911 Just Became Worthless

nospam@example.com (Karl Denninger) — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 10:28:00 -0500

There's stupid, and then there's really stupid.

Apparently, the town of Tracy, California (a bit east of the Bay Area) has decided to turn 911 emergency calls into a profit center. Karl Bode points us to the news that the town now wants people to pay $300 for every 911 call. Of course, if you think you might be a frequent 911 caller, they've got a plan for that. For the low, low, low price of just $48 per year, you can call 911 as many times as you want. Yes, that's right folks, there's a special deal for those of you who regularly have emergencies. Make sure to order now!

There is an update on this - apparently it will only apply if the fire department has to respond to medical emergencies.

You know, like, for example, if you're driving down the road and see a horrible single-car wreck happen in front of you?

The 911 system has just become worthless folks.

I won't dial any more when traveling, and I've phoned in a couple of really bad single-vehicle accidents that I happened upon "first." I have no idea if my doing so saved lives or not, but it is reasonable to assume that it might have.

Those people may now die, because unless I can be assured that I won't get hit with a $300 bill for calling in an accident everywhere in this nation I'm not going to do it, and this sort of idiocy has a way of spreading - rapidly.

Thanks to the people of Tracy, California, which believes that raping its citizens is the most important aspect of things, I can no longer use my cell phone to call in auto accidents without the risk of being charged $300 for being a good Samaritan.

State Detonation Countdown: California

nospam@example.com (Karl Denninger) — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 14:53:00 -0500

Off the wire: California's Governor has declared a fiscal emergency and is imposing $8 billion in emergency cuts, asking for $7 billion in Federal aid.

Governor Schwarzenegger has declared that the state is facing a deficit of $41.6 billion - nearly half of projected revenues.

The summary budget can be found here. While there are major cuts in a lot of programs, what's amazing is what's not cut - specifically, K-12 and higher education, both of which are either flat or receive increases.

Debt service is also up, and may go up a lot more.

This is what I would call "a good start" - but exempting overly-bloated state educational systems is idiotic. They are a huge part of the budget and, along with "health and human services", need to bear more of the pain.

When all is said and done with a 50% deficiency The Governor is proposing to decrease spending by a paltry 3.7%.

Where did you put the bong, Arnie?

You said you were missing half the money you needed - or rather, to balance the budget based on revenues you'd have to manage to cut the budget in half, double revenues, or some combination.

So how is it that you come up with the revenue and expense numbers in that latter document? They balance.... how's that? I've not found the trick yet, but I'm sure there is one.

A 3.7% reduction can't close a 50% deficit.

When facing an elephant that is threatening to stomp you the appropriate response is not to attempt to address him with a flyswatter.

The Market Ticker - States

911 Just Became Worthless

State Detonation Countdown: California