California’s Economy Surpasses the UK’s, Becomes World’s Fifth Largest
I’m always amused when the libertarians talk about how overly burdensome the California state government is, and how it’s causing masses of people and businesses to leave in favor of less restrictive parts of the country. That doesn’t explain why a who-cares house in the suburbs goes for $750,000, and the economy, fueled by technology, entertainment and agriculture, continues to go through the roof.
Yes, all this is happening in the context of fairly aggressive regulations, most of them aimed at protecting the environment. Yet there are almost 40 million of us who are thrilled to be proud residents of a state whose air has made the transition shown above, and that produces a huge percentage of the world’s IP breakthroughs.
Cleaning up the environment doesn’t happen by accident, and it certainly doesn’t happen without the vigorous involvement of the public sector. Not only is this OK with California’s people, we elect our leaders specifically to get this accomplished.
As always, however, there are humorous aspects to all this. Here in Santa Barbara, Justin Fareed, a Republican Trump supporter backed by big oil, is setting up a third run at the 24th District seat in the U.S. House of Representatives, going against the incumbent, environmentalist Salud Carbajal, for the second time (having gotten skunked in 2016).
Justin: Take your silly little act to Tulsa or Dallas….or essentially anyplace but Santa Barbara. Not only do we care about the environment here, but I don’t think you can find six Trump supporters in the entire God-blessed city. I have a better chance of playing middle linebacker for the Philadelphia Eagles next year than you do of winning this election.
Craig,
I’ve got two questions ;
You do realize California isn’t really a country, don’t you? It doesn’t really have a GNP because so much of the expenses associated with nationhood are actually funded by the US Government.
Do you also realize California has the highest poverty rate in the US with more than 20% below the poverty line ? Los Angeles, Long Beach, and Oakland etc, have endemic drug, gang and murder rates rivaling the slums of South America.
I wonder if the California’s prison population (the nations largest) enjoy the clean air policies of the government as they crowd into facilities built for a prison population only one third it’s current size ?
Do you exalt in the knowledge that at least 30,000 prisoners currently incarcerated shouldn’t be there? Either to poor to be adequately defended, charged with the wrong offenses or simply victims of the system ?
The list could go on and on, California has it’s problems, your smugness is misplaced.
2) Do you really think abusing and jeering your fellow Californian’s who support a different political party or disagree with your opinions is really productive ? Although in the 2016 Presidential election Hillary Clinton carried California by a significant margin, President Trump still gained 4.5 million votes.
Justin Fareed is entitled to stand for political office. It’s to his credit that as a young farmer just of of college he has devoted so much time and energy to civic causes, community programs etc. He served as a volunteer board member of Join-Up. a non-profit organization assists combat veterans and first responders returning to America with physical, emotional or mental disabilities.
Justin devoted much energy to promoting state-of-the-art desalination and water treatment solutions.(which is how I met him).
Since his fathers illness Justin also assumed much of the responsibility the familys business, Pro Band Sports Industries, Inc., which specializes in the design and manufacture of sports medical aids, especially for the disabled. In addition, he Justin is a ” hands on” overseer on his familys third generation-owned cattle ranch.
Why shouldn’t such an active and involved citizen offer his talents as a candidate for public life ?
Your attack on Justin being backed by “big” oil, is based on nothing more than errant gossip !
The evidence is laughable ! At biggest it seems that decades ago an relative of Justin’s was briefly married to the Grandson of an oil company executive who’s Grandfather sold out his oil interests in the late 1950’s.
Justin’s mother owns shares in a property company in which one of her relatives is also a shareholder. This relative was also related by marriage to a beneficiary of an old trust fund set up by a long deceased oil millionaire.
Talk about clutching at straws!
But even if it were true, (which it’s not) Why is oil and gas industry support such a crime in California ? Only those like yourself, insulated in cozy Santa Barbara. can hypocritically pretend California can live without oil and gas !
The truth is very different, California’s largest export revenue is oil. The oil and gas sector coupled with the Californian auto industry, directly or indirectly employs 1 in 6 Californian workers, the oil industry is the single largest taxpayer.
California’s prosperity is based on oil.
But, hey let’s get personal, just like you get with poor ol’ Justin. What did you last put in your car’s furl tank ? Have you supported the world’s most viable EV maker with your own money ? Hell, the Tesla is even built in California, but did you opt to buy an EV ?
Nope, not you ! No wonder California has a reputation for rank hypocrisy !
It’s an understandable phenomenon when the average person encounters hypocritical smugness to become skeptical and resistant.
There’s nothing inherently wrong with encouraging clean automotive, or any industrial, technology. Governments have a right to legislate to regulate for better health standards and anti-pollution measures.
As long as these measures are perceived to be in the public interest, practical and economically responsible, the public should be in full support.
What is undesirable is ‘moral’ or political/ideological crusades based on extreme or impractical agendas resulting in economic vandalism and no tangible benefit.
Enlisting cooperation, not spewing divisive abuse, is the path to achieving better environmental outcomes.
Salud Carbajal is also a fine candidate. He is passionately, but intelligently, involved environmental and community issues that affect his voter base.
California is lucky to produce candidates so willing to give up time and energy for the thankless task of standing for political office.
I think that a far more important way to consider the relative success or failure of given political and economic ideologies would be to look at GDP per capita as compared to resources per capita.
Marcopolo is half right when he protests that this doesn’t include consideration of federal funds flowing into the state compared with outlays… so that too must be considered.
First: GDP per capita.
California isn’t the highest on the list, that would be Massachusetts. Of course, MA is another one of those extremely liberal states that has a strong regulatory regime…
In fact, 4 of the top 5, 7 of the top 10, and 10 of the top 15 are deep blue states. In order, we have the following for the top 15:
MA, NY, CT, AK, DE, ND, WY, CA, NJ, WA, MD, IL, TX, MN, NE.
It’s also worth noting that 7 out of 7 of the worst states regarding GDP per capita are deep red states, and of the worst 10 you see 8 deep reds (MS, ID, WV, AR, SC, AL, AZ, KY, MO), 1 deep blue(ME), and 1 purple (FL).
Considering resources per capita is far more difficult… but some considerations could be made. The easiest is population density… then further considerations on specific natural resources. Just looking again at the top 15 states, the 10 “blue” states have an average population density of 192 people/km2. All but one of those states can claim “beach/harbor/port” as a specific natural resource of value, but the land itself doesn’t have known extraordinary concentrations of resources that would elevate the state beyond normal economic considerations. For the 5 “red” states that make the list, the population density averages only 11 people/km2.. TX, ND, and AK all boast extraordinary oil and gas reserves, WY boasts a wealth of coal reserves that is virtually unrivaled anywhere in the world. TX – the only red state that has a population density greater than NINE people/km2 – also has beaches/coast/ports.
So there are far more resources/population in the red states that are doing well verses the blue states.
Finally comes Marcopolo’s sole point – federal funds. This is easy to rank.
For every year in memory, the states that have received the least federal funds per dollar of federal tax collected have all been blue – and by no small margin. This is unlikely to ever change. So the federal intervention into “blue” states tends to be net negative, the blue states (barring New Mexico, that is), tend to pay more federal taxes than they receive in benefits, while the red states tend to receive far more federal funding than they pay in federal taxes…
So Marcopolo’s singular “point” proves the opposite of what he likely intended.
Glenn,
I think you miss the point.
Craig’s contention was to compare the economy of California as if it was an independent nation.
My contention is that’s not really possible because State benefit from Federal government services which are extremely costly for independent nation states.
The federal government provides items like defense etc, which are huge expenses requiring large expenditures. The US government creates also vast federal employment paid for by all states.
So trying to pass any state economy as if it were a nation, is pointless since the calculations are just too complex.