[no_such_reality]

[quote=briansd1]CA renter, its not about propping up banks and prices. It’s about keeping economic activity from falling off. By economic activity I mean the number of cars sold, the number of meals served at restaurants, etc…[/quote]

Letting it correct is what restarts the economic activity.

Everyone is forced to move on. Instead we have everyone, from business people to home owners just ‘hanging on’ waiting for it to return to what it was and it won’t.

We could have bottomed out 2 years ago. Home construction would have restarted, rehabbing the foreclosures would have been a two year boom, lots of people working, prices would be way down (probably another 20% from peak, maybe more).

Wages, probably would have gone up.

Rents would go down.

But instead, we have a stall that they keep pumping trying to keep in th stratosphere.

[no_such_reality]

[quote=briansd1]CA renter, in hindsight we know that banks were not prepared for the crash in home prices. However you want to look at it, the banks did not have the infrastructure needed to process all the foreclosures on a timely manner. It was a systemic problem.[/quote]

No, they quickly remedied that problem. The one they still struggle with it solvency. If they actually foreclosed and had to realize the real value of their properties instead of paper value, they’d be BK.

CAR is right, this keeps fools in houses they never could afford and keeps the same houses at price levels that are actually above sustainability and keeps the tax payers funding irresponsible banks and home debtors.

[no_such_reality]

[quote=paramount][quote=spdrun]

I have no problem with BORDER checks at the border. I do have a problem with random checks inside the US. I have an even bigger problem with probing questions about things that are none of the business of the people asking them, and have no relation to whether I’m carrying drugs, have a trunk full of “extreme Southerners,” or am an American citizen.[/quote]

Exactly. These are suspicion-less and illegal/unconstitutional interior checkpoints.[/quote]

You must hats Dui checkpoints

Driving is a privilege not a right

[no_such_reality]

We’ve deployed iPads to our sales force. We planned refresh at 18 months. We’ll be lucky if most make it that long.

[no_such_reality]

[quote=ocrenter]
We need something a whole lot more pragmatic than deporting American grown kids because they were “cutting”. That’s just plain stupid.
.[/quote]

That’s the problem. We do it, and it sets the expectation of just come and hide long enough for your kids to be ‘american’ grown.

How long is that? How young is it?

Do they need to come under the age of 1? 2? 3? 5? 10?

How long do they need to be here? Already 18? Successful in school, no run ins with the law?
Or will it be they’re over 14?
Or 10?
Or 5?

And how many other issues be we bring by encouraging millions to live in the shadows so their children will be ‘american’ grown?

That’s why need a draconian policy and then grant ayslum for the ‘countryless’ american grown children.

We need the policy first, then the asylum. Asylum first, brings a repeat.

For every kid like Ana in the prior article what other negatives are we getting in the basket of illegal immigration?

For every Ana, is encouraging their families to stay and keep Ana here bringing others with one kid that will drop out and become a gangbanger? 1/10th? 1/100th?

It will take 100 Anas to counter the costs we incur for one additional gangbanger.

It isnt even gang members. Ana represents what success rate? I look at LAUSD and they have a 1/3 drop out rate. If Ana is 1 in 100 achieving like that, even 1 in 10 achieving like that, we 3 drop outs. At 1 in 100 it’s 30 drop outs.

What’s the cost to our society of facilitating 30 more drop outs?

And no, I’m not blaming their community for the gang problem or the school failure problem, however it’s not making it better and the additional costs are real.

[no_such_reality]

[quote=briansd1][quote=no_such_reality]All those millions following the rules, paying thir fees, waiting in line look like such chumps[/quote]

You got it wrong nsr. The Dream Act does not affect those already in line in any way.

It opens up a new line for young kids whose parents brought here and who grew up as Americans. The Dream Act is a win-win all around.[/quote]

Duh Brian, the people waiting in line have been waiting a long time. They should have just sneaked in, sent their kids to our schools and now their kids would be welcome (if they turned out okay.)

No need to be, or have been waiting.

[no_such_reality]

$1.59, buy a Sharpie, write Bitch’en on the sink.

Done.

[no_such_reality]

[quote=ocrenter][quote=no_such_reality]All those millions following the rules, paying thir fees, waiting in line look like such chumps[/quote]

So you are proposing rounding up a kid going to college that speaks no Spanish because he or she came here at age 3, who has never left the States since age of 3 because of the illegal status, and dumping him or her off on the other side of San Ysidro?

Is that the idea?[/quote]

What we have today is the result of Reagan’s FAILED amnesty. It brought more illegals in waiting for just this move.

For every fluff piece the LA Times writes highlighting an illegal that has done well, how many haven’t? How many went to jail? How many were burdens on our health care system? How many fester in sweat shops? How many flood our schools?

Kick them all out, then welcome the Americanos back. Until you kick them all out, we are just going to increase the problem. The price of every kid like Ana being welcomed is the price of her remaining illegal family members (Mom now appears legal) leaving until they come back LEGALLY.

In the mean time, we need to make it massively EASIER for people without criminal and terrorist backgrounds, good education and work ethic to come. Illegal immigration is like a basket of apples. For every shiny apple liek Ana in the story, how much rot is underneath?

We need to make it easier to come and work without skills and leave and come back. Legally without legal citizen rights as part of a work program that puts the burden for funding, health care etc on the employers.

We need maximum enforcement on illegal labor EMPLOYERs. When the CEOs and OWNERs start going to jail, the demand for the illegal labor will go away. No jobs, no new people coming. No expectation that they can just stay, no new people coming.

All this move does is pander to the latino vote and encourage more people to come and be abused for 20 years while they wait for a political pandering moment.

So yes, OCR, we need to be really harsh, because until we are, we just create more of the problem by setting the expectation that we’ll just accept it later.

And maybe we can add that $130,000 price tag for her 13 years of education to the price of staying.

[no_such_reality]

All those millions following the rules, paying thir fees, waiting in line look like such chumps

[no_such_reality]

[quote=flu]…meaning… no backward compatibility.

Windows Phone 8 will not work on older devices

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/windows-phone-8-will-not-work-on-older-devices-2012-06-20?siteid=yhoof2

And since it will be closed source, no chance hacking it into an older device.[/quote]

Microsoft… no chance hacking it…

I laughed so hard I think I pee’d myself.

[no_such_reality]

Don’t bother with the LA Times, I’m expecting them to start publishing in primarily en Espanol any time now.

[no_such_reality]

Is Mary Nichols head of CARB elected?

[no_such_reality]

Former Bell official’s pensions cut further

Finally doing the right thing.

And in case you miss the real item in the story. “According to state law, workers can buy as many as five years’ additional credit toward their pensions.”

Now I’ve got to go look at what that cost them. How much would you pay for a 10-15% increase in your annual pension from 55-60 til you die?

[no_such_reality]

Thank you CAR for being clear for everyone.

The government workers do not think they are accountable to the taxpayer.

If the taxpayer doesnt like it, get out of the State is their position.

[no_such_reality]

This thread is about pensions, not the entire budget.

Its a classic tactic to delay.

[quote=CA renter][quote=no_such_reality]CAR, the plan is very simple, the Union’s must accept a reduction in their retirement benefit. A further conversion to 401K style plan eliminates the long term risk to the taxpayer.[/quote]

Once again, because you apparently missed it…

Even if you converted everyone over to a 401k plan, there would still be a budget crisis. The pensions are NOT the primary reason for the budget crisis. We have a budget crisis primarily because revenues went down (and we have a “pension crisis” because of investment losses, not because of “greedy union workers”).

Now, what are your suggestions for fixing our budget? Remember, pensions are just the tip of the iceberg and changing/reducing pension benefits would NOT fix our budget problems.[/quote]

[Author]

Posts