California has officially entered an era of climate-induced economic instability.

Gov. Gavin Newsom announced a new budget Wednesday that faces a shortfall of nearly $38 billion.

The lost money was largely due to lower-than-expected tax revenues on capital gains, and stocks and investment returns for the Golden State's wealthiest people were less than expected.

But the situation was different last year, as state officials know how much California can responsibly spend by the time the annual tax is due in April.

During the winter and spring, Mother Nature brought record snow and storms that flooded entire towns such as Planada and Pajaro. Capitola was hit by a bomb cyclone and the pier was nearly destroyed. Lake Tulare has re-emerged in the Central Valley, submerging homes and crops and exposing the weakness of expensive levees.of Damage from this extreme weather event cost $4.6 billion and claimed 22 lives.according to the National Center for Environmental Information.

The weather was so volatile and devastating that even the IRS relented, pushing the tax deadline for the majority of state residents first to October and then to November.

That is, no one really knew (There were certainly indicators, but) How much we were spending money we didn't really have until a few months ago when our taxes were finally added up and we ran out.

“This has been a tough year,” Newsom told reporters gathered to hear his plans, and no one disputes that.

But as we move toward the economic reality of climate change, this year may not be unique. of course, The stock market is expected to rise, inflation is falling and employment figures are rising. By any measurable standard, California and the U.S. economy is poised for a good year. Regardless of national sentiment, which is not yet ready to accept a positive outlook in the face of high bills and persistent uncertainty.

but The severity of the weather does not seem to be weakening, and dealing with the unforgiving costs of storms, floods, fires, rising sea levels, extreme heat, and mudslides that will change what we can and cannot afford in California. Consumers are already aware of this with home and auto insurance, with premiums increasing based on predictions of more climate disasters.

At the same time, the cost of rebuilding and maintaining homes in high-risk areas has increased as well, such as where the sea is encroaching on them or where blazes can double in width in fire-prone forests. are doing. It's becoming difficult to pay for just keeping your home warm or cool.

This means that it will be difficult for people of all income levels to continue living in their homes. over 3 million AmericansPeople living in storm-prone states like Texas and Florida are already migrating because of the weather, and climate migration trends are expected to increase as the cost of living in dangerous and desolate places becomes unsustainable. has been done.

The federal government recently national climate assessmentwe detailed the many ways that climate and the economy are linked, and the many ways the situation could get worse.

The report said that in the 1980s, “the country experienced an average of one $1 billion (inflation-adjusted) disaster every four months.” Now, on average, he has one case every three weeks. ”

A billion dollar disaster occurs every three weeks. In the past few years, it has reached a total of $89 billion worth of events. And that $1 billion includes the emotional and economic damage caused by casualties, traumatized families, generational wealth literally turned to ashes, impoverished communities (often people of color) without drinking water and roads. ) etc. are not included.

However, the costs of climate change are not only obvious. Newsom's budget includes cuts, but the coming months will be all about the governor and Legislature hammering out those cuts. Newsom has proposed cutting spending by $8.5 billion, the largest portion of which would come from climate change programs. But housing programs, middle class scholarship funds and other unpopular cuts would also be losses.

Mr. Newsom has also proposed withdrawing $13 billion from our rainy day fund, which makes sense but is also likely to be an unpopular move.

However, it was a rainy year.

If Newsom's proposal tells us anything, it's that we need to plan for wetter years and heavier rains.

As Mr. Newsom puts it, this year means “tightening up.” A $39 billion deficit is painful, but not insurmountable.

But we need to save up more reserves for disasters we know are coming, which seems like common sense but is nearly impossible under existing rules.I won't bore you with the details. Gann limitBut budget rules established in the 1970s, long before billionaires with stock portfolios rivaling the wealth of small nations became California's main source of income, make it difficult to save more during periods of high income. Suffice it to say.

Our reserve fund is strong, but states, including Wyoming, with similarly unstable revenue models, have far stronger reserves than ours.Wyoming has a chance. I will continue running for almost a year with the money I have saved.. Obviously California is bigger, but we only saved up enough to last her less than 3 months.

For both people and states, predicting future incomes is always a crystal ball endeavor. But climate change will cause us great harm in one way or another.

Californians should start saving now for inevitable debt.