[no_such_reality]

California’s Medical Prison beset by waste and mismanagement

Some people are simply in denial.

[no_such_reality]

[quote=flu]Two stocks I bought recently (one before earnings)…

1. Altria (MO)..
I bought them for a dividend play (5.1%).
It’s pretty boring. Goes between $36-38/share… Which is good. I like stability..
[/quote]

I’ve had on again off again encounters with MO over the years. And even though I’m a proponent of legalization for most recreational drugs, something about MO just makes me feel dirty when I own it.

I’m not a social concious investor, but something about MO always makes me question if I’m putting money above everything.

[no_such_reality]

LOL, no, actually, they wouldn’t.

A legal system makes decision based on ‘the law’, technicalities, actual law, sometimes, actual intent of the law.

A justice system provides outcomes that are just, equitable, righteous. Or in simple synonym terms; good, honest, fair.

Both can be enacted quite capriciously.

If the accused was doing it to you, would you want a result that complied with the letter of the law or would you want a result that was ‘good, honest & fair’?

[quote=scaredyclassic][quote=no_such_reality]The problem is pretty simple.

There’s what will happen in the California LEGAL system.

then there is what should happen in a JUSTICE system.

don’t get the too confused. It’ll just piss you off.

The fact that the defendent is a gub’ment worker hopefully doesn’t affect it one way or another. Nor should it.

Although we can just had her to the list of bad behavior by those stringently hired and ‘qualified’ gub’ment workers.[/quote]

a justice system would probably have a lot of similarites to our legal system.

we’d probably have people, not computers, decide what to charge, and what the deal if any should be.

we’d have laws, with specific penalties.

we’d have judges probably monitor the proceedings are see if they felt the law was being complied with.

we’d probably have lots of disagreement about what those particular indicviduals actually do, sinc e reasonable people can differ …

how would a justice system differ from the current legal system, other than in terms of producing a specific outcome in a specific case?[/quote]

[no_such_reality]

The problem is pretty simple.

There’s what will happen in the California LEGAL system.

then there is what should happen in a JUSTICE system.

don’t get the too confused. It’ll just piss you off.

The fact that the defendent is a gub’ment worker hopefully doesn’t affect it one way or another. Nor should it.

Although we can just had her to the list of bad behavior by those stringently hired and ‘qualified’ gub’ment workers.

[no_such_reality]

[quote=CA renter]
I did bring honest data. Please link your source so we can dissect it more. The public school number you’ve posted probably includes some major infrastructure and interest on bond payments, among many other indirect costs. [/quote]

Those would be the real costs. What you brought is a school talking point.

If I buy a bunch of stuff on a credit card and then pay interest on the credit card, that’s all the cost of getting the stuff.

That’s how the government and schools are hiding their spending. Bonds, “infrastructure”, etc. It’s all the REAL spending that is being done on schools and in many districts, it’s being going on for decades.

The number he brings is the same way I reached the LAUSD number, and the same way you get to the fact that California doesn’t spend $100B a year at a state level, we’ve been spending over $200B

You go look up ALL the money being spent in the four different budget presentations.

You’ve lost all credibility with me since you can’t admit that the Union IS part of the problem. In LAUSD they managed to get a contract that the termination is so biased and so difficult that the administration just puts probelm, and by problem we mean things like molesting students, in a non-teaching, non-working office cube and pays them out until retirement because in the end, It’s less expensive.

That is a problem and creates a completely unaccountable environment. Why not, maybe it has to do ith the 3 person panel of peers, one picked by the union, one by the teacher, and one by administration.

Yep, no road block to reality there.

[no_such_reality]

IMHO, the single biggest proof that money won’t fix the problem is LAUSD. When you look at the actual total expenditures across all funds and categories (i.e. icluding building new schools), over the last two decades, they’ve been spending close to $20,000 per pupil each year.

LAUSD is, IMHO, broken. Horribly broken in spite of many dedicated and competent individual teachers. They are sadded in a system that strips them of resources, saddles them in bereaucracy, structurally creates a hostile employee/employer relationship and tolerates mediocrity and covers-up failure in denial and cares more about politically correct talking points than accomplishing anything concrete.

And anecdotally, the schools will have no problem hiring at current compensation levels. Much like LAFD, they get too many candidates. There is zero need to increase teacher compensation, the recent grads are literally beating down door, smoozing everybody in every school they can find trying to get one of few openings.

If you can’t find math instructors, you raise compensation for math qualified instructors, not raise compensation for all instructors.

[no_such_reality]

[quote=CA renter]Here’s the salary table for SD Unified’s teachers. Under no circumstances are teachers overpaid.

http://www.sandi.net/cms/lib/CA01001235/Centricity/Domain/94/salaryschedules/teachers.pdf%5B/quote%5D

I like page 6. Page 6 is for a 227 work day year, close but not quite equivalent to a typical private sector work year.

Salaries range from $49,594 for a first year, BA level person, to $102K qfor 17 years, MA and 90 credit units of ‘training’.

That 183 work day calendar an pay rate does not include paid holidays nor any accumulated vacation, sick time that they are paid. See the following school schedule calendar

Private sector workers start with a 260 work day year. Anywhere from 6-10 holidays, So 254 to 250 ‘work’ days.

Apples to apples 183 days not including holidays maps to ~250 work days in the private sector. We need to compare total comp per day ‘worked’.

Per attached schedule, they have 13 paid holidays which results in 7% more money for those 183 days. So that $39,982/yr pay schedule first year, BA only teacher, not including sick time, vacation, is getting $233 per day worked (in annual pay) or, equivalent to the private sector person making $233/day for their 250 work days or $58,443/yr. Not a bad entry salary.

Likewise that 17 year, BA only teacher, equates out to $92K/yr for 250 days of work. The heavily credentialed 17 year vet is making the equivalent of $120k/year of the private sector.

That’s assuming the private sector persons sick time, vacation time and benefits are on par. LOL.

[no_such_reality]

I see the internet lost my edit.

Basically, I appended a paragraph saying an HOA is a form of government. Like all forms of government, once they start providing a service, discontinuing the service is near impossible due to the number of people viewing their loss of ‘free’ service.

Trying to micromanage the budget and cable inclusion is a losing proposition. By having pre-included cable, the oondo association largely limits the number of requests and complaints they get for satellite dishes.

I’ve also seen it go the complete other way the OP intends, once the bored people realize they can propose their ‘feel’ good ideas and then use HOA money to inact. Things like community beautification and value enhancement. Which means, making the common areas look nice. Which really means, the hobbyist gardeners running the subcommittee start spending $12,000+ a year ‘updating’ and ‘replanting’ flowers in the flower beds every month.

[no_such_reality]

[quote=Happs]I think you hit the nail on the head regarding resistant to change. They are cliquish but I am still perplexed why they are reluctant to put an item on the agenda and vote it down 5-0 if they don’t like them? It’s not like many people even attend the Board meetings.[/quote]

Because you’re a PITA and once they put yours on, then you submit another. Then other people with submit others and then you have a whole bunch of people trying to backseat drive the budget.

Basic cable is provided by the HOA. Board members probably are getting ‘courtesy’ upgrade packages. Removing the cable with have the board dealing with the other 500 tenants minus 1 about why they now get a bigger cable bill.

[no_such_reality]

[quote=flu]How the heck are you folks getting a 12% tax rate on fed. Mine is close to 19% and that’s with itemized deductions.

I must be doing my taxes wrong[/quote]

No, your taxes are the taxes of a person with high income.

UCGal is working the plan to have more life without realizing income. It’s the financial independence plan, you greatly simplify your life if you figure out how to happily live on less income.

[no_such_reality]

It kind of depends, once it’s clear you’re not going to take it and you’re going turn it right back, they may totally chill.

my general finding has always been the louder and more aggressive the person is, the more they really know they don’t have a leg to stand on.

Once the bluster doesn’t work, they’ve got nothing left and they know it.

Except that 10% that is just irrational and convince themselves ‘they’re right’. They end up on a mission from god.

[no_such_reality]

[quote=Blogstar]
Yes, I bought the easement from 3 people, one sold to this hostile person. Nobody wants courtesy or respects it will never be nurture by parties involved for sure. [/quote]

Yea, pretty simple then. They’re either ignorant and their problem with lack of disclosure by the prior owner or they’re not and they’re just bullying.

Put the restraining order on them to keep their distance during improvements and then call the cops every single time they violate it.

And take your sweet time improving.

And as CDMA said, never go out alone over there. Always remember, 80% of the population simply runs on might makes right. That’s why as you go down the economic ladde aggression becomes a more and more common negotiation tactic.

[no_such_reality]

JMHO, if your lead in position, is I’ve talked to the lawyer and have the legal right… well, you’ve got the legal right. And that’s all you’ve got. Now go beat your neighbor over the head with a legal right and see how neighborly they are.

[quote]The easements are not once in a life usages. They were created by my title company for me, with the previous owner for a 40′ wide road for [/quote]
Wait a minute, did I just read that right. You bought the easement from the prior owner. So these people that are harrassing you bought AFTER you bought the easement?

If that’s the case, they’re idiot crackjobs. Still would be a nice courtesy to pre-discuss improvement with them.

They don’t happen to be preppers are they?

I also wonder if 40ft road easements were discussed during their purchase of the property.

[no_such_reality]

Just out of curiosity, did you discuss this plan to create an improved access road with the actual landowner on essentially a previously set of abdicated easements?

Yes with the easements, you have rights, but you’ll essentially taking a once in decade used right of way and planning to turn it into the new primary assess for your property. Do I have that about right? That goes to CA Renter’s question. You’re really taking 3 easements which have little practical use to the people with them and now tying them together to drastically change the impact of the easements on the primary land owner.

I’ll also 2nd CDMA’s point, the horents nest is already kicked. I’m just reading between the lines, and when reading between the lines, you’re looking kinding like you’re doing an f-u, I want this.

How is the proximity from this road you’re planning on building and key areas of their property?

JMHO, you can be 100% legal and still totally schmucky, just like Donald Trump.

I don’t know if for your sake my reading between the lines is total wrong or if I’m right, not 100% sure which will generate more animosity in the long run.

[no_such_reality]

[quote=spdrun][quote=XBoxBoy]
At any rate, I’m not seeing the data to back up claims that being a firefighter is particularly dangerous. Just saying.
[/quote]

Depends how job-related deaths are tabulated. I recall reading that firefighters had 2-3x the lifetime cancer risk of people in other jobs. Exposure to smoke, dust, vapors from heated toxics can’t be good for you.[/quote]

Except CalPERS shows that Firefighters and safety professions out live the general public with a longer life expectancy.

[Author]

Posts