Monday, December 6, 2010

The Silverado Moment

In the movie "Silverado," the character played by Kevin Kline has an awakening. His friend, played by Linda Hunt, is threatened with death by the evil sheriff, played by Brian Dennehy. Hunt points out the obvious to the gambler and gunfighter character played by Kline: the Dennehy character can't hurt her if he's dead. In the same way, a crisis of money, in State budgets, is driving already a "Silverado Moment" for White middle class voters. Nearly every state is in budgetary crisis, and the bigger states with terrible demographics are in severe crisis. California faces a $6 billion budget crisis in the next six months and $20 billion for the next 12 budget cycle after that. Illinois, New York, and Massachusetts face similar budget crises. Spurred by middle class flight, and demographic transformation into Brazil like favelas filled with the "Mexodus" of Mexican immigrants, nearly all illegal and very, very poor, with a few highly liberal rich Whites, these states simply cannot pay for the budgets they must have, often by statute or state constitutions or federal consent decrees. There are not enough White middle class taxpayers to fund the required massive outlays in health, education, welfare, and prisons.Sky high taxes make raising new taxes a prospect sure to create massive voter revolt.

Hence the Silverado Moment. Voters in these states, are increasingly realizing they can have the nice things they want, libraries open, beautiful parks, safe streets, saving the obscure mice and birds in wetlands, if they do just one thing. Deport every illegal alien they can find (and their kids) and let the Federal government go hang. Bingo! Budget balanced, with no new taxes.


The San Francisco Chronicle reports that Mexicans outnumber Whites in K-12 students, and about 40% of all K-12 students parents cannot vote (i.e. they are likely illegal aliens). This fact is driving the Silverado Moment.

No, White voters don't want to "kill" Mexican illegal aliens. They just want to deport them, so they won't have to pay for their high costs. Illegal alien labor is not cheap, certainly not for taxpayers.


The Orange County Register posted a budgetary breakdown. Roughly $37 billion in the current budget year goes for K-12 Education, about $37 billion for Health and Welfare, and about $9 billion for prison/corrections expenditures. These are the biggest budgetary areas, all others including Higher Education are minor categories, and cannot be cut radically without impacting middle class, and crucially, upper class White voters.

Assuming a 40% reduction in expenditures in K-12, Health and Welfare, and prisons, with widespread deportation (or even pushing out to other states through vigorous enforcement), you would be looking at decreases of $14.8 billion in K-12, $14.8 billion in Health/Welfare, and 3.6 billion in Prison/Corrections. Totaling $33.2 billion in cuts, without tax increases. Of course, enforcement and deportations cost. Not the least of which is that the Feds and Obama will fight hard to keep "instant voters" in the US, no matter what the costs to States and their taxpayers

This crisis is coming because unfunded pension obligations, among the States, is estimated to be around $500 billion. The unfunded obligations exist because there is not enough money to pay for both contractural obligations to public employees and expenditures on illegal aliens and their children. Already bond markets are reacting badly, with California and Illinois reaching Greek levels of yields (yields are the inverse of prices, cheap bonds equal high yield bonds or, junk level, essentially). California even had to withdraw some bonds due to tepid investor reaction at the prices. California must eventually offer the bonds at junk-level prices.

Rahm Emmanuel and Saul Alinksy counseled to never let a crisis go to waste. Well, the crisis is here. Like Kevin Kline in Silverado, middle class White taxpayers face tax annihilation in a time of stagnant wages, and rapidly increasing food and energy and clothing prices, with no more ability to simply borrow today to put off reckoning tomorrow. To pay, essentially, for the costs associated with educating the children of dirt poor peasants from Mexico who came to America illegally. Or spending welfare on illegal aliens and their children, almost all of them from Mexico. Or spending on prisons and corrections for the massive influx of illegal aliens, many of them low level drug criminals associated with the Zetas or Gulf Cartel.

In addition, many states have constitutional or statute requirements for certain percentages of the budget to be spent on various categories: K-12 education, or welfare. With Obama's Spendulus, many federal funds (that are now running out) came with requirements for states to massively increase (permanently) welfare spending, there is not much to cut.

Unless ... Unless ...

Illegals simply get deported. By States deciding to ignore a federal government and President who is a clueless and destructive idiot. Somewhere, somehow, a Governor and Legislature will decide that a President who cannot jail (and punish) Julian Assange can be defied internally. One cannot be weak abroad and not be also, weak at home. Deciding, as President Andrew Jackson said, to allow the Supreme Court having made their decision to enforce it.

In the end, it will be all about the money. Even Santa Monica and Malibu millionaire marxist liberals care about (their) money. Taxes on their real estate holdings are the next targets, voiced by the uber-rich (David Geffen, Eli Broad) against the merely rich (say, David Spade). The remaining middle class Whites are being squeezed, and don't figure to be very sympathetic to what amounts to a colonization of the US by Mexican peasants. Roughly 7.2 billion for enforcement would be available ($33.2 billion in savings minus the current 18 month budget deficit of 26 billion) under a California plan to simply balance the budget by deporting illegals (and their children).

Of course Jerry Brown and a Democratic Legislature will not ever consider this. Nor will the folks of Massachusetts, or New York. But New Jersey is probably another measure. Or possibly even Illinois (Mayor Daley getting out of town means a scandal is brewing). Definitely places like South Carolina, or Georgia, or Tennessee, can see the way to balance budgets without punitive tax increases that push the White middle class into poverty.

Setting up a confrontation with a President who has gambled everything that he can be weak abroad, deliberately, without being weak at home. In other words, States taking what the President and feds have ceded: control over the borders. With the approval of their taxpayers and voters, in places where moneyed interests are tied to real estate, not mobile assets able to be moved globally. Not obviously, California, but other states with more favorable demographics (bigger slices of White middle class voters and taxpayers, more real estate owners, less uber-rich and Mexican illegals) seem to be moving towards this.

It is always about the money.

21 comments:

tacticalchrstn said...

I wish Whiskey was right, but another Silverado moment overrides the state budget crises. Funding for federal entitlements (social security, medicare) cannot be sustained becasue there are not enough young white people. So... we keep bringing in hoards of young brown people, keep the states in a state of perpetual budget crisis, and continure federal bailouts of the states. This kind of soviet style ineptitude can go on for a long time.

Whiskey said...

The Fed simply does not have enough money to bail out the States. Weakness in bond sales reflect bond market views that a great deal of State (and federal) debt will not be repaid. Either through repudiation or inflation (same thing).

Naturalized said...

All this is a consequence of the introduction of birth control pill in 1964. Note, that Aztecs that are reconquering the territory lost to whites in the first stage of the Indian war in the 19th century do not eat these pills. In the end, Aztecs also other Indians from the Altiplano (e.g. Chavez, Morales) appear to have won against Europeans: the lowland Indianans that were massacred in the 17th-19th centuries was only the first line of Indian defense.

Lorne said...

I suspect if something like this happens, it will be done by vigilantes while state/local law enforcement looks the other way.

sestamibi said...

Another obstacle is the truculence of our betters among the federal judiciary. We have already seen SB 1070 set aside in Arizona at the behest of the idiot in the White House. Last week a cunt federal judge in Oklahoma set aside the voters' will not to allow sharia law as the basis for any judicial decision-making there.

Sooner or later there will be, as Sharron Angle put it, "Second Amendment solutions" to the imperial judiciary.

Whiskey said...

At the time of the Mexican-American War in 1845, there were only 7,000 or so "Californios" (Mexican nationals speaking Spanish). Indeed the settlement of Texas by "filibusters" from places like Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, Ohio, and more was a function of first, almost no people in the Texas territory, and second the desire of the Mexican government to settle them against both Indian attack and European powers.

There was almost no Mexican presence in California, despite having it all to themselves for centuries. You can read Richard Henry Dana's "Two Years Before the Mast" and see first-hand accounts of how depopulated Southern California was. Dana Point was where the Californios threw hides over the cliffs for the Yankee Clippers to take leather hides to the East, around the Cape. Remarkable. San Diego was really the only place of appreciable people, and then only a few hundred, in the 1820's.

It was quite telling that despite the US Army mauling the supposedly better, bigger, and more professional Mexican one around Mexico City, the US made sure to annex only the depopulated parts of Mexico. Even New Mexico was thinly populated.

Naturalized said...

@Whiskey: By Indian war, I did not mean the MExican-American war. When Pilgrims landed in America, It was inhabited by Indians, that during an ice age 20,000 years earlier moved across Bering Strait to North America from Chukotka peninsula. Some of these Indians pushed South further,and became more civilized: Aztecs, Incas, etc, and some remained in the lowlands of the North America. It is the second kind that seemed to have lost the Indian war against the European invasion, mostly in the 17th-18th centuries, but now the more successful kind from the South, the Aztecs are showing that overall, the war will actually be won by the Indians.

The Anti-Gnostic said...

The SWPL strategy so far has been to find a whitopia and relocate after things get too "vibrant" in their own nest. Lather, rinse, repeat. Of course by now, even Portland has its very own Somalian ghetto.

When there are no more whitopias, these people will contentedly face their own extinction. They will regard it as the ultimate expression of their gnosis.

Gx1080 said...

@Naturalized
Oh please. That's just Indigenist bullshit. Most Latin American, even Mexicans are currently of mixed blood, and the pure Indians are around 10% of the population, if that.

So get stuffed.

Naturalized said...

@1080p
They are mostly Indian. Look at people in Madrid sometime: they do not look like Mexican immigrants at all.

madmax said...

Gee, how about advocate for the elimination of the welfare state, public education, anti-discrimination laws, the Federal Reserve Bank, the regulatory state. How about arguing for true economic liberty? Oh, no I guess its alot better to bitch and moan about immigration when none of this would be a problem if EVERYONE PAID THEIR OWN WAY.

I think you PaleoCons are actually eager for a race war. Maybe that's how you will prove your manliness or some such. Who know?

Anonymous said...

How about arguing for true economic liberty? Oh, no I guess its alot better to bitch and moan about immigration when none of this would be a problem if EVERYONE PAID THEIR OWN WAY.

You can have that... or democracy. Not both. In a democracy, the rabble will vote to spend Other People's Money.

The Anti-Gnostic said...

madmax:

Classical liberalism and libertarianism are, to put it bluntly, "white" philosophies. So when you import your pan-Hispanic nationalists, your African clans, etc., you are diluting the influence of paleo's and libertarians and increasing the lobby of social democrats. It's pretty hard to get rid of the welfare-warfare state when it can use immigration to increase its constituency.

nullpointer said...

Your bias against those dirty mexicans that are leaching off American's hard earned tax dollars leaves out a very important part of the picture.

Mish (http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com) has a whole series of posts on how it's pension promises and over-paid public sector wages that are bankrupting states. Our politicians are in bed with the unions. It's not the dirty mexicans getting paid union wages it's all those white teachers, cops, firefighters, legislative aides, councilmen, etc that are receiving 100K (in some cases 300K+) pensions.

Here's a list of them in california:
http://www.californiapensionreform.com/database.asp

The only even remotely hispanic name on that list is a Spanish neuroscientist who laid the basis for understanding of cognition and neural structures, particularly in the pre-frontal cortex.

You are right about one thing. Paying people a slave wage and causing them to live in ethnic ghettos is bad for everybody.

Also somebody made a comment about Mises and Austrian economics on my last post. Austrian economics is 100% correct. Keynesian is 100% correct. They're not mutually exclusive. Saving surpluses to help smooth out bad times and not succumbing to the parable of the broken window are not mutually exclusive. Monetarists and their pseudo-Keynesian tripe are the ones in academic fantasyland with QE and all this other money supply non-sense.

Lower wages does not imply deflation just as higher wages do not imply inflation.

By The Sword said...

Maybe we should all just learn to speak Spanish?

The innovators, entrepreneurs and hard-workers will rise to the top. Deporting 10 million Mexicans seems rather impossible (especially since we have swiss-cheese borders) so why not just focus on what we can change, like all the free crap that our government likes to give away (at the taxpayer's expense).

Learn Spanish and sell the newcomers stuff. They want the American Dream. Sell it to them... like it was sold to us.

The Anti-Gnostic said...

Learn Spanish and sell the newcomers stuff. They want the American Dream. Sell it to them... like it was sold to us.

We already do. Retail businesses fall all over themselves accomodating Meso-Americans with bilingual services, easy credit, jobs, etc.

At the end of the day, what will be accomplished is to have turned the United States into Meso-America.

Whiskey said...

Or what Victor Davis Hanson dubbed in his book "Mexifornia." It has also been called Amexica. A toxic mixture of the worst elements of Mexico and the US. See Santa Ana CA, or Fresno, or Compton (now Majority Mexican) or the city of Bell.

Basically, a poverty factory like Mexico. With Zetas, Gulf Cartel, and the rest all mixed in.

Anonymous said...

DNA sampling has been done, and it is estimated that 2/3 of male Mexican ancestry is from the Iberian peninsula.

And, 2/3 of female Mexican ancestry is Mexican indigenous.

Those estimates were made in sampling among Mexicans living in Colorado. But, historians report marriage practices among the Mexican people over the last 500 years that correlate with that.

Working on my wife's genealogy, an ancestor, probably of some Spanish blood, had children with at least 6 or 7 women, mostly indigenous women, except the two legal wives.

Plans to deport 11 million Mexican illegals are pure fantasy. This assumes they are not armed or don't know how to shoot. Attempts to do this will make our cities look like those videos of Baghdad during the invasion. Bullets flying everywhere. The fantasized vigilante groups who would attempt this mass deportation would be comprised of men who can't even defend their human; legal; civil; and constitutional rights against a bunch of unarmed women.

Anonymous age 68

Micha Elyi said...

@nullpointer Our politicians are in bed with the unions. It's not the dirty mexicans getting paid union wages it's all those white teachers, cops, firefighters...

What percentage of those teachers, cops, and firefighters (along the social services workers and prison guards you forgot to mention) would be redundant when illegals are deported? 40% plus?

Do the math.

@Anonymous age 68: Plans to deport 11 million Mexican illegals are pure fantasy. This assumes they are not armed or don't know how to shoot. Attempts to do this will make our cities look like those videos of Baghdad during the invasion. Bullets flying everywhere.

One doesn't have to be too terribly old to remember when the idea of "11 million Mexican illegals" in America would have been scoffed at as "fantasy."

Should things get so ugly that the guns come out, Americans will consider themselves to be defending their own home, community, and country. Mexicans will consider themselves to be Mexicans temporarily in another country - just as they do today.

The outcome? Work it out.

kragshot said...

So, your solution to this economic crisis is another "Operation Wetback," or "Bracero Plan," eh? Read some history...see how well that worked out.

Speaking as a descendant of people who didn't have much of a choice in being brought over here, I find that your ideology is more than a bit flawed. As for the illegals not paying taxes, are you forgetting all of the things that they buy while over here? They are taxed on consumer and sustenance goods just like every other American citizen.

If you want to be up in arms about something, then protest about how "legal" immigrants are given tax-free status for opening new businesses. Most of these legal immigrants get the grants for those businesses, purposely run them in the red for the designated period while sending most of the proceeds to their home countries and then allow the business to bankrupt and walk away from their debt without a second glance.

While I agree that there needs to be a solution to the issue with illegal immigration in our cities, your idea isn't the one to back.

Mil-Tech Bard said...

The key number isn't 11 million illegals.

It is 600,000 state, county city and other local police.

Local government enforcement of Federal immigration laws will result in effective deportation of the illegal population in America in about five to seven years.

The over all numbers work out that if local enforcement of Federal immigration law results in one deportation per local cop every two months, that is 300,000 deportations per month -- roughly what ICE does per year -- or 3.6 million per year.

At the very worst case, even if 50% come back in a few months and 2/3 in a year. That is a huge reduction in local government health care outlays alone from illegals not being here to obtain services.

And it is still a reduction of 1.2 million illegals net over a year.

And it would be relatively easy to do based on behavior profiling.

Arizona local police statistics reported to the FBI show 95% of everyone pulled over without current auto registration, current inspection and without auto liability insurance are illegal immigrants.

Assuming immigration ID checks of everyone fitting that behavior profile, metropolitan traffic squads in cities of 50,000 or more across the nation will be deporting tens to hundreds, per week, per municipality, alone.

There are a number of other tell tales in terms of illegal behavior such as wiring money over seas than can be used with digital data mining technology.

All that is lacking is the political will.