Joel Bernard, Sorry but I deal in facts, not left-wing fantasies. Take a look at “California NAEP Results”. California schools are rock-bottom. The only state California consistently betters is Mississippi (“Thank God for Mississippi”). See also “California's decade of gains on this test just ended”. California is the welfare capital of America (34% of welfare recipients, 12% of U.S. population). See “Is California the welfare capital?” for the details. Of course, California does have the highest poverty rate in the nation (according to the U.S. census). For another source, see “California Or Texas, Which State Has A Lower Poverty Rate?”. The numbers are easy. The poverty rate in California is 20.4%. Texas 14.7%.

As for inequality, let’s just say that California shouldn’t talk about it. From 2009 to 2012, the top 1% (in California) saw their incomes grow by 49.6%. The other 99% (in California) saw their incomes decline by -3%. Overall, California is consistently, the 5th or 6th least equal state in the nation. See “List of U.S. states by Gini coefficient” and “The Increasingly Unequal States of America”.

Of course, California makes up for high inequality with low incomes. See “New State-Level Price Data Shows Smaller State Real Income Differences”. California actually ranks below Mississippi in real income per person (but at least the schools are better than Mississippi).

California compensates for low incomes with unaffordable housing. California ranks 49th in nation (in this case it is “Thank God for Hawaii”). Mississippi ranks 13th in housing affordability

The link you provided was about short-term economic growth. Alas, the gods of short-term growth are fickle. See “Texas Booms (+3.9%) as California Flatlines (0.1%); Mining, Manufacturing Drive Growth”. The long-term (over decades) data favors Texas over California. From 1997 to 2016, the economy of Texas grew by 83.6%. California by 71.3%. The even longer-term data also favors Texas. From 1970 to present per-capita income rose by 12.28 in Texas versus 11.35 in California. Of course, that overstates California’s poor performance. Inflation was considerably higher in California versus Texas over the period in question.

Your link did serve one useful purpose. The “Let Them Eat Cake” mentality is alive and well on the left-coast. No mention of education. No mention of poverty. No mention of unaffordable housing. No mention of inequality. No mention of low incomes for working people. Fake growth statistics are more than enough for the arrogant and the complacent.

Finally, let me quote from a well-known liberal, John Judis (in “End State: Is California Finished?”).

“At the gathering, held in a plush conference room, one of the experts projected tables and graphs comparing various states. It was there that I had my own "AHA!" moment. The states with thriving educational systems were generally northern, predominately white, and with relatively few immigrants: the New England states, North Dakota, and Minnesota. That bore out the late Senator Patrick Moynihan's quip that the strongest factor in predicting SAT scores was proximity to the Canadian border. The states grouped with California on the lower end of the bar graph were Deep South states like Mississippi and Alabama with a legacy of racism and with a relative absence of new-economy jobs; states like West Virginia that have relatively few jobs for college grads; and states like Nevada, New Mexico, and Hawaii that have huge numbers of non-English-speaking, downscale immigrants whose children are entering the schools. California clearly falls into the last group, suggesting that California's poor performance since the 1960s may not have been due to an influx of bad teachers, or the rise of teachers' unions, but to the growth of the state's immigrant population after the 1965 federal legislation on immigration opened the gates.”