T Nation

New Jersey Faces Bankruptcy

Is your state next?

"Debt Quadruples

Eight months ago he told a group of mayors that without reducing the state’s debt burden, ``our financial situation will not allow us to make needed investments in critical infrastructure or rationally balance the books.’’

New Jersey’s debt has almost quadrupled since fiscal 1996 after previous governors borrowed to boost spending, balance budgets and avoid tax increases.

The state has had seven years of deficits and Corzine said next year’s will be at least $1.7 billion. New Jersey spent 7.4 percent of its income on debt service in fiscal 2007, second only to Connecticut at 12.6 percent, according to New York-based S&P.

``I’m willing to risk losing my job if that’s necessary to set our fiscal house in order and get New Jersey out from the debt burden constraining our future,’’ Corzine, 61, said in November."

Numerous states are nearly bankrupt and the citizens are taxed to the limit. California is, for all intents and purposes, bankrupt.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=a4rssheZuR1k&refer=exclusive

Maybe they should stop spending all of their money on buckets of hair gel.

Worse yet, they’re in New Jersey.

New Jersey and California should start a war with each other. That always stimulates the economy.

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Is your state next?

"Debt Quadruples

Eight months ago he told a group of mayors that without reducing the state’s debt burden, ``our financial situation will not allow us to make needed investments in critical infrastructure or rationally balance the books.’’

New Jersey’s debt has almost quadrupled since fiscal 1996 after previous governors borrowed to boost spending, balance budgets and avoid tax increases.

The state has had seven years of deficits and Corzine said next year’s will be at least $1.7 billion. New Jersey spent 7.4 percent of its income on debt service in fiscal 2007, second only to Connecticut at 12.6 percent, according to New York-based S&P.

``I’m willing to risk losing my job if that’s necessary to set our fiscal house in order and get New Jersey out from the debt burden constraining our future,’’ Corzine, 61, said in November."

Numerous states are nearly bankrupt and the citizens are taxed to the limit. California is, for all intents and purposes, bankrupt.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=a4rssheZuR1k&refer=exclusive

How long have the democrats been in charge of Jersey? That might explain it better than anything else.

[/quote]

The fact that you think Republicans are a better option, makes your post amusing

No worries. They are instituting a tax on wife beaters. Their coffers will overflow.

All joking aside — states are borrowing like mad to keep up the spending obligations instituted in good times. How long can states borrow billions to pay pensions and keep upgrading roads?

One day, one state will simply declare bankruptcy. Either the Fed bails them out too, or the bond market collapses. The federal government will have little choice but to assume more and more of the states’ obligations. Where’s THAT money to come from? Either massive tax increases or serious debasement of the currency…

State debt is the secret ticking bomb of which few are paying any attention.

Legalize and Tax marijuana-problem solved

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
Rocky101 wrote:
Legalize and Tax marijuana-problem solved

And several other problems begin…[/quote]

Like? Pot-fueled riots oh wait that is alcohol, domestic abuse and sexual assault on the rise, oh wait that is alcohol again.
Might as well legalize it it is safer than tobacco and alcohol /end of thread hijack/

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
No worries. They are instituting a tax on wife beaters. Their coffers will overflow.[/quote]

High petroleum prices hit the New Jersey economy especially hard since one third of state’s crude oil imports go to hair products. Unfortunately taxing it like motor fuel is a third rail issue in state politics.

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

[quote]Mick28 wrote:

Otherwise, we should try to legalize everything that is just a little better for us than alcohol and tobacco, but still not very good. [/quote]

As we should, yes.

Plus, there are studies, well at least there is one, that some people actually drive better while being moderately stoned.

Legalize it.

For the children.

There is only one possibility: The federal government backs state debt. This causes the credit rating of the United States to tumble and/or the dollar value to tumble.

As we’re seeing now, the standard of living of Americans begins to fall as the Depression takes hold. Investors around the world begin recognizing that they will get their investments back in greatly depreciated dollars.

A run on the dollar accelerates as the Depression finally is recognized by most. Only a military state prevents the United States from collapsing into complete anarchy.

"There is roughly $6.84 Trillion in bank deposits. $2.60 Trillion of that is uninsured. There is only $53 billion in FDIC insurance to cover $6.84 Trillion in bank deposits. Indymac will eat up roughly $8 billion of that.

Of the $6.84 Trillion in bank deposits, the total cash on hand at banks is a mere $273.7 Billion. Where is the rest of the loot? The answer is in off balance sheet SIVs, imploding commercial real estate deals, Alt-A liar loans, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bonds, toggle bonds where debt is amazingly paid back with more debt, and all sorts of other silly (and arguably fraudulent) financial wizardry schemes that have bank and brokerage firms leveraged at 30-1 or more. Those loans cannot be paid back."

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article5594.html

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
orion wrote:
Mick28 wrote:

Otherwise, we should try to legalize everything that is just a little better for us than alcohol and tobacco, but still not very good.

As we should, yes.

Plus, there are studies, well at least there is one, that some people actually drive better while being moderately stoned.

Legalize it.

For the children.

More nonsense from the idiot from austria.

[/quote]

Oh, then please show us any evidence for your assumption.

Because the studies I know show that people who are impaired by cannabis drive more carefully which offsets any negative effects of cannabis.

The people who do cause accidents on weed are usually also drunk.

Even if more people were stoned while driving there is no way to tell if that was more dangerous than the situation right now.

What the hell I´ll start:

http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roadsafety/research/rsrr/theme3/cannabisanddrivingareviewoft4764?page=12#a1039

However, there is not sufficient evidence indicating the percentage of drivers that operate a vehicle after consuming cannabis, particularly during the time period of any intoxicating effect. As a result, there is no precise estimate of the percentage of drivers exposed to cannabis as an accident risk factor. Indeed, it is problematic to estimate the extent of exposure independent of other risk factors associated with cannabis use such as alcohol. Moreover, the demographic group most frequently using cannabis already has the greatest a priori accident risk due to driving inexperience and factors associated with youth relating to risk taking, delinquency and motivation. These demographic and psychosocial variables may relate to both drug use and accident risk, thereby presenting an artificial relationship between use of drugs and accident involvement.

Evidence of impairment from the consumption of cannabis has been reported by studies using laboratory tests, driving simulators and on-road observation. The laboratory tests generally indicate acute impairment of memory, attention and psychomotor control. Both simulation and road trials generally find that driving behaviour shortly after consumption of larger doses of cannabis results in (i) a more cautious driving style; (ii) increased variability in lane position (and headway); and (iii) longer decision times. Whereas these results indicate a ‘change’ from normal conditions, they do not necessarily reflect ‘impairment’ in terms of performance effectiveness since few studies report increased accident risk. However, the results do suggest ‘impairment’ in terms of performance efficiency given that the increased compensatory effort resulting from cannabis use limits the available resources to cope with any additional, unexpected or high demand, events.

In conclusion, cannabis impairs driving behaviour. However, this impairment is mediated in that subjects under cannabis treatment appear to perceive that they are indeed impaired. Where they can compensate, they do, for example, by not overtaking, by slowing down and by focusing their attention when they know a response will be required. However, such compensation is not possible where events are unexpected or where continuous attention is required. Effects of driving behaviour are present up to an hour after smoking but do not continue for extended periods.

    "With respect to comparisons between alcohol and marijuana effects, these substances tend to differ in their effects. In contrast to the compensatory behaviour exhibited by subjects under cannabis treatment, subjects who have received alcohol tend to drive in a more risky manner. Both substances impair performance, however,[b] the more cautious behaviour of subjects who have received cannabis decreases the impact of the drug on performance, where the opposite holds true for alcohol." [/b] (Smiley, 1998, p. 19)

Thus, not only is it problematic to estimate the percentage of accident involvements associated with cannabis use alone, there is no evidence that impairment resulting from cannabis use causes accidents. Attempts to alleviate these problems by calculating risk of culpability for an accident (rather than the risk of having an accident) suggest that cannabis may actually reduce responsibility for accidents . It is evident that further epidemiological research is necessary. Such research must adopt a ‘Grand Rapids’ methodology of obtaining valid baseline data matched to positive cases, as well as including sufficient sample sizes and a valid operational definition of ‘responsibility’. Such research may benefit from differentiating between accident types and accounting for relevant covariates including driver age and sex.

Emphasis mine

Legalize it.

To make the streets safe for itzy-bitzy, teeny-weeny children!

THE CHILDREN!

PS: I rule

Supreme.