilled jobs as companies begin to exploit low cost labor in developing countries.  Something unheard from during the boom years, we saw the emergence of an underclass of workers, the great majority over 40 who found themselves out of work or forced to accept jobs that paid a fraction of the union wages they enjoyed in the past. 

Many poor folks from developing countries were ready, willing, and able to come over to fill the low level jobs natives shunted. They could earn in a month more than they were able to earn in a year in their home country. Millions came illegally. They soon made their presence felt mostly in the agriculture, home building, home care, and restaurant industries.

Chain migration was expanded to include brothers, sisters, grandparents, and in-laws. A special lottery was set aside to give preference to immigrants from poorly represented nations. Amnesty was granted to millions of illegal immigrants, thus fueling more illegal immigration. Special protective set asides permitted folks escaping calamities to settle in America.

Comparing the Before and After

As with any wide pendulum swing, many feel that the pendulum has swung too much toward liberalization. These folks want to see a shorter migration chain limited to children and spouses (the nuclear family), and the elimination or reduction of the lottery system. They also oppose what they consider amnesty. These folks want a more secure border to keep illegal migration from the Southern border under control.

Proponents, on the other hand, say that shortening the chain is tantamount to breaking up families … something that was the norm during the prior immigration years.  They lament the potential elimination or reduction of the lottery as an attack on people of color since most applicants come from the African continent.  Folks believe that building a wall on the Southern border is a racist tactic.

My Take

There is plenty room between these two opposing views to reach a compromise. One can understand the notion that including parents in the chain migration would reward the parents of the Dreamers for having violated the laws of the country. So grandfathering out the parents of the Dreamers seems like the right thing to do. A path to citizenship for the Dreamers needs to be in place. Understandingly a waiting period is in order – 10-12 years seems reasonable. Legal immigrants have to wait a minimum of 5 years before they can petition for naturalization.

So lets get this done …