[enron_by_the_sea]

[quote=harvey]The Mercury News article is a bit confusing on the K-12 numbers:
[/quote]

I agree it is confusing. You can go to the source (gov.’s proposal) linked there

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/120484452/Gov-Jerry-Browns-May-Revise-of-California-Budget-2012-12

Page 8 shows chart of K-14 funding over the years. It is $47B for 2011-12. Proposed to go up $53.7B in 2012-13 if the taxes pass. (That will be $2.9B above the statutory limit of prop-98. The prop-98 limit itself does increase by $3.7 because of higher revenue – which is what the Mercury News is alluding to .. Perhaps.)

If taxes don’t pass then Brown will take $5.5B away and schools will be left with 53.7-5.5=$48.2B. That is still $1.2B (or 2.5%) more than 2011-12.

[enron_by_the_sea]

I just had a chance to briefly skim through an article that actually has details about proposed budget and the actual text of the gov.s proposal

http://www.mercurynews.com/california-budget/ci_20620197/gov-jerry-brown-calls-more-social-services-cuts

Here are some highlights.

* For all the talk from Gov. Brown about cuts, the proposed spending ($91.4B) for 2012-13 is actually 5% (or $5B) higher than 2011-12.

* Gov. says that if you don’t approve his tax increase he will cut $5B from K-12 education. What he does not tell you is that even after cutting $5B from K-12, the state will be spending higher ($48B) on K-12 the next year than this year ($47B). The increase(2%) will more or less keep up with inflation in the economy. I fail to see how this will be “devastating” to public education as some people are saying.

[enron_by_the_sea]

Lot of money is needed to fund pensions, welfare, prisons and high speed train …

By the way do not read much into proposed cuts by Brown in this budget. I predict that

(1) Legislature will never pass them
(2) Or they will be carefully designed such that courts will overturn them (that is what happened to many of last year’s cuts)
(3) Or they will go into effect and them someone will complain and then those will be rolled back (also happened last year.)

Luckily we are still allowed to vote on the tax increase. However I predict that after Nov election, Dems will finally get their 2/3 majority in assembly and senate. After that they will not even ask you to vote on it!

[enron_by_the_sea]

[quote=AN]
The same reason why CA is going to have a high speed train?[/quote]

For every $1 that Feds give to CA for HSR, we will have to spend something like $9 to build this white elephant. I would rather not have that type of generosity from the feds!

[enron_by_the_sea]

Assuming there is no structural flaw in the house, definitely under the market!

Maybe a little short sale fraud in progress?

[enron_by_the_sea]

[quote=markmax33] AND the estimated amount of ad revenue Facebook makes from each user is about $125/user. [/quote]

I am surprised that no one called out this one. FB has 900million users. So are you saying their revenues today are 100 billion dollars?

Actually their ad revenues for 2011 were more like ~ 4.2 bilion ( See http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-09-20/facebook-revenue-will-reach-4-27-billion-emarketer-says-1-.html )

They made $9.5/user/year in US/Canada and much less than that if the user is from other parts of the world.

See http://seekingalpha.com/article/559401-facebook-made-9-51-in-ad-revenue-per-user-last-year-in-the-u-s-and-canada?source=feed

[enron_by_the_sea]

If I can buy facebook shares at the underwriter’s price then I would probably buy them and flip them ASAP at open to Joe-the-clueless-investor. But most likely, I can’t do that because those IPO prices are reserved for fat-cat customers of Goldman Sachs only!

If I can’t get shares at that price then it is best to stay out of this and watch the fun from the side…

[enron_by_the_sea]

“Gah gah goo goo debasement! theft!”

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/01/on-the-uselessness-of-debates/

[enron_by_the_sea]

[quote=pri_dk]These stories are becoming all too common:

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/may/01/man-abandoned-dea-cell-steps-forward/

An engineering student stepped forward with his lawyer Tuesday to say he was left alone in a federal holding cell for five days with no food or water, apparently forgotten by the federal drug agents who detained him.[/quote]

So I feel for this person and I wish that whoever did this gets what they deserve.

But really what connection does it have to the “war on drugs”? In theory you can be detained for any other offense and this still could happen to you!

[enron_by_the_sea]

[quote=briansd1][quote=enron_by_the_sea] its operation will cost the taxpayers of the state of CA forever! Real white elephant!!![/quote]

Oh my God, the state has to provide transportation services forever!!

And roads and schools don’t get funding forever?[/quote]

My biggest beef against backers of HSR is that they seem to have this attitude that they know best what is good for the state. if they use any realistic estimates, their proposed project does not make any financial sense (and it is debatable if it the best thing for the environment either). So they just make numbers up and assume that the rest of us are stupid or not paying any attention!

When I see such white elephants in the making, why should I vote for any tax increase for funding anything in this state?

[enron_by_the_sea]

[quote=briansd1][quote=enron_by_the_sea]
And roads and schools don’t get funding forever?[/quote]

Road funding comes from gas taxes (not general fund).

To do the same to high speed train, you will have to charge 300+ for the ticket (see above) and no one will use it.

In general for most transportation user pays.

[enron_by_the_sea]

Now I hear that even if we somehow build this thing, its operation will cost the taxpayers of the state of CA forever! Real white elephant!!!

[quote]

If the bullet train project is to pencil out, it must operate far more economically than any high-speed rail system in the world, according to the experts, who include former World Bank executive William Grindley.

Unless these extraordinary economies are achieved, the train will require alarmingly high annual operating subsidies “forever,” as the experts wrote in a report last month. The annual operating deficit could top $2 billion, they wrote.

The rail authority’s business plans indicate that the bullet train would cost about 10 cents per passenger mile to operate, Bushell said in a recent interview.

That means it would cost 10 cents to carry one passenger one mile on the rail system. But international high-speed rail systems cost on average about 43 cents per passenger mile, he said.

[/quote]

Read more here: http://www.modbee.com/2012/04/29/2179385/bullet-trains-operating-costs.html#storylink=cpy

BTW if real operating cost of the project is more like 0.43/mile as it has been observed elsewhere in the world, then the cost of transporting 1 person from LA to SF is about 300 miles* 0.43 = $129 one way. If HSR has to make any money then it will cost >$300 round trip to transport a person and this project is not viable.

Therefore they might have just made a number of $0.10/mile…

[enron_by_the_sea]

LOL! Do opposite of what flu thinks!

[enron_by_the_sea]

I was also amused to read this in the above link about the report from the legislative analyst

[quote]
Further, it criticizes the Brown administration’s new backup plan to use potentially tens of billions of dollars from the state’s new “cap-and-trade” program in which big polluters buy credits in electronic auctions to offset greenhouse gas emissions, with the revenue going to environmentally friendly programs. The LAO argues there are more cost-effective environmental programs that could use the money, that it’s unclear whether high-speed rail would actually reduce greenhouse gases quickly enough , and that it may be illegal to use the funds to build the bullet train.
[/quote]

There it is! “High-speed-train-saves-the-environment” argument is gone too!

[enron_by_the_sea]

Stop California bullet train, state’s top analyst urges

http://www.mercurynews.com/california-high-speed-rail/ci_20418167/stop-california-bullet-train-states-top-analyst-urges

[quote]
The state’s top analyst on Tuesday urged lawmakers to slam the brakes on California’s $68 billion bullet train, cautioning that the newly overhauled plan simply isn’t “strong enough” and relies on “highly speculative” funding sources.

The report from the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office is especially significant as the state Senate and Assembly on Wednesday begin a debate on whether to start building the high-speed rail line, a decision officials revealed Tuesday will likely be delayed into the summer. The report could give a divided Legislature the political cover it needs to halt the biggest public works project in California history; otherwise, lawmakers would have to go against the advice of their own experts.

It is the latest in a series of stinging critiques of the project by independent watchdog groups. But it’s the first analysis since the Brown administration early this month unveiled a scaled-back version of the rail line that was intended to appease critics by trimming the cost by $30 billion, speeding up the start of service by five years and electrifying the Caltrain line by the end of the decade.
[/quote]

Somehow I don’t think “lets start building it first and then we will figure out” mentality is going to care much about it!

[Author]

Posts