Re: "Fantastic" State Park Plan Offered by Govenor

http://gov.ca.gov/press-release/13366/

Gov. Schwarzenegger Announces Plan to Keep State Parks Open
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger today unveiled a plan that would allow for all state parks to remain open without increasing the Department of Parks and Recreation budget appropriation. Following the passage of the budget reduction in July, the Governor tasked the Department of Parks and Recreation and the Department of Finance to work together on a plan to achieve $14.2 million in budget savings in the current fiscal year while mitigating the number of park closures.
-------

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/09/no-california-state-parks-will-close-gov-schwarzenegger-announces.html

Just months after the state threatened to close 100 parks because of budget cuts, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger announced a plan today that will keep all parks open by instead reducing maintenance, administrative staff and some facilities’ hours.

The governor had cut $14.2 million from the parks budget as part of an effort to close a $60-billion budget shortfall, and parks officials said the reduction would force the closure of up to 100 state parks. That sparked an outcry from the public and pressure from environmental groups to reconsider.....

---

The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.
-- Carl Sagan

He really seems to hate the parks. I wonder why.

I heard a "State of the State" address by the Gov a year or two ago. He spent many minutes complaining about the deficiencies in the services provided by the state to teachers, schools, the poor, etc. Then he launched on a discussion of how the state taxes are too high. I don't know you pay for programs without money.

He is reluctant to do the very thing, actually the only real thing under the circumstances, that the state can do to increase revenue--- increase taxes. Some recent tax proposals by state commissions to address the revenue situation in California have suggested further cuts to taxes to the wealthy but higher taxes on business (does that make sense for anyone except the wealthy??).

He seems to be clinging to the concept that what benefits the rich will eventually benefit society. I would suggest that instead of the "trickle down" concept, he should consider the "trickle up" theory--- by improving the general living conditions in the state to the poorer majority, benefits will trickle up the the most wealthy in society. And get rid of Prop 13 property tax constraints and tax improved real property at its real value.

---

The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.
-- Carl Sagan

Wealthy (or better, put, wealthier...) people sign paychecks...taxing them more takes away incentive to continue making money. There aren't enough rich people around to support the overabundance of special programs CA and the Feds demand.

As far as the parks go, they could've made these cuts in the first place instead of turning into ugly during a budget battle. I'm in favor of pay to play.