Schwarzenegger follows Brown’s route

“There’s only one thing he can do and if he does it his legacy will be restored,” says Steve Merksamer, who runs a big political law firm and was Gov. George Deukmejian’s chief of staff. “He needs to follow through with what he said he’d do. There will be a lot of screaming and demonstrations, but he has to show bold, tough leadership. And, frankly, that is what the public expects.”

I asked Davis.

“This is the closest we have come to a Prop. 13 revolt,” the former governor said. “This was a smack-down. Now is the time you take to heart what the public is saying. What it’s saying is, ‘Look, you’ve already taxed us. We don’t have any more money budgeted for Sacramento.’ ”

Schwarzenegger must become a born-again slasher.

Under a program announced in February by the Obama administration, the government is to spend $75 billion on incentives for mortgage servicing companies that reduce payments for troubled homeowners. The Treasury Department says the program will spare as many as four million homeowners from foreclosure.

But three months after the program was announced, a Treasury spokeswoman, Jenni Engebretsen, estimated the number of loans that have been modified at “more than 10,000 but fewer than 55,000.”

In the first two months of the year alone, another 313,000 mortgages landed in foreclosure or became delinquent at least 90 days, according to First American CoreLogic.
—
Among prime borrowers, foreclosure rates have been growing fastest in states with particularly high unemployment. In California, for example, the unemployment rate rose to 11.2 percent from 6.4 percent for the year that ended in March, while the foreclosure rate for prime mortgages nearly tripled, reaching 1.81 percent.

Even states seemingly removed from the real estate bubble are seeing foreclosures accelerate as the recession grinds on.

Andrews’ gut was right: in a money squeeze, stop spending.

But dollars to donuts, he voted (like all good NYT employees) for Obama, who, like California legislators, doesn’t know the meaning of “stop spending.”

Somehow, I’m supposed to feel sorry for these idiots. “But it felt so right!” is no excuse for spending beyond your means.

>>>

Considering that the age group described by that annoying title are between 46 – 63, it is not surprising that they are “slowly dying off.” In fact it will take at least another 54 years before that generation is gone. The rate o death for those in their late 40 snad 50s is not exactly that of those in their 70s, 80s and up.
>>

Or are you somehow trying to refer to those who are older than 63 ?
>>
In that case you are talking about the WWII generation ( at minimum 82 and up) and the Korean War & 50s-mid-1960s generations who were born typically between 1928 and 1943/44 (at minimum 65 and up.)