[CA renter]

[quote=Blogstar]Cooking was one of the most survival enabling processes that man ever engaged in. It enabled us to eat and easily digest large quantities of almost anything that had recently been alive, plant or animal and to eat things that could be stored in basically inedible forms, like rice. The implications are huge.

I like cooking.[/quote]

True. I’m just whining a bit because I’m usually the one who has to clean up the mess. 🙂

[CA renter]

As for globalization? Yes, that’s a huge problem for U.S. workers. IMO, we need to enact tariffs to offset any discrepancies between labor and environmental protection in the U.S. and other countries. Additionally, if a corporation is making most of their profits overseas and doing most/all of their production overseas, then they aren’t U.S. companies, and they shouldn’t be entitled to the protections and benefits (military protection of sea lanes, infrastructure, IP/private property protection, legal, etc.) provided by U.S. taxpayers.

[CA renter]

[quote=harvey][quote=CA renter]
And talk about a lack of compassion. You think nothing at all about taking away someone’s compensation that was already earned over many years. If you think that’s a good idea, great; you can step up to the plate and reduce your own pay and donate that to a public agency of your choice…you know, to help out the poor taxpayers and all. That’s what you’re asking these public employees to do, so you should be happy to serve as a role model, right? IIRC, you didn’t favor clawing back compensation of the people who caused the mess in the first place — the Wall Street scum who’ve made *far more* than any cop, firefighter, or teacher in the U.S.[/quote]

I’ve never said that public employee compensation should be reduced. Never.

There you go again, just plain tellin’ lies.

BTW: Our new friend phaster gets it. Welcome to Piggington![/quote]

Oh hell yes you have, ad nauseam. When you suggest that public sector employees should have their vested benefits reduced, you are saying that their compensation should be reduced. Defined benefit pensions are a form of deferred compensation. You should know that since you claim to be a financial expert.

So, not only have you repeatedly advocated for reduced compensation for public employees, you’ve suggested that we should reduce the compensation *that they have already earned.*

Just keep on lying…as always.

And I can show post after post where you’ve lied your ass off. If you’re going to call me a liar, you’d better be able to find ONE post where I’ve lied. Go ahead and try to find one.

[CA renter]

[quote=scaredyclassic]We eat raw.[/quote]

I wish we could eat more raw foods. My husband is a meatatarian, so everything gets cooked when he’s home. He even likes to have a cooked breakfast and lunch every day.

[CA renter]

[quote=scaredyclassic]What if we all just had one bowl, one cup, one set cutlery.

And we just each washed it when done?[/quote]

That would be nice in theory, but can you imagine your kids doing that after every meal? How about dinner guests? And all the cooking utensils?

Having lived with a lot of roommates in the past, I can say for a fact that very few people clean up after themselves completely. Maybe I can add that to my “pet peeve” list. 😉

[CA renter]

[quote=phaster][quote=CA renter]Many have defined benefits, and DB plans were the norm a few decades ago…you know, when the middle class and the economy were at their strongest.[/quote]

That era back in the 1950’s and 1960’s was IMHO an anomaly in world history, because the USA was the only super power in terms of military and manufacturing.

Consider that Japan and Germany back then had no manufacturing base, so DB were a way to instill worker loyalty (or said another way, DB came about because of a good economy, DB for the “middle class” didn’t create a good economy).

Now with workers in the USA having to compete with workers in not only Germany and Japan, one also has to contend with workers in China, Brazil, etc., so it makes sense that pensions in the private sector for USA workers are no long possible (its the double edge sword of a capitalistic economy). In other words it was inevitable that living standards of people around the world would rise, but since the USA was no longer the only game in town for manufacturing, the standard of living for those with more brawn than brain would fall.

Was reading someone mentioned the dangers of the military industrial complex, actually the concept should be updated IMHO.

Specifically what was once the danger of nepotism w/ the military and their contractors, is paralleled all around the nation (not just here in CA WRT pensions), I just think its going to hit SD first because it has all the right conditions for an economic implosion of biblical proportions!!

The entrenched problem is the “political-legal welfare system” which is the tendency of politicians to pander to public employee unions for political support in a bid to get into or retain an office. The “Quid pro quo” in this instance is a literal “sweet heart deal” payoff when it comes time labor talks. In economic terms, the idea of a public employees union is bad because the interests of politicians and public employees is the same (they are seeking shelter form the “real world” where global competition is now the norm, and DP in the private sector are history)

FDR long ago recognized the problem w/ public employee unions when he said:

“The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations.”

http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2013/aug/13/scott-walker/Did-FDR-oppose-collective-bargaining-for-governmen/

From what I understand of economic, unions in the private sector work because there is alternatives which over the long run makes the product better and lowers the cost (i.e. products like cars and computers).

Now consider what has happened to public services here in SD, have the roads been kept up or are they in disrepair? WRT public schools, what I’ve read is the traditional “factory” one size all school is giving way to new “organic” centers of learning, like high tech high in point loma, albert einstein charter school in golden hill, etc.

[quote=CA renter]The worst employees tend to leave before benefits vest to any large extent. That doesn’t mean that some dead wood isn’t hanging around after too many years — and I absolutely support making it easier to fire truly bad employees.[/quote]

could not agree more, and think this concept should be extended to entrenched politicians (both on the left and right) because it seem they enable lots of the problems:

http://patrick.net/forum/?p=1247288&c=1114955#comment-1114955%5B/quote%5D

You are totally wrong about politicians and unions being on the same side of the table. Nothing could be further from the truth. Some politicians are labor-friendly, and others have a vitriolic hatred for unions. I have personal experience with contract negotiations, and there is NO truth to your statement that politicians automatically pander to unions.

Unions are no different from any other group that supports politicians who will further their particular interests. That goes for public contractors (or those who hope to be public contractors); businesses who want special infrastructure that will benefit their businesses or who want special tax breaks or financial incentives; “taxpayer advocates” who are looking to reduce taxes for special interests (think Prop 13); interest groups who push for things that will place a heavier burden on public agencies without a commensurate benefit to the population at large (immigration reformers; citizens who want special projects, infrastructure, tax breaks/credits; landowners who want roads, bridges and other infrastructure specifically built to increase the value of their holdings, etc.). The list goes on and on. Every one of these groups cost taxpayers money. Every single one. Again, public employees are one piece of the puzzle (and a very small one in some instances).

And unions work because they allow employees to bargain collectively. Public unions benefit private employees, too, because private employers have to compete for the same pool of candidates.

Right now, corporate tax revenues, as a percentage of GDP, are near an all-time low, and profits are at an all time high. At the same time, labor participation rates, and all other metrics used to determine the well-being of labor are at or near all-time lows. Coincidence? Not at all. Again, we desperately need unions for ALL workers, and very politically active ones at that.

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?g=cSh

——-

Regarding the charter movement? That began in public schools, and it was supported by unions.

The charter school idea in the United States was originated in 1974 by Ray Budde,[10] a professor at the University of Massachusetts Amherst. Albert Shanker, President of the American Federation of Teachers, embraced the concept in 1988, when he called for the reform of the public schools by establishing “charter schools” or “schools of choice.”[11] Gloria Ladson-Billings called him “the first person to publicly propose charter schools”.[12] At the time, a few schools already existed that were not called charter schools but embodied some of their principles, such as H-B Woodlawn.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charter_schools_in_the_United_States

————-

But before you get too excited about charter schools, most of which are now publicly-funded private schools, you should look at how they compare to traditional public schools.

http://credo.stanford.edu/documents/NCSS%202013%20Final%20Draft.pdf

[CA renter]

[quote=harvey]Wow. Not a hint of compassion in your posts.

There are lot of Macks out there, on the golf courses, in the RV parks and marinas — yes they’re out there. They can be easy to miss — their youth masks their retiree status — but they’re out there. Victims, all of them.

What about Mack? Who will rescue Mack from Wall Street?[/quote]

Bullshit. Very few can retire at 50 with full benefits because they’d have to start at 20 to do so.

And talk about a lack of compassion. You think nothing at all about taking away someone’s compensation that was already earned over many years. If you think that’s a good idea, great; you can step up to the plate and reduce your own pay and donate that to a public agency of your choice…you know, to help out the poor taxpayers and all. That’s what you’re asking these public employees to do, so you should be happy to serve as a role model, right? IIRC, you didn’t favor clawing back compensation of the people who caused the mess in the first place — the Wall Street scum who’ve made *far more* than any cop, firefighter, or teacher in the U.S.

[CA renter]

[quote=FlyerInHi][quote=spdrun]

All houses should be equipped with 2 dishwashers so you can move the daily dishes from 1 machine to the next.

Buy your next house from an Orthodox Jewish family, and it may come so equipped. Probably with two drawer type dishwashers to separate meat and dairy dishes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drawer_dishwasher%5B/quote%5D

I’m not crazy about those drawer dishwashers.

I recently remodeled my kitchen but didn’t think about 2 dishwashers. It would not have been much more. You have to add the cost of the extra dishwasher, but you save on the cabinetry.

I also think that at least 2 dryers in the laundry room should be the new standard.

Yes, we are improving our standard of living with more material. Think of those housewives of the past slaving away to do their 5 kids’ laundry![/quote]

When we bought our house, we did an extensive addition and remodeling job, and added an extra dishwasher. My DH initially thought I was nuts, but has commented many times since then about how smart it was to have two dishwashers. We use both of them almost every day (family of 5 with at least 4 of us eating every meal at home with lots of cooking and regular dinner guests).

[CA renter]

[quote=FlyerInHi]simple answer, CAr. Because the assailants are not cops representing institutional power.

We are more outraged, as a we should be, by cops using the power of their institutions to abuse citizens.

Here’s a story on institutional abuse. New technology is making lots of past abuses come to light.

In the future, cameras and new technology, especially location technology in private spaces will prevent lots of crimes.

Maybe we don’t need so many cops anymore.[/quote]

I’m a big critic of police misconduct, and the case you’ve linked to was a tragedy (D.A. misconduct, not police, in that case). Whenever an innocent person is convicted of a crime, especially one so heinous, we need to seriously study what went wrong, and why, to ensure that it doesn’t happen again.

The corruption of institutional power is never acceptable, but neither are mob attacks (or any attacks) against innocent people.

While I’m not a fan of “technology in private spaces,” I love DNA technology that enables us to more easily convict the guilty and set the innocent free.

[CA renter]

So, why are these stories — where store employees were beaten by a large mob, and where a Marine was beaten into a coma, and where a couple were attacked by a group of thugs (where truly innocent white people are being attacked by mobs of black people) — not being played on the news 24/7 like the Ferguson story (a thug who played tough guy with a cop and got shot), or the Trayvon Martin story?

http://toprightnews.com/?p=5688

If mobs of white people were attacking black people like this, it would be the ONLY thing on the news for months.

———

The Marine story…

http://www.westernjournalism.com/arrest-made-in-vicious-racially-charged-black-on-white-beating-of-retired-u-s-marine-not-a-hate-crime/

———–

Below is a video of a White couple getting attacked by a group of six Black men, who quietly come up behind them and then lash out in a violent assault – throwing around, punching, kicking, and stomping on the White male during the unprovoked attack.

http://toprightnews.com/?p=5650

[CA renter]

Local and state governments have been spending freely on other things, too. The point is that pensions are only ONE small part of the puzzle. In the case of California, pension contributions represent approximately 3-5% of the state’s expenditures. On a local level, it’s quite a bit higher, though it still varies greatly, depending on the location (high RE prices/taxes, vibrant economy with higher income and sales taxes).

Some local agencies will be in a particularly bad spot because the communities they serve present a double whammy for them: low taxes (property, sales, and income) and a much higher public service burden. These are communities where the houses cost less or where more of the homes are owned by old-timers or landlords who are paying the old Prop 13 taxes, so the property taxes are lower. They also tend to have lower income taxes, where applicable, and lower sales taxes if the community, in general, is poor and there’s not enough high-end commercial RE to boost sales tax revenues. It’s these communities that will also tend to have a much higher crime problem, requiring more cops, often at a higher cost than in more affluent communities (because most cops will move to a nicer area, all else being equal).

And their fire departments will require more personnel and more equipment because these communities will have more crime victims, overdoses, and more patients who will call 911 for medical care vs. going to a doctor and utilizing preventative care measures, etc. They will also have more buildings that have been illegally altered and added onto…resulting in more fires, etc.

It’s a pickle for the govt leaders who try to “do the right thing” by their constituents by providing the necessary services, while also trying to manage a smaller and more volatile budget, as revenues and spending in these communities tend to be affected more by general economic trends than agencies in more affluent areas are.

[CA renter]

[quote=harvey]Tony “Mack” Rodriguez, a retired sergeant on the Desert Hot Springs police force describes how the situation came about. “The union told us that the revenue estimates were unrealistic, and we should do something about it. We were talking about deferring some raises, or maybe cutting back overtime. We had a plan.”

But Rodriguez said the union proposal never made through because of interference from a number of investment firms. “Our plan never got too far. These Wall Street guys came in and made us take raises. They increased the pension payouts and lowered the retirement age. They were ruthless, there was no stopping them.”

Now Rodriguez , 51, is not working but is forced to receive 90% of his prior salary of $132.000. “I’m stuck with these paychecks, for life” he said. “I could live till I’m eighty-five, and I’ll have to deal with this for the next thirty years.”

The situation has required him to fill his garage with motorsport vehicles he rarely uses. He recently was forced to purchase a fifty foot RV. “We had to buy a bigger house because of all this stuff” lamented Rodriguez. “I even had to get a disability tax break because the Wall Street guy told me that my knee hurts.”[/quote]

FYI, it was indeed the Wall Street/financial geniuses who convinced public leaders that they could enhance pension benefits during the internet/stock market bubble *at no additional cost.* While the boots-on-the-ground workers certainly didn’t oppose the benefit enhancements (would you?), the unions more certainly DID warn public agencies that reducing the pension contributions to zero during the bubble years would result in underfunded pensions down the road when the market corrected. They were right.

And why didn’t govt leaders want to fund the pensions during the good times? They did it so that they could take care of other stakeholders, like public contractors (a HUGE problem in local governments) and advocacy groups who wanted their various pet projects completed since all of that “extra money” was just sitting around doing nothing. This is why it’s almost impossible for government leaders to save for a rainy day: every stakeholder is watching the funds and will demand, on a daily basis, that the money be spent on their personal projects and ideas.

[CA renter]

Blah, blah, blah…

Nice try, pri.

For those of you who haven’t figured it out yet, that wasn’t an actual quote. This is what harvey/pri does — quotes or claims things that aren’t real.

[CA renter]

1) Unkind and/or inconsiderate people.
2) Things that don’t work properly at the very
moment when you need them to do so.
3) Clutter and disorganization. And dirt…I really, really hate dirt.

[CA renter]

Awesome post, moneymaker! 🙂

I am grateful for…

1) My very best friend and love of my life, my DH.
2) Our kids, who are far better than I ever was.
3) Our awesome friends and the good times we share.
4) The fairly good health of my family and friends.
5) Our house, we couldn’t be happier with it.
6) Our sweet, wonderful dog who’s a perfect match
for us (thank you, SD Humane Society).
7) For being an American, though we could make some
improvements, it really is a great country.
8) For financial security…luckier than most of
the world’s population, as are most Piggs, I
imagine.
9) I’m grateful that I am grateful…that while life
will always throw a few challenges our way,
things are mostly good, and we are able to
recognize that. Too many cannot appreciate how
lucky they are because of depression, or because
they’re naturally inclined to just focus on the bad stuff.
10) The internet, for the wealth of information
that is now available to us, and for the virtual
and real friendships that we can now enjoy,
thanks to technology.

[Author]

Posts