Where Would You Live?

If you could live in any other country in the world and be granted immediate citizenship assuming you would want that, where would you live? And if you are of the persuasion that you would never leave the USA, let's rephrase the question: if you HAD to leave the USA, where would you live?

This is a question I have grappled with for decades. There are so many people, places, and cultures in which I want to wallow.

I love the mountains of Switzerland, the serenity of Finland, the fjords of Norway, the warmth of the Spanish people, the west coast vibe of Australia, the nearness of Canada, which feels like a 51st state, and yet so different, and the rustic beauty of Mexico (aside from the drug-related massacres). The high altitudes of Bolivia and women in black bowler hats!

Aside from personal aesthetics, I think I'd have to go with a country where I feel I am treated as an equal. My sexual orientation isn't a factor. And that basically limits my choices, which in and of itself is fucking infuriating.

Then I have to further limit my decision based on which countries I think might be underwater within my lifetime due to global warming. That might take care of the Netherlands which would otherwise be my first choice, probably. I just like the vibe there.

I guess I'd go with Spain.

But if I had to move cats, I'd go with Canada.

Make sense?

Slurring on the Radio

The only thing that surprises me about learning of an AM radio talk show host using the word "wetback" is that it happened in Austin, Texas. Honestly, is this guy so stupid that he didn't expect a backlash in the Berkeley of Texas, ground-zero for liberal progressives in Texas? Not to mention, home to a huge wetback Hispanic population.

If I hadn't done that strike-thru it would have been funny right? Like sarcasm and satire?

"I frequently use sarcasm and satire in my humor," Pryor told listeners this morning. "The first mistake I made is using the term. It's a highly offensive and outdated term that should never be used."

I have never heard this guy's show. I'm not exactly what you'd call a fan of talk radio. But if it's like any of the other AM talk radio formats, real humor isn't even in the equation.

It would have been interesting if the article had included some lengthy quotes so we could have heard the humor, satire, and sarcasm in the proper context.

Pryor began using the word during a discussion about the terminology used to describe people who are in the country illegally.

"Whatever happened to the good old word 'wetback' "? he asked.

[...]

Later during the discussion, Pryor said he was merely trying to come up "with a more efficient way of saying it, that's all, and just bring back a little of good ol' classic Americana."

Oh, right. Like redneck Americana? Like 1950s Lynch a Negro for Jesus Americana?

I don't care if these people have issues with illegal immigration; many people do. But if you can't maintain a little self-control on the air, and behave like a mature adult without resorting to speech which fans the flames, then you really don't have much to say. Nothing at all, in fact.

Nor do you understand very much about sarcasm, satire, and humor. But thanks for reminding me why I avoid talk radio.

Stop the F-22 Now!

My three-dimensional political spectrum just got a little more bent this morning after reading about the F-22 fighter jets. President Obama has rightfully said he won't sign the military spending bill unless the $1.75 billion program to buy seven jets is removed from the bill.

Senators Edward Kennedy and John Kerry support the purchase. Senators Carl Levin and John McCain oppose it. Supporters want the program because of the high-paying jobs which will be retained. That sounds reasonable on the surface except for one small detail: The Pentagon doesn't really need these jets.

The Pentagon would rather buy unmanned aircraft to gather intelligence in Afghanistan and accelerate the testing for the F-35, a new plane designed to attack ground targets. Pentagon officials say the F-22 is hard to maintain and costs $44,000 to operate for an hour, compared with $30,000 for older planes.

But many Republicans in Congress say more F-22s, which were designed for aerial combat, are needed as a hedge against countries like China.

Holy shit! Let's break this down into bite-sized pieces. In an era when we desperately need to be spending money on things like infrastructure, education, reducing poverty, combating homelessness, health care, gaining energy independence and developing renewable energy sources to name but a few, we have senators pushing for a military expenditure which is unnecessary, simply to keep workers employed. (And keeping executives and stockholders of Lockheed Martin happy.)

It is this kind of disconnect which has me wondering how we'll ever get out of this hole. (We won't, but that's another issue.)

And that argument that the F-22s are a hedge against China? Please. If China wanted to bring us down, they already are well-positioned to cripple us via the economic system. However, Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.), the chairman of the House Appropriations Defense subcommittee, believes China will potentially be a threat at some point, "particularly as it will compete directly with the United States for energy supplies."

All the more reason we should be addressing our energy needs now, not when we're over a barrel. No pun intended.

Consider as well, the costs to operate each of the F-22s: $44,000 is one American worker's annual salary for every hour the jets are in use. And that's on top of the $1.75 billion price tag which is another 38,636 such annual salaries.

While that may amount to a minuscule fraction of the jobs we've lost in the current recession, to squander that money unnecessarily is wrong-headed, misguided, and totally void of reasonable logic.

Let's jump back to the China statement for a moment, and John Murtha. And Japan's desire to buy F-22 fighter jets. But there's a slight problem: there's an export ban on the jets.

Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.), the chairman of the House Appropriations Defense subcommittee, said Wednesday that he intends to meet in the coming days with Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey (D-Wis.) and Rep. Bill Young (Fla.), Murtha’s GOP counterpart on the Defense subcommittee, to discuss lifting the export ban on the F-22.

The key player in that briefing will be Obey, who in 1998 wrote the legislation that bans the exports of the F-22 mainly to keep secret the aircraft’s radar-evading stealth technology. Obey has not budged since, and it’s unclear whether he is willing to relent.

On the surface, it sounds like a pretty good idea if we want to keep these jobs. Allow Japan to buy the jets instead of us building them for ourselves unnecessarily. A win-win situation, right? Ummm, not so fast. In the world of politics, military, and money, things are never simple.

Murtha, who is willing to work with Inouye on facilitating the sale of the F-22 to the Japanese, admitted it is an expensive proposition that also depends on whether Lockheed Martin’s Marietta, Ga., production line will stay open for several more years. That production line in turn depends on U.S. domestic orders for the plane. The Obama administration did not ask for money for the production of the fighter jet in fiscal 2010 and is adamant about halting production after the 187th airplane is delivered to the Air Force.

Murtha said that he would like to be able to purchase another 20 aircraft in 2010, but that he is uncertain whether that would be possible, considering the total price tag for those planes is $3.2 billion. Murtha also said that he is concerned about the high cost of operating and maintaining the existing planes.

Ahh, catch-22 with the F-22! We need to keep paying to keep the plant operational (i.e. churning out unneeded and expensive jets) until we can work out the details of an export to Japan, which might ultimately help with that Big Red Scare from China when they need more energy.

There are not even any guarantees at this point that this plan will even come to fruition.

For the F-22 to end up in Japan, Lockheed Martin would have to spend a considerable amount of time — several years — demilitarizing the plane. That essentially means stripping the jet of sensitive technologies employed by the U.S. military. That could be costly. By Murtha’s calculations the research and development to remove those capabilities would cost at least $1 billion and could go much higher, and it is unclear whether the Japanese would be able to pay such a steep price.

There's a lot more going on here than just "saving American jobs." I smell a big ol' stinking dead rat.

Beware of "Bargain" Foreclosures

Meth labs in homes across the US are a big problem. And the health issues are not limited to the meth users. This story came as a bit of a surprise to me -- that toxic residue from meth labs in homes can linger for years, and have very negative consequences for new owners of the home.

Federal data on meth lab seizures suggest that there are tens of thousands of contaminated residences in the United States. The victims include low-income elderly people whose homes are surreptitiously used by relatives or in-laws to make meth, and landlords whose tenants leave them with a toxic mess.

Some states have tried to fix the problem by requiring cleanup and, at the time of sale, disclosure of the house’s history. But the high cost of cleaning — $5,000 to $100,000, depending on the size of the home, the stringency of the requirements and the degree of contamination — has left hundreds of properties vacant and quarantined, particularly in Western and Southern states afflicted with meth use.

“The meth lab home problem is only going to grow,” said Dawn Turner, who started a Web site, www.methlabhomes.com, after her son lost thousands of dollars when he bought a foreclosed home in Sweetwater, Tenn., that turned out to be contaminated.

Because cleanup costs are so high, many families have no option but to suffer or walk away.

Meth contamination can bring financial ruin to families like that of Francisca Rodriguez. The family dog began having seizures nine days after the Rodriguezes moved into their home in Grapevine, Tex., near Dallas, and their 6-year-old son developed a breathing problem similar to asthma, said Ms. Rodriguez, 35, a stay-at-home mother of three.

After learning from neighbors that the three-bedroom ranch-style home had been a known “drug house,” the family had it tested. The air ducts had meth levels more than 100 times higher than the most commonly cited limit beyond which cleanup is typically required.

The former owner had marked “no” on a disclosure form asking whether the house had ever been a meth lab, Ms. Rodriguez said. But because he is now in prison for meth possession, among other things, the Rodriguezes decided there was nothing to gain by suing him. They moved out, throwing away most of their possessions because they could not be cleaned, and are letting the house go into foreclosure.

“It makes you crazy,” Ms. Rodriguez said. “Our credit is ruined, we won’t be able to buy another house, somebody exposed my kids to meth, and my dog died.”

There was a 14% increase in the number of home-based meth labs discovered last year. This is clearly another housing crisis, and we have a mish-mash of inadequate state laws dealing with the matter, all of which are woefully inadequate.

About 20 states have passed laws requiring meth contamination cleanup, and they use widely varied standards. Virtually all the laws hold the property owner financially responsible; Colorado appears to be the only state that allots federal grant money to help innocent property owners faced with unexpected cleanup jobs.

This is not the American dream.

Survival of the Fittest

I know this isn't funny, but I'm sorry; I'm grinning like a opossum.

Put down the gadgets before you're hit by a truck. Jesus. H. Christ.

A Staten Island teen trying to text while walking fell into an open manhole - and city officials have launched an investigation.

Alexa Longueira, 15, was walking with a friend along Victory Blvd. on Wednesday when she suddenly dropped underground.

"She's all scraped up on her back, under her arms and her shoulders," her mother, Kim Longueira, said

Apparently it tweaked Pam’s sense of humor with her post title which also cracked me up.

Maybe a lot of people are more coordinated than I am. I don't even like to walk while talking on a cell phone, must less texting. I don't text actually. I find typing on a full-sized keyboard tedious enough. And all this time I've assumed it's just me and my old age less than youthful vitality. Thankfully, I've been proven wrong by a 15-year-old.

The Bright Side to Economic Calamity

I'm glad to see prison reform and tough sentencing guidelines for low-level offenders being tossed away in favor of more sensible -- and less costly -- solutions. I'm just not sure why it takes a devastated economy to put that into place. I suspect this is indeed a reflection of the economic realities rather than a concrete change in philosophy.

Once the economy turns around it will be interesting to see if we return from whence we came -- back to ridiculously long prison sentences for mere possession.

Cash-strapped states are increasingly turning to alternative sentencing methods and to streamlined probation and parole as a way to keep low-level offenders out of prison and in their communities.

[...]

The measures include drug courts, which allow low-level drug offenders to avoid prison time through treatment and intense, personal, weekly intervention by a judge, and at least 500 courts for people arrested for driving while intoxicated. Drivers avoid jail by attending regular alcohol-treatment classes and by submitting to random tests.

States have also begun to shorten probation and to reduce the number of people sent to prison for technical violations, such as missing appointments.

[...]

These trends are showing up almost everywhere as a direct response to governors and state legislatures looking with alarm at prison costs eating up increasing shares of their budgets. According to Adam Gelb, director of the Public Safety Performance Project for the Pew Center on the States, more than half the states and the District are trying to reduce the growth in their prison populations through alternative sentencing and through new probation and parole procedures.

Surprisingly, this is happening even in Texas, although our current track record hardly qualified as progressive.

But what is striking, experts say, is how some states with reputations for being tough on crime are most rapidly embracing these policies, which might have once been dismissed as the product of liberal think tanks and soft-on-crime leniency.

Texas is a case in point. From 1978 to 2004, the inmate population rose 573 percent and the state's population increased 67 percent. With hard sentencing laws and some conservative judges, Texas built a "lock 'em up" reputation. The state has more than 155,00 inmates and leads the nation in putting prisoners to death.

But two years ago, Texas officials were faced with an alarming projection: By 2012, the state would need 17,000 more beds, which would mean building eight prisons at a cost of nearly $1 billion.

State Rep. Jerry Madden, a self-described conservative Republican, had just taken over as chairman of the Texas House committee on corrections. "I started asking questions," he said in a phone interview. To avoid building more beds for more prisoners, Madden said, "You either got to slow 'em going in, or speed 'em going out. And Texas is not a state that says, 'Speed 'em up going out.' "

[...]

The changes, implemented in the 2007 legislative session, included more funding for drug and DWI courts. New rules shortened the average probation time from 10 years to five. With about 445,000 people on probation, the system had become "the Number One feeder to the prison system," said Ana Yáñez-Correa, executive director of the Texas Criminal Justice Coalition, a progressive group.

The state also ordered the parole board to raise its parole rate to an earlier number of 31 percent; the proportion of eligible inmates granted parole had slipped to 26 percent.

With those changes in place, prison population growth slowed to a trickle. From January 2007 until December 2008, Texas added 529 inmates to its total, a tenth of what was projected.

It's enough to make me hope the economy doesn't improve. Because tough times seem to be the only time we come to our senses. And that's rather pathetic.

My Perfect World

is where:

Everyone pays a bit of attention. Explore. Don't be spoon-fed.

People slow the fuck down. Don't be in such a rush. Don't tailgate. It will only cause you pain and discomfort in the end.

Everyone eats healthy. Three meals a day. Fresh fruits and veggies in season.

Politicians don't feel the need to lie or cover up their sexual indiscretions.

The homeless don't need to feel ostracized because, even though the homeless shelter is in an abandoned hotel, and the federal government is offering it for free, the locals fear their property values will suffer. Even if said locals live near a freeway where their property values are already up for debate.

We don't need to prove our power to the planet through wars, but rather we prove ourselves to the planet in what we say and do to promote equality, fairness, and justice.

Stopping cellphone use on the streets and highways. Unless it is a dire emergency rather than an attempt to squeeze a little more efficiency out of a busy day. Ever seen an 18-car pileup? Not pleasant.

We don't need freeways because people aren't in a hurry and we don't need to divide neighborhoods.

People stop having babies without understanding the full 18-year commitment, responsibility, and cost -- despite their desire to procreate. Or because the Pope tells them contraception is evil.

Just stop. Examine all that is around you. Contemplate it. And then continue. Slowly. At a pace you can swallow.

Read labels.

READ LABELS.

The Sexual Orientation Spectrum

Everyone likes to talk -- or brag -- about how they are x% German and x% Swedish or x% Irish and x% English, or x% Nigerian and x% Native American (OK, you don't hear that one very often but..), but the simple fact is, nobody wants to bring this to the male/female sexual orientation level.

In the Sexual Orientation Spectrum, please name me two people who anchor either side of it. The 100% male heterosexual and the 100% female heterosexual. Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh do NOT count. Unless you have inside information.

We are all born of males & females conjoining. Things are bound to get mixed up in the fluids. Those DNA strands are not unlike the vacuum cleaner power cord which can manage to tie itself into knots overnight.

Shit happens.

I'm waiting.

Friday Pussy Blog: Cats & (Catnip) Mice Edition

Sissy looking rather large and loafish on the sofa... waiting to be fed. The empty cat food bowls are directly behind the sofa.

The Tot assumes a more high-profile position on the kitchen table. I have to walk past him to get the cat food so, again, he won't be unaware when I'm scooping.

Witchay Woman brought him two mice stuffed with catnip (well, maybe one of them was for Sissy, but the Tot has claimed them both) and he tends to leave them in highly visible areas with plenty of foot traffic. I cringe each time I step on one because I think I've stepped in a pile of cat vomit.

Speaking of which, I did step in some at the beginning of the week, and not only was it on the bottom of my sandal, it was inside it as well. Not sure how that happened. It resulted in a haiku.

Happy Friday!

Losing My Hope

I've been in the doldrums all week and can't seem to snap out of it. The heat might be getting to me. We've already had 15 days of temperatures at 100° or over, and 8 of those days were 105° or more. Today is likely to be the 9th day of such extreme heat. Incidentally, that is my threshold for meeting the definition "hot as fuck." Between 99.5° and 104.4° is just "damned hot." Unless there is an afternoon cloud providing some shade, I am now limiting my walking regimen to mornings until this heat subsides. But I digress.

I am also being weighed down by some very unpleasant political realities which, unlike the heat, will not fade away by mid-September. It's giving me a restless anxiety.

The fact that I built up a set of completely unrealistic expectations for change in the Obama administration is chewing the hell out of my raw nerves. And now that Barack Obama's approval rating is dropping, speculation is being fueled as to whether he will be a one-term president, and whether the Democrats will start losing seats in the 2010 mid-terms if the economy hasn't improved substantially by this time next year. In the meantime, everyone is scrambling to figure out what to do.

The looming political battle is about how to respond, and three camps are forming. The first includes the White House and most Democratic leaders in Congress, who champion a wait-and-see approach until more of the stimulus money hits the streets.

White House officials estimate that the government has committed $158 billion for spending around the country, but only about one-third of that has been spent. Temporary tax cuts have totaled about $43 billion thus far, according to White House estimates.

A second camp, consisting of nervous Democrats and some economists, argues that the government must spur the economy with another round of spending, tax cuts or a mixture of both.

The third camp is led by Republicans, many of whom argue that the spending program was wrong from the start and that the government should focus on tax cuts.

Ahh, yes, the same old tired song and dance routine. Maybe we need a fourth camp.

I keep asking myself, "why are our choices limited to center-right Democrats or far-right Republicans?" The progressive left really isn't getting much of a shot at fixing the problems if we keep becoming disillusioned with a lack of progress among the current crop and then swing wildly back to the right in 2010 and/or 2012.

Then I realize that is the only scenario because this country will probably require another century or two for us to get our shit together. Because the substantive change I am seeking is not going to be brought about by Congressional coddling, reaching across the aisle, and compromising on critically important matters.

To use a beer analogy, when I voted for change, it was not to replace Bud Light with Miller Lite, or even Heineken. I want to be knocked off my feet by a rich, dark, smoky unpasteurized brew on tap, with a thick frothy head, served in a pint glass instead of an aluminum can.

Unfortunately, that's not the American way. And this reluctance to not only embrace change, but failing to aggressively pursue it, could well be our downfall.

The level of corruption in politics is astounding, and our political system itself seems to be choking our hope, or mine at least. Here is one example which brilliantly illustrates the gross inefficiency of our federal and state governments.

According to an analysis by The New York Times of 5,274 transportation projects approved so far — the most complete look yet at how states plan to spend their stimulus money — the 100 largest metropolitan areas are getting less than half the money from the biggest pot of transportation stimulus money. In many cases, they have lost a tug of war with state lawmakers that urban advocates say could hurt the nation’s economic engines.

The stimulus law provided $26.6 billion for highways, bridges and other transportation projects, but left the decision on how to spend most of it to the states, which have a long history of giving short shrift to major metropolitan areas when it comes to dividing federal transportation money. Now that all 50 states have beat a June 30 deadline by winning approval for projects that will use more than half of that transportation money, worth $16.4 billion, it is clear that the stimulus program will continue that pattern of spending disproportionately on rural areas.

“If we’re trying to recover the nation’s economy, we should be focusing where the economy is, which is in these large areas,” said Robert Puentes, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution’s Metropolitan Policy Program, which advocates more targeted spending. “But states take this peanut-butter approach, taking the dollars and spreading them around very thinly, rather than taking the dollars and concentrating them where the most complex transportation problems are.”

[...]

Seattle found itself shut out when lawmakers in the State of Washington divided the first pot of stimulus money. Missouri has directed nearly half its money to 89 small counties which, together, make up only a quarter of the state’s population. The United States Conference of Mayors, which did its own analysis of different data last month, concluded that the nation’s metropolitan areas were being “shortchanged.”

Basically, the stimulus money, or the transportation segment of it at least, is simply being squandered with no rhyme, reason or logic.

Oh, there's a reason all right (emphasis mine):

“We have a long history of shortchanging cities and metropolitan areas and allocating transportation money to places where few people live,” said Owen D. Gutfreund, an assistant professor of urban planning at the City University of New York who wrote “20th Century Sprawl: Highways and the Reshaping of the American Landscape” (Oxford University Press, 2004).

Professor Gutfreund said that in some states the distribution was driven by statehouse politics, with money spread to the districts of as many lawmakers as possible, or given out as political favors. In others, he said, the money is distributed by formulas that favor rural areas or that give priority to state-owned roads, often found far outside of urban areas.

Here we are facing the most dire economic situation since the Great Depression and it's still all about selfish personal greed in political circles. Have no fear, this is all part of the Obama administration's master plan:

Obama administration officials, who have called for ending sprawl and making sure that federal transportation spending is cost-effective, say they are looking at how states are spending the money from the stimulus law, officially called the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, to learn about the strengths and weaknesses of the current system.

“The transparency that comes with Recovery Act funds is letting us see what’s happening in real time, and that’s a good thing,” said Roy Kienitz, an under secretary of transportation for policy. “Understanding where recovery dollars go and why will help us determine how to shape long-term transportation policies with the goal of getting the most benefit for every dollar.”

Bull-fucking-shit! Come on! This behavior is nothing new; this has been going on in some form or another through the centuries.

It is clear that states and politicians cannot be trusted to spend the stimulus money wisely, and as it was intended. Hooray for transparency so we can all be annoyed. Well, except for the millions of Americans who aren't paying attention. I know, I know, I'm being too harsh. Let them get through their Michael Jackson grief and then I'm sure they'll come around.

Aside from the economy and the recovery efforts, there's tremendous pressure to overhaul health care which, if the transportation stimulus spending provides any clues, we are likely to get screwed in the ass on that front as well. There isn't a perfect health care scenario, but you can bet we could do a whole lot better than what we'll end up with once Obama and Congress are done compromising and kissing ass with Big Pharma.

The nation's largest insurers, hospitals and medical groups have hired more than 350 former government staff members and retired members of Congress in hopes of influencing their old bosses and colleagues, according to an analysis of lobbying disclosures and other records.

[...]

The hirings are part of a record-breaking influence campaign by the health-care industry, which is spending more than $1.4 million a day on lobbying in the current fight, according to disclosure records. And even in a city where lobbying is a part of life, the scale of the effort has drawn attention. For example, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) doubled its spending to nearly $7 million in the first quarter of 2009, followed by Pfizer, with more than $6 million.

The push has reunited many who worked together in government on health-care reform, but are now employed as advocates for pharmaceutical and insurance companies.

It is ironic that the entire health care reform movement is one giant spreading cancer. But that's politics and the American way again. Expect real substantive change and progress and ye shall be disappointed.

Outside the unpleasant realm of health care and the economy, things aren't any better on the civil rights front. We continue having to fight like hell over no-brainer issues like DADT (although hope is brewing), which makes a repeal of DOMA and full nationwide marriage equality seem hopelessly distant. At least one state has the cajones to go to battle for justice.

Even this initial breath of fresh air is already stagnated a few miles up the coast.
Barely two months after Maine became the fifth state to allow gay marriage, 55,087 assholes have now signed a petition to put that up for a public vote. Thank the Catholic Diocese of Portland and others for that effort. And people wonder why I have such issues with organized religion.

We'll now have that homophobic gem in our faces, along with a big infusion of cash from out-of-state interests to push infuriatingly obnoxious bullshit advertising for weeks leading up to the election day showdown.

Whoever first uttered the words "life is just not fair" deserves a gold brick award for overachieving in understatements.

For the record, in a battle between red and blue, this is not how a progressive country should look.

But once the summer heat subsides, I'm sure I'll calm down and realize just how irrational I'm feeling at the moment.

I Would Gladly Give You an I.O.U. on Tuesday for a Hamburger Today

Those "registered warrants" being issued in California, aka I.O.U's, have been slow in coming for many... or yet to arrive.

“We are out of cash now,” said Carlos Flores, the executive director of the San Diego Regional Center, which provides services to Californians with developmental disabilities. The center is awaiting a $12 million warrant. “I can pay my staff next paycheck, and that’s it,” Mr. Flores said.

Other state contractors who provide services to the disabled had similar stories. Mark Berger, the chief executive of Partnerships With Industry, which offers job placement and training for the same type of clients, said he, too, had yet to get a warrant. “I haven’t heard of anybody who has received one,” Mr. Berger said.

There is also the possibility that if and when the warrants do arrive, the recipients might have to jump through hoops to turn them into cash.

The majority of banks have been clear that they will not take the warrants after July 10. Banks “do not wish to facilitate the lack of resolution of the budget deficit by basically providing this accommodation for an extended period of time,” said Rod Brown, chief executive of the California Bankers Association. “California must become more fiscally responsible.”

[...]

People expecting money from the state who do not get a warrant by Friday have three choices. They can try to find an alternative bank or credit union willing to deal with someone who is not a customer, they can hold the warrant until it matures and collect the interest, or they can try their luck in secondary markets, where some people are already seeking to buy i.o.u.’s at a discount.

What's interesting is that there are plenty of Californians who would gladly pay more taxes to help solve the deficit, under the right circumstances.