San Bernardino files for Chapter 9 ba...

San Bernardino files for Chapter 9 bankruptcy

There are 15 comments on the www.mercurynews.com story from Aug 2, 2012, titled San Bernardino files for Chapter 9 bankruptcy. In it, www.mercurynews.com reports that:

San Bernardino officials say they've filed an emergency petition for Chapter 9 bankruptcy in response to the $45.8 million budget shortfall the city faces this year, making official a move the City Council approved last month.

Interim City Manager Andrea Travis-Miller says Wednesday's filing won't affect essential service to the community, and there are no immediate reductions or changes planned.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.mercurynews.com.

Robert

Fort Lauderdale, FL

#1 Aug 2, 2012
I am sure there will be more to follow you just can't keep spending more than you take in without it catching up to you.

Unless that is you are the federal government, everyone seems to think borrowing half the money you spend is no big deal and it will have no re percussion s. Some rich person will pay that,

yea right.

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#2 Aug 2, 2012
Soon the public union teachers will lose all of their pensions. Ain't that something?

Since: May 11

Location hidden

#3 Aug 2, 2012
I believe we'll see more of this around the country.

From 1998 to 2004 San Bernardino was doing well simply because they kept adding more and more government jobs. Their number one employer is the University of California, second largest is the city government. Not just teachers and firefighters, but lots of city officials who probably all earned 6 figures a year. San Bernardino has a population of 221,000. You have to think that their taxes are simply going to pay their own salaries.

Governments can't keep this up. There isn't enough money to keep supporting bloated governments. Yet, whenever a government is in financial trouble the first place it looks to relieve itself is services that are important to the people. It doesn't look to get rid of highly-paid managers and all the staff and accountrements that come along with managers. No, it's firemen and police officers and teachers and those who are hands-on workers who get shafted.

Governments are not unlike households. If you run your household finances correctly you don't spend more than you earn, if you see your finances becoming shaky you stop spending, you plan for emergencies, and just because you earn a little extra that doesn't mean you go crazy and spend it all.

Politicians love to spend other people's money and they don't mind spending those people into a hole. ALL the leaders of any city that has to file for bankruptcy should be fired. It's obvious they have no idea what they are doing.

Since: May 11

Location hidden

#4 Aug 2, 2012
Robert wrote:
I am sure there will be more to follow you just can't keep spending more than you take in without it catching up to you.
Unless that is you are the federal government, everyone seems to think borrowing half the money you spend is no big deal and it will have no re percussion s. Some rich person will pay that,
yea right.
Or some poor little kid will go hungry. Either way, it sucks.

“It's a Brand New Day”

Since: Feb 06

New Rochelle

#5 Aug 2, 2012
PayThat CEO wrote:
I believe we'll see more of this around the country.
From 1998 to 2004 San Bernardino was doing well simply because they kept adding more and more government jobs. Their number one employer is the University of California, second largest is the city government. Not just teachers and firefighters, but lots of city officials who probably all earned 6 figures a year. San Bernardino has a population of 221,000. You have to think that their taxes are simply going to pay their own salaries.
Governments can't keep this up. There isn't enough money to keep supporting bloated governments. Yet, whenever a government is in financial trouble the first place it looks to relieve itself is services that are important to the people. It doesn't look to get rid of highly-paid managers and all the staff and accountrements that come along with managers. No, it's firemen and police officers and teachers and those who are hands-on workers who get shafted.
Governments are not unlike households. If you run your household finances correctly you don't spend more than you earn, if you see your finances becoming shaky you stop spending, you plan for emergencies, and just because you earn a little extra that doesn't mean you go crazy and spend it all.
Politicians love to spend other people's money and they don't mind spending those people into a hole. ALL the leaders of any city that has to file for bankruptcy should be fired. It's obvious they have no idea what they are doing.
Yet, people in California still pay far more into the federal government than they get back. This money goes to suppport the 'Red states' that complain about federal spending, and knock California for almost being bankrupt, while these RED STATES are almost all on Federal Welfare.... http://martincantor.com/files/FederalbudgetAn...

Read and weep, California. See where your money goes...(Fig 1.2 & 1.1)
Robert

Fort Lauderdale, FL

#6 Aug 2, 2012
Mr_Bill wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet, people in California still pay far more into the federal government than they get back. This money goes to suppport the 'Red states' that complain about federal spending, and knock California for almost being bankrupt, while these RED STATES are almost all on Federal Welfare.... http://martincantor.com/files/FederalbudgetAn...
Read and weep, California. See where your money goes...(Fig 1.2 & 1.1)
What is they say lies damn lies and statistics.

You are full of it California gets far more than some southern red state.

2009 Federal Contract Spending had California number 1 at 55,562,326,567. Virginia and California usually fight over 1 & 2 with Texas coming in 3rd. Texas only got 3rd because they have so many military bases there.

The stats you are using are deceptive because a lot of the money goes to the military, social security and medicare. Your stats have more to do with where people live and where military bases are placed than how much the federal government is helping a state.

If you just look at $'s spent in the state or $'s spent on federal contracts or $'s spent on social programs like welfare you get a completely different picture.

The irs put out some data from 2007 on federal spending by state, it showed California getting the most 260 billion dollars with the next closest state being 171 billion.

“It's a Brand New Day”

Since: Feb 06

New Rochelle

#7 Aug 2, 2012
Robert wrote:
<quoted text>
What is they say lies damn lies and statistics.
You are full of it California gets far more than some southern red state.
2009 Federal Contract Spending had California number 1 at 55,562,326,567. Virginia and California usually fight over 1 & 2 with Texas coming in 3rd. Texas only got 3rd because they have so many military bases there.
The stats you are using are deceptive because a lot of the money goes to the military, social security and medicare. Your stats have more to do with where people live and where military bases are placed than how much the federal government is helping a state.
If you just look at $'s spent in the state or $'s spent on federal contracts or $'s spent on social programs like welfare you get a completely different picture.
The irs put out some data from 2007 on federal spending by state, it showed California getting the most 260 billion dollars with the next closest state being 171 billion.
No, Robert, the "red States" are almost all on the federal teat. Sorry, but you always seem to be completely detached from reality.
The TEN WORST WELFARE STATES ARE:

Alaska
New Mexico
Mississippi
Virginia
N. Dakota
louisiana
W. Virginia
Alabama
S. Dakota
Hawaii

This is reality. They all suck life from the Northeast, Mid-west, and California.

Reality.
Robert

Fort Lauderdale, FL

#8 Aug 2, 2012
Mr_Bill wrote:
<quoted text>
No, Robert, the "red States" are almost all on the federal teat. Sorry, but you always seem to be completely detached from reality.
The TEN WORST WELFARE STATES ARE:
Alaska
New Mexico
Mississippi
Virginia
N. Dakota
louisiana
W. Virginia
Alabama
S. Dakota
Hawaii
This is reality. They all suck life from the Northeast, Mid-west, and California.
Reality.
How do you figure that ?

You have Alaska number 1, they had according to a 2011 new york times article 7,974 welfare recipients during the same year California had 1,144,529.

You lie ms bill.

“It's a Brand New Day”

Since: Feb 06

New Rochelle

#9 Aug 2, 2012
Robert wrote:
<quoted text>
How do you figure that ?
You have Alaska number 1, they had according to a 2011 new york times article 7,974 welfare recipients during the same year California had 1,144,529.
You lie ms bill.
Federal $$$ sent, above that collected, not bodies.
USA

United States

#10 Aug 2, 2012
thanks to BO Administration...many more to come...bahahaha
Robert

Fort Lauderdale, FL

#11 Aug 2, 2012
Alaska, which you have in your top ten, had 58 thousand people on food stamps, California had 2 million 104 thousand so go peddle your false statistics to someone else.
Bringmedinner

San Jose, CA

#12 Aug 2, 2012
The Democrat administrations managing these numerous cities now having to claim bankruptcy should be legally liable just as bank administrations should be legally liable for ripping off the citizenries. It has been intentional mismanagement with many of the slicksters enriching themselves repeatedly at the expense of the public. The rabbit holes go deep and are almost always Democrat controlled.

Since: May 11

Location hidden

#13 Aug 3, 2012
Bringmedinner wrote:
The Democrat administrations managing these numerous cities now having to claim bankruptcy should be legally liable just as bank administrations should be legally liable for ripping off the citizenries. It has been intentional mismanagement with many of the slicksters enriching themselves repeatedly at the expense of the public. The rabbit holes go deep and are almost always Democrat controlled.
Hate to burst your bubble, but the mayor of San Bernardino is a Republican.
Robert

Fort Lauderdale, FL

#14 Aug 3, 2012
A lot of them were predictable and avoidable the elected leaders just did not care. I see no reason to bail those out, let them fail and have to sell off their assets. There may be others the state should help out.

“It's a Brand New Day”

Since: Feb 06

New Rochelle

#15 Aug 3, 2012
Robert wrote:
Alaska, which you have in your top ten, had 58 thousand people on food stamps, California had 2 million 104 thousand so go peddle your false statistics to someone else.
Not statistics, but accounting.

Again; Federal $$$ sent, above that collected, not bodies.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Bankruptcy Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Newnan lawyer suspended for 6 months (Nov '14) Sat jim crow PULTE 29
News 'Dance Moms' Abby Lee Miller Gets 11th-Hour Rep... Feb 22 Ynott 1
News Ivanka Trump takes daughter Arabella to the Sup... Feb 22 Jeff Brightone 1
News Fanfare for Hugh's Room fundraiser upsets unpai... Feb 22 Tommy Ryam 2
News 'Dance Mom' should be imprisoned for fraud, pro... Feb 13 fayrae 1
News Former Amazon warehouse goes on the auction block Feb 11 Jlkproperties 1
News No pay raises for Arch bosses (Jul '16) Feb 9 Augie 5
More from around the web