Surreal State of the State Speech

[Djshakes]

[quote=zk][quote=Djshakes]I love it. Lefties run the state into the hole and then when criticized bark “why don’t you tell us how to fix it then, huh” as if it is our problem. They will never admit “yeah…our policies f’d stuff up”.

I’m sorry that people can’t come up with a quick response as to how to fix this colossal problem you have got us into over the years. You have dug the hole so deep with limited options out it is pretty much a trick question. I applaud your bailout mentality and unwillingness to accept responsibility though. However, years of liberal policies and government have gotten us into this situation……live with it. The state can burn for all I care. Maybe others would wake up. I’m willing to have it be a sacrificial lamb. [/quote]

[quote=Djshakes]Lefties run the state into the hole…[/quote]

You assume I’m a “lefty.” You’re wrong.

[quote=Djshakes]and then when criticized…[/quote]

I wasn’t criticized by anyone, but if there’s something you’d like to say, I’m listening.

[quote=Djshakes]…bark…[/quote]

I’m not barking, I’m trying, quite unsuccessfully (except for flu), to get an exchange of ideas started.

[quote=Djshakes]…as if it is our problem.[/quote]

If you live in California, it is your problem.

[quote=Djshakes]They will never admit ‘yeah…our policies f’d stuff up’. [/quote]

That I agree with. Except you left something out. It’s not just the left. Neither side will step up and say that. The right blames the state of the economy on Obama, when it was Bush and the Republican congress who (in large part) destroyed it. Both sides are incapable of accepting blame.

At this point, however, blame is irrelevant. There’s a huge problem that needs to be fixed.

[quote=Djshakes]I’m sorry that people can’t come up with a quick response as to how to fix this colossal problem…[/quote]

My point is if they have no ideas on how to fix it, they shouldn’t be blaming our first fiscally responsible governor in decades for actually trying to do something that will actually fix the budget problem. Bitch, bitch, bitch, but no ideas. Lame.

[quote=Djshakes]…you have got us into over the years.[/quote]

Who’s “you”?

[quote=Djshakes]You have dug the hole so deep with limited options out it is pretty much a trick question.[/quote]

A trick question? Really? So are you saying we’ve given Jerry Brown a trick question and there’s nothing he can do?

[quote=Djshakes]I applaud your bailout mentality…[/quote]

My what!? Anyone can see that you made that up out of thin air. You should avoid doing such things if you want any credibility.

[quote=Djshakes]However, years of liberal policies and government have gotten us into this situation…[/quote]

I think that’s mostly true. I also think fiscal irresponsibility is rampant on both sides of the aisle.

[quote=Djshakes]…live with it[/quote]

Why would I do that? Why would I not want to see it fixed?

[quote=Djshakes]The state can burn for all I care.[/quote]

I’d guess that you don’t mean that, in which case I can’t see why you’d say it. (If you do mean it, then you desperately need professional psychiatric care).

[quote=Djshakes]Maybe others would wake up.[/quote]

Doubtful.

[quote=Djshakes]I’m willing to have it be a sacrificial lamb.[/quote]

Why?[/quote]

Let me rant once and a while damn it. It makes me feel manly. I’ll kiss and make up with you in a bit…sexy.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=UCGal]Except at a corporation the folks at the top would then award themselves big bonuses for being so effective at making the cuts. The board of directors would agree – and up their own compensation while they’re at it. In the meantime 15-20% of the former employees are out of jobs and those remaining have more work and less budget to work with.

Call me cynical. I don’t think the corporate model is a good one.[/quote]

I agree the “corporate model” won’t work, UCGal. In the nineties, County Department Heads and other top staff DID get large annual bonuses for staying under budget. They did this by eliminating positions in their departments/agencies. There was public outrage from all sides over this debacle so not sure if it still goes on.

Of your “15-20%” (I’m thinking 25-30%) of State, County, City employees that will be out of jobs due to budget cuts, virtually ALL of them will be eligible for unemployment (a drain on the partially-Federally funded EDD). Employees close to retirement or with substantial seniority won’t get laid off (read: the ones mostly old enough to voluntarily retire). That’s the way the “system” works. So the lowest-paid “newest” workers (most not yet vested in the retirement system) will be paid by EDD for up to two years and the highest paid (top step) employees doing the same tasks will remain employed. They will use the “LIFO” method of (worker) “inventory,” lol (last-in, first out). The “first-in” workers have “bumping rights.” :=!

This method of laying off will decimate services to the public, but won’t affect the budget much. The employees remaining will be higher paid and have MUCH higher retirement contributions. They’ll be overworked and burn out and use ALL of their substantial sick leave (1500 to 2000 hours anyone??), ALL their saved up annual leave and all the FML they can get away with to stay on the payroll and produce next to nothing. Couple this with agency closings several days per month and you have a “part-time” non-responsive government.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=UCGal]Except at a corporation the folks at the top would then award themselves big bonuses for being so effective at making the cuts. The board of directors would agree – and up their own compensation while they’re at it. In the meantime 15-20% of the former employees are out of jobs and those remaining have more work and less budget to work with.

Call me cynical. I don’t think the corporate model is a good one.[/quote]

I agree the “corporate model” won’t work, UCGal. In the nineties, County Department Heads and other top staff DID get large annual bonuses for staying under budget. They did this by eliminating positions in their departments/agencies. There was public outrage from all sides over this debacle so not sure if it still goes on.

Of your “15-20%” (I’m thinking 25-30%) of State, County, City employees that will be out of jobs due to budget cuts, virtually ALL of them will be eligible for unemployment (a drain on the partially-Federally funded EDD). Employees close to retirement or with substantial seniority won’t get laid off (read: the ones mostly old enough to voluntarily retire). That’s the way the “system” works. So the lowest-paid “newest” workers (most not yet vested in the retirement system) will be paid by EDD for up to two years and the highest paid (top step) employees doing the same tasks will remain employed. They will use the “LIFO” method of (worker) “inventory,” lol (last-in, first out). The “first-in” workers have “bumping rights.” :=!

This method of laying off will decimate services to the public, but won’t affect the budget much. The employees remaining will be higher paid and have MUCH higher retirement contributions. They’ll be overworked and burn out and use ALL of their substantial sick leave (1500 to 2000 hours anyone??), ALL their saved up annual leave and all the FML they can get away with to stay on the payroll and produce next to nothing. Couple this with agency closings several days per month and you have a “part-time” non-responsive government.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=UCGal]Except at a corporation the folks at the top would then award themselves big bonuses for being so effective at making the cuts. The board of directors would agree – and up their own compensation while they’re at it. In the meantime 15-20% of the former employees are out of jobs and those remaining have more work and less budget to work with.

Call me cynical. I don’t think the corporate model is a good one.[/quote]

I agree the “corporate model” won’t work, UCGal. In the nineties, County Department Heads and other top staff DID get large annual bonuses for staying under budget. They did this by eliminating positions in their departments/agencies. There was public outrage from all sides over this debacle so not sure if it still goes on.

Of your “15-20%” (I’m thinking 25-30%) of State, County, City employees that will be out of jobs due to budget cuts, virtually ALL of them will be eligible for unemployment (a drain on the partially-Federally funded EDD). Employees close to retirement or with substantial seniority won’t get laid off (read: the ones mostly old enough to voluntarily retire). That’s the way the “system” works. So the lowest-paid “newest” workers (most not yet vested in the retirement system) will be paid by EDD for up to two years and the highest paid (top step) employees doing the same tasks will remain employed. They will use the “LIFO” method of (worker) “inventory,” lol (last-in, first out). The “first-in” workers have “bumping rights.” :=!

This method of laying off will decimate services to the public, but won’t affect the budget much. The employees remaining will be higher paid and have MUCH higher retirement contributions. They’ll be overworked and burn out and use ALL of their substantial sick leave (1500 to 2000 hours anyone??), ALL their saved up annual leave and all the FML they can get away with to stay on the payroll and produce next to nothing. Couple this with agency closings several days per month and you have a “part-time” non-responsive government.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=UCGal]Except at a corporation the folks at the top would then award themselves big bonuses for being so effective at making the cuts. The board of directors would agree – and up their own compensation while they’re at it. In the meantime 15-20% of the former employees are out of jobs and those remaining have more work and less budget to work with.

Call me cynical. I don’t think the corporate model is a good one.[/quote]

I agree the “corporate model” won’t work, UCGal. In the nineties, County Department Heads and other top staff DID get large annual bonuses for staying under budget. They did this by eliminating positions in their departments/agencies. There was public outrage from all sides over this debacle so not sure if it still goes on.

Of your “15-20%” (I’m thinking 25-30%) of State, County, City employees that will be out of jobs due to budget cuts, virtually ALL of them will be eligible for unemployment (a drain on the partially-Federally funded EDD). Employees close to retirement or with substantial seniority won’t get laid off (read: the ones mostly old enough to voluntarily retire). That’s the way the “system” works. So the lowest-paid “newest” workers (most not yet vested in the retirement system) will be paid by EDD for up to two years and the highest paid (top step) employees doing the same tasks will remain employed. They will use the “LIFO” method of (worker) “inventory,” lol (last-in, first out). The “first-in” workers have “bumping rights.” :=!

This method of laying off will decimate services to the public, but won’t affect the budget much. The employees remaining will be higher paid and have MUCH higher retirement contributions. They’ll be overworked and burn out and use ALL of their substantial sick leave (1500 to 2000 hours anyone??), ALL their saved up annual leave and all the FML they can get away with to stay on the payroll and produce next to nothing. Couple this with agency closings several days per month and you have a “part-time” non-responsive government.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=UCGal]Except at a corporation the folks at the top would then award themselves big bonuses for being so effective at making the cuts. The board of directors would agree – and up their own compensation while they’re at it. In the meantime 15-20% of the former employees are out of jobs and those remaining have more work and less budget to work with.

Call me cynical. I don’t think the corporate model is a good one.[/quote]

I agree the “corporate model” won’t work, UCGal. In the nineties, County Department Heads and other top staff DID get large annual bonuses for staying under budget. They did this by eliminating positions in their departments/agencies. There was public outrage from all sides over this debacle so not sure if it still goes on.

Of your “15-20%” (I’m thinking 25-30%) of State, County, City employees that will be out of jobs due to budget cuts, virtually ALL of them will be eligible for unemployment (a drain on the partially-Federally funded EDD). Employees close to retirement or with substantial seniority won’t get laid off (read: the ones mostly old enough to voluntarily retire). That’s the way the “system” works. So the lowest-paid “newest” workers (most not yet vested in the retirement system) will be paid by EDD for up to two years and the highest paid (top step) employees doing the same tasks will remain employed. They will use the “LIFO” method of (worker) “inventory,” lol (last-in, first out). The “first-in” workers have “bumping rights.” :=!

This method of laying off will decimate services to the public, but won’t affect the budget much. The employees remaining will be higher paid and have MUCH higher retirement contributions. They’ll be overworked and burn out and use ALL of their substantial sick leave (1500 to 2000 hours anyone??), ALL their saved up annual leave and all the FML they can get away with to stay on the payroll and produce next to nothing. Couple this with agency closings several days per month and you have a “part-time” non-responsive government.

[Anonymous]

One thing I find frustrating (and ironic) about these boards is that people are quick to make arguments with massive consequences for American society without bothering to look at facts or numbers. Isn’t the starting premise of Piggington an obsession with facts, rather than a blind hope that numbers will work the way our political philosophies (and pocket books) would like? What’s the point of a political perspective if in the end it doesn’t actually make contact with reality?

Anyway, if you’re interested, you can look at the Bureau of Labor Statistics:

http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_ca.htm#25-0000

Mean salaries for teachers are ~$60K. Keep in mind that our teacher labor force is relatively old due to baby boomers, thereby skewing the distribution (making the mean itself not very meaningful). Median salary is always much more informative.

[Anonymous]

One thing I find frustrating (and ironic) about these boards is that people are quick to make arguments with massive consequences for American society without bothering to look at facts or numbers. Isn’t the starting premise of Piggington an obsession with facts, rather than a blind hope that numbers will work the way our political philosophies (and pocket books) would like? What’s the point of a political perspective if in the end it doesn’t actually make contact with reality?

Anyway, if you’re interested, you can look at the Bureau of Labor Statistics:

http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_ca.htm#25-0000

Mean salaries for teachers are ~$60K. Keep in mind that our teacher labor force is relatively old due to baby boomers, thereby skewing the distribution (making the mean itself not very meaningful). Median salary is always much more informative.

[Anonymous]

One thing I find frustrating (and ironic) about these boards is that people are quick to make arguments with massive consequences for American society without bothering to look at facts or numbers. Isn’t the starting premise of Piggington an obsession with facts, rather than a blind hope that numbers will work the way our political philosophies (and pocket books) would like? What’s the point of a political perspective if in the end it doesn’t actually make contact with reality?

Anyway, if you’re interested, you can look at the Bureau of Labor Statistics:

http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_ca.htm#25-0000

Mean salaries for teachers are ~$60K. Keep in mind that our teacher labor force is relatively old due to baby boomers, thereby skewing the distribution (making the mean itself not very meaningful). Median salary is always much more informative.

[Anonymous]

One thing I find frustrating (and ironic) about these boards is that people are quick to make arguments with massive consequences for American society without bothering to look at facts or numbers. Isn’t the starting premise of Piggington an obsession with facts, rather than a blind hope that numbers will work the way our political philosophies (and pocket books) would like? What’s the point of a political perspective if in the end it doesn’t actually make contact with reality?

Anyway, if you’re interested, you can look at the Bureau of Labor Statistics:

http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_ca.htm#25-0000

Mean salaries for teachers are ~$60K. Keep in mind that our teacher labor force is relatively old due to baby boomers, thereby skewing the distribution (making the mean itself not very meaningful). Median salary is always much more informative.

[Anonymous]

One thing I find frustrating (and ironic) about these boards is that people are quick to make arguments with massive consequences for American society without bothering to look at facts or numbers. Isn’t the starting premise of Piggington an obsession with facts, rather than a blind hope that numbers will work the way our political philosophies (and pocket books) would like? What’s the point of a political perspective if in the end it doesn’t actually make contact with reality?

Anyway, if you’re interested, you can look at the Bureau of Labor Statistics:

http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_ca.htm#25-0000

Mean salaries for teachers are ~$60K. Keep in mind that our teacher labor force is relatively old due to baby boomers, thereby skewing the distribution (making the mean itself not very meaningful). Median salary is always much more informative.

[Djshakes]

[quote=bearishgurl] Couple this with agency closings several days per month and you have a “part-time” non-responsive government.[/quote]

This probably isn’t a bad thing.

[Djshakes]

[quote=bearishgurl] Couple this with agency closings several days per month and you have a “part-time” non-responsive government.[/quote]

This probably isn’t a bad thing.

[Djshakes]

[quote=bearishgurl] Couple this with agency closings several days per month and you have a “part-time” non-responsive government.[/quote]

This probably isn’t a bad thing.

[Djshakes]

[quote=bearishgurl] Couple this with agency closings several days per month and you have a “part-time” non-responsive government.[/quote]

This probably isn’t a bad thing.

[Author]

Posts