Woo-hoo, I've got him going now. Look at him wiggle:
Richard Bennett writes: If you're going to insist, against all the evidence, that the "Pete Wilson energy policy" that worked fine until Davis and the PUC screwed it up in 2000, how about letting me in on how much of the $38B was due to energy costs?Enquiring minds and all that.
Then tell me why California's deficit is larger than that of all other states combined. I really want to know, and I'm clearly not as well-informed as you.
But, if you really want me to say this in public supported by the evidence, I will: It's simple why the Wilson energy policy is at fault -- it set the stage for the market manipulation and criminal behavior that, so far, no one has been punished for except the citizens of California. Ken Lay should share a cell with the architects of the California energy deregulation, but there since it isn't a crime to be criminally stupid, they won't.
Why is the budget deficit in California bigger than all others combined? Because of the electricity crisis' costs to local business and the deep connection Silicon Valley has to global markets squashed by Bush policy, combined with the fact the California state budget is larger than the combined budgets of other states, as it is the eighth largest economy in the world.
Well, you've answered one of my questions about being blind, deaf or stupid....
So basically, you're saying that Pete Wilson caused the Internet bubble to burst by passing a law you don't like back in 1996?
Interesting theory.
Posted by: Richard Bennett at October 14, 2003 04:27 PMNo, I said no such thing. I said Pete Wilson's energy policy laid the foundation for widespread abuse.
Get glasses, you're clearly blind.
Posted by: Mitch Ratcliffe at October 14, 2003 05:09 PM