I shouldn’t even be responding to your trolling, but I will do so one more time…
1. The LA Times is more biased than CalPERS, and CalPERS is, one would assume, the original source of the information that the LA Times is citing.
2. The information on the CalPERS site is factual. If you take issue with any of their numbers, please post a credible source showing how CalPERS is lying about these numbers.
3. Yes, you need to learn how to cite credible sources. Specifically, you need to learn about the difference between a primary source, and a secondary source (which is where the spin usually happens).
Good luck!
——–
edited to add: Just looked up Melody Petersen, the journalist who wrote the LA Times article. It’s clear that she has a right-wing, pro-privatization perspective because her other articles about the Military Industrial Complex don’t show the same sort of hawkish stance. To the contrary, they are glowing articles talking about all the jobs that will be created when the govt spends tens of billions of dollars on more war planes that we don’t need, and shouldn’t be building.
Additionally, in that article, she quotes research from the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research (SIEPR). Though they claim that they are “non-partisan,” SIEPR was founded by George P. Shultz and Michael J. Boskin, both of whom have been deeply involved with the Hoover Institution.
The Hoover Institution’s purpose and scope statement:
“This Institution supports the Constitution of the United States, its Bill of Rights and its method of representative government. Both our social and economic systems are based on private enterprise from which springs initiative and ingenuity…. Ours is a system where the Federal Government should undertake no governmental, social or economic action, except where local government, or the people, cannot undertake it for themselves…. The overall mission of this Institution is, from its records, to recall the voice of experience against the making of war, and by the study of these records and their publication, to recall man’s endeavors to make and preserve peace, and to sustain for America the safeguards of the American way of life. This Institution is not, and must not be, a mere library. But with these purposes as its goal, the Institution itself must constantly and dynamically point the road to peace, to personal freedom, and to the safeguards of the American system.”‘
