[ocrenter]

[img_assist|nid=11283|title=breakup map|desc=|link=node|align=center|width=480|height=600]

The breakup is not going to happen, as the first thing that is brought up is race. and when race is brought up, all discussion stop.

The issue here is the question of are large school districts truly bad for students. There is some truth to that. when an organization gets to a certain size, by nature layers of bureaucracy start to make changes slow to a craw.

but the coastal vs inland school districts would have similar problems, as they will still be quite large.

so why not divide by four?

or simply maintain the same large district but transfer more power from central administration to individual groupings of schools centered by a high school–in essence, multiple mini school districts.

the coastal vs inland thing is politically dead on arrival. time to move on to a better idea.

[ocrenter]

[img_assist|nid=11283|title=breakup map|desc=|link=node|align=center|width=480|height=600]

The breakup is not going to happen, as the first thing that is brought up is race. and when race is brought up, all discussion stop.

The issue here is the question of are large school districts truly bad for students. There is some truth to that. when an organization gets to a certain size, by nature layers of bureaucracy start to make changes slow to a craw.

but the coastal vs inland school districts would have similar problems, as they will still be quite large.

so why not divide by four?

or simply maintain the same large district but transfer more power from central administration to individual groupings of schools centered by a high school–in essence, multiple mini school districts.

the coastal vs inland thing is politically dead on arrival. time to move on to a better idea.

[ocrenter]

[quote=DWCAP]So she took $1000, and you dont agree with the charges cause you didnt cause any damage? Or you want to see the reciepts cause you dont think the cost should have been that high? These are two different things. Did you take any pictures of the place before you left? Do you have a copy of the move in inspection, to prove damages are not your fault? [/quote]

here’s the big issue: did she supply you with an itemized list of things to correct on the day of your walk-thru?

yes, then you are responsible for those items and she can deduct them at her discretion.

no, take her to court, your chance of winning just went up tremendously.

[ocrenter]

[quote=DWCAP]So she took $1000, and you dont agree with the charges cause you didnt cause any damage? Or you want to see the reciepts cause you dont think the cost should have been that high? These are two different things. Did you take any pictures of the place before you left? Do you have a copy of the move in inspection, to prove damages are not your fault? [/quote]

here’s the big issue: did she supply you with an itemized list of things to correct on the day of your walk-thru?

yes, then you are responsible for those items and she can deduct them at her discretion.

no, take her to court, your chance of winning just went up tremendously.

[ocrenter]

[quote=DWCAP]So she took $1000, and you dont agree with the charges cause you didnt cause any damage? Or you want to see the reciepts cause you dont think the cost should have been that high? These are two different things. Did you take any pictures of the place before you left? Do you have a copy of the move in inspection, to prove damages are not your fault? [/quote]

here’s the big issue: did she supply you with an itemized list of things to correct on the day of your walk-thru?

yes, then you are responsible for those items and she can deduct them at her discretion.

no, take her to court, your chance of winning just went up tremendously.

[ocrenter]

[quote=DWCAP]So she took $1000, and you dont agree with the charges cause you didnt cause any damage? Or you want to see the reciepts cause you dont think the cost should have been that high? These are two different things. Did you take any pictures of the place before you left? Do you have a copy of the move in inspection, to prove damages are not your fault? [/quote]

here’s the big issue: did she supply you with an itemized list of things to correct on the day of your walk-thru?

yes, then you are responsible for those items and she can deduct them at her discretion.

no, take her to court, your chance of winning just went up tremendously.

[ocrenter]

[quote=DWCAP]So she took $1000, and you dont agree with the charges cause you didnt cause any damage? Or you want to see the reciepts cause you dont think the cost should have been that high? These are two different things. Did you take any pictures of the place before you left? Do you have a copy of the move in inspection, to prove damages are not your fault? [/quote]

here’s the big issue: did she supply you with an itemized list of things to correct on the day of your walk-thru?

yes, then you are responsible for those items and she can deduct them at her discretion.

no, take her to court, your chance of winning just went up tremendously.

[ocrenter]

[quote=no_such_reality]October 1, 2008 that’s the publishing date. Pre-election in the middle of the election fight.

In context not nearly as disturbing as it would be today.[/quote]

thank you no_such_reality for clearing that up. looks like there were far more “Nazi Youth” videos set to the song on youtube. I can’t even find the original! looks like the right wing really had a whole lot of fun with this flop of a song.

So the question goes to the original poster. Why did you put this mid-election video on today?

because we can always put up a video of Republicans chanting “drill, drill, drill” during the GOP convention as well.

[ocrenter]

[quote=no_such_reality]October 1, 2008 that’s the publishing date. Pre-election in the middle of the election fight.

In context not nearly as disturbing as it would be today.[/quote]

thank you no_such_reality for clearing that up. looks like there were far more “Nazi Youth” videos set to the song on youtube. I can’t even find the original! looks like the right wing really had a whole lot of fun with this flop of a song.

So the question goes to the original poster. Why did you put this mid-election video on today?

because we can always put up a video of Republicans chanting “drill, drill, drill” during the GOP convention as well.

[ocrenter]

[quote=no_such_reality]October 1, 2008 that’s the publishing date. Pre-election in the middle of the election fight.

In context not nearly as disturbing as it would be today.[/quote]

thank you no_such_reality for clearing that up. looks like there were far more “Nazi Youth” videos set to the song on youtube. I can’t even find the original! looks like the right wing really had a whole lot of fun with this flop of a song.

So the question goes to the original poster. Why did you put this mid-election video on today?

because we can always put up a video of Republicans chanting “drill, drill, drill” during the GOP convention as well.

[ocrenter]

[quote=no_such_reality]October 1, 2008 that’s the publishing date. Pre-election in the middle of the election fight.

In context not nearly as disturbing as it would be today.[/quote]

thank you no_such_reality for clearing that up. looks like there were far more “Nazi Youth” videos set to the song on youtube. I can’t even find the original! looks like the right wing really had a whole lot of fun with this flop of a song.

So the question goes to the original poster. Why did you put this mid-election video on today?

because we can always put up a video of Republicans chanting “drill, drill, drill” during the GOP convention as well.

[ocrenter]

[quote=no_such_reality]October 1, 2008 that’s the publishing date. Pre-election in the middle of the election fight.

In context not nearly as disturbing as it would be today.[/quote]

thank you no_such_reality for clearing that up. looks like there were far more “Nazi Youth” videos set to the song on youtube. I can’t even find the original! looks like the right wing really had a whole lot of fun with this flop of a song.

So the question goes to the original poster. Why did you put this mid-election video on today?

because we can always put up a video of Republicans chanting “drill, drill, drill” during the GOP convention as well.

[ocrenter]

[quote=Bob]As others have pointed out, this article is garbage and not worth responding to.[/quote]

well, it isn’t all that worthless.

if one understands that majority of SD’s sales are foreclosures in first wave subprime regions, and that this study/article represent such subset of properties, then it is worthwhile.

unfortunately most readers of the UT doesn’t understand that and will apply this study’s conclusion to places like Carmel Valley, where 2nd wave option ARM and prime defaults have just started gathering strength.

[ocrenter]

[quote=Bob]As others have pointed out, this article is garbage and not worth responding to.[/quote]

well, it isn’t all that worthless.

if one understands that majority of SD’s sales are foreclosures in first wave subprime regions, and that this study/article represent such subset of properties, then it is worthwhile.

unfortunately most readers of the UT doesn’t understand that and will apply this study’s conclusion to places like Carmel Valley, where 2nd wave option ARM and prime defaults have just started gathering strength.

[ocrenter]

[quote=Bob]As others have pointed out, this article is garbage and not worth responding to.[/quote]

well, it isn’t all that worthless.

if one understands that majority of SD’s sales are foreclosures in first wave subprime regions, and that this study/article represent such subset of properties, then it is worthwhile.

unfortunately most readers of the UT doesn’t understand that and will apply this study’s conclusion to places like Carmel Valley, where 2nd wave option ARM and prime defaults have just started gathering strength.

[Author]

Posts