TO antispin AND Voice of Truth:

When speaking of salaries for California State Employees, it is unfair to compare their salaries straight across the board with other states without taking into consideration the very high cost of living in this state. When the purchasing power of an employee’s salary is taken into account for the cost of living in their state AND local area, that is when you see who really has a higher or lower income compared to their cost of living.

I do not know how California employees rate in purchasing power compared to other states, but that would be a much better and fairer way to judge, rather than going by just the numbers.

Hence my and my fellow disabled Californian’s problem. We receive about $845 per month (no food stamps allowed, which is how the state pays us their additional money that Arnold is taking back to 1982 levels, else they would have to incur the cost of administrating food stamps to the disabled as well - so paying us cash instead is a cost saving for the state), that sum seems higher than it really is for people in other states because the cost of living in those states is so low. Those other states do not pay like California does, but do administer food stamps.

So this is how it breaks down in reality:

Effective January 2009, the SSI payment for an eligible individual is $674 per month and $1,011 per month for an eligible couple. State of California pays &171;.00 per month in lieu of Food Stamps. Arnold wants to kick it back to $156.00 - the Federal min. and the 1982 starting amount for the opt out program. If he goes lower than that, the state looses the opt out program for food stamps.

Right now, on $845 in California we are at 93.62% of the poverty level (6.37% below the Federal poverty level). If Arnold gets his way and lowers our state supplement to the federal min, then we would be driven down to 91.97% of the poverty level (8.03% below the Federal poverty level).

Think about it, a small drop of just $15.00 per month drops us by 1.66% further below the poverty level. We can’t afford an additional 1.66% cut, BUT people earning over $100,000.00 per year sure can! But guess who gets cut first!

So, if the Federal Standard is set at 100, then California comes in at: 135.1% of that federal standard.  So if the Federal SSI/SSA benefit is $674, then to add to that for the additional 35.1% for living in California, we should be getting $909.90, not $845, let alone $830 Arnold wants to implement. Also consider that an income for one person in the sate of California to be at a 70% Lower Living Standard you need to be receiving $10,400 (Poverty Guidelines/Level).

So, apparently it takes a minimum income of $34,736 for one person to live at a functional standard of living in the state of California, where as in KENTUCKY the cost of living compared to the federal standard is 90.4% (the lowest state I think).

All of the above needs to be taken into consideration when comparing salaries, benefits and so on. At $845 per month with a cost of living ranging at 135.1%, try being disabled and living on that. Oh, by the way Arnold also wants to cut our (the disabled in the state) medical, housing, and In Home Support again as well.

The next time you injure yourself, or are in a accident, keep in mind that if you do not have a pension, and/or not much in your SSA account, you to could, by the grace of bad luck, be able to live in our world.

The next time I hear someone say to me again that we all have to tighten our belts now, is going to get a frank piece of my mind and a nasty reality check, right in the face (non-physical, just to be clear).

Am I angry right now, naw ...... LOL ..... you bet, but mostly I am just terrified.

antispin, where do I even start.  First, Chevron exec salaries are not in the “tens of millions”, though that is a great regurgitation of the party line.

Profits come after more than just salaries are paid.  How about all the capital required to run and build the company.  How about all the interest on the cash they borrow to enable the day to day running of the company (yes, they do have debt).  On and on.

FYI, California state employees, including teachers, enjoy the HIGHEST avg salary of any state worker in the USA.  So, I sincerely doubt that any corporation is paying their bottom rung people more than that.

The shareholder do nothing except give Chevron the money to grow?  How the hell do you think a corp operates?

I’m a troll???  No, I’m just capable of thinking for myself using actual facts, which is something that you clearly won’t let get in the way of your arguments.

“voice of truth” -

And you must know that profits come after salaries are paid.  Chevron execuative salaries are routinely in the tens of millions.  The lowest salaries typically start somewhere north of the average california teacher salary.  The profits are distributed among investors who do zero work: they just collect the profits for having their money invested. 

btw, you are either brainwashed drone or a troll.

Virginia777: “SSI/SSP grants, cash to those with disabilities - Reduced to the barely sustainable figure of $830 per month.”

The sad truth is that for the past 20 years or so years we (those of us on SSI/SSA) have been cut 19 to 20 times to balance California’s budget. One year we were severely cut to pay for a 5% tax cut for the top 1% richest people in the state. Nobody, save for a few Democrats, cared then, nobody cares now (in both the government and most of the public).

We are now well below the poverty line, and Arnie has vowed to plunge us even farther below, right up to the federal limit, in order to find cash without touching the incomes of those who can afford the cuts better than we can.

Well Arnie dear, I guess you tought this Lucky Duck a lesson. Gona have to give up this disability gig, get up out of my wheelchair, and give up this cushy disabled life of mine .......

anti-spin, it is obvious from your post that you either A) have no functioning understanding of what you are talking about or B) you are trying to cloud and spin an argument.  The correlation of a companies revenue to its number of employees is absolutely zero.  You do know that revenue does not equal profit, right?  At least in the private sector.  In the public sector, because government does not produce anything, every dollar it confiscates is profit.  That is why adding government jobs does nothing for the overall economy, it is merely shuffling the deck chairs on the Titanic.

Carl is exactly right that one of the main reasons that California is in the predicament it is in is due to public workers and the overly bloated pension system.

Also, it should be noted that the California Legislature has repeatedly refused to cut state spending, though asked to do so by a variety of governors.

Everyone realizes that is the Legislative body of government, both state and federal, that actually spends the money, not the governor or president, right?

Carl, I think you’ll find that the average pay in the private sector is greater than in the public sector.  Consider, for example, Chevron Corporation ( http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=chevron+corporation )

revenue | $ 189.7 billion
employees | 67000
revenue / employee | $ 2.831 million

They’re doing significantly better than, say, California teachers ( http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=teachers+california )

people employed | 979040 people (1 in 16)
yearly change | +10810 people (+1.1%)
median wage | $48640 per year

It seems you’re buying into the meme the corporations employ the MSM to convince you of: that private is virtuous and downtrodden, while government is elite and dominating.  Nonsense.  The corporations want to make complete serfs of 90% of Americans and royalty of 0.09% ...the rest would be what’s left of the middle class.  Corporate superviors.

Of course there is no cutting wages for state workers, who make twice as much as private sector workers and enjoyed nice raises when times were good. That would be a painless cut.

What about a pension cap for all those who exploited corrupt local officials and now collect well over $100,000 a year in retirement from the state and local governments. Perhaps pensions should be limited to the average full-time salary for Californians, something like $45,000 a year.

These would instantly solve the budget problem, but will never happen in this corrupt state.

Arnold has aimed his axe directly at the poor in California. Look at a sample of what he is cutting:

Home Supportive Services - cut by 87%

SSI/SSP grants, cash to those with disabilities - Reduced to the barely sustainable figure of $830 per month.

CalWORKs - 15.7% cut to the cash allowance, bringing income for a family of three from $694 to $586 for rent and utilities.

Immigrants - ALL all cash assistance programs cut off, all food assistance, SSI (which is partly federal) reduced by $15 per month.

Children - Almost complete elimination of Healthy Families program which provided affordable health care to children with incomes too high to qualify for Medi-Cal.

We are in big trouble in this state.

hello. why did this multimillionaire wait so long to make cuts in the state budget? nothing will affect his way of life. it was his job to handle the state budget years ago, so all those in his state (living much less fortunately than his family) would by now be beginning to recover. was beg, borrow, and lie to get other people’s money, all he knew? nothing about eliminating the chaff, trimming the spending, reversing the deficit? he has never been in Congress. he must have been infected with the democratic disease.

There is another alternative, one that we will get to before this is over.

Bankrupcy…

it’s time to protect yourself from California, while you can…