Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
November 14, 2011 at 11:40 AM in reply to: HUD to Roll Out Emergency Loan Program for Unemployed “Homeowners” by Year-End #732901
Shadowfax
ParticipantMy Conlaw understanding has faded and I had a horrible ConLaw prof, but a few things stuck with me. First, that there is no “right to abortion” in the constitution. There is no “right to privacy” but the interpretation of a “living” consitution enables the courts to protect certain areas of life that the founders couldn’t envision in the 1700s. Or perhaps they were so basic they didn’t think they needed mentioning? Either way, we now have to interpret the written words of the document. Literalists will never give up saying “it’s not in the Constitution,” but how can a bunch of male slave owners in the 1700s have accounted for the unfolding of history without intending for the Constition to grow and adapt over time?
The right to privacy (the basis of the attenuated right to abortion) is based in the concept of “fundamental rights”. These were first set forth (in western law making) in the Magna Carta–a document that the founders were well versed in and some of the federalist papers show that they conversed in the language of the magna carta about certain fundamental rights. [go look it up]
A nice summary of how the founders were influenced by the last attempt to express the freedoms of the people is found here: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/featured_documents/magna_carta/
The expression of certain fundamental or inalienable rights is the underpinning of the “penumbra of rights” that is relied upon to get to all the privacy issues, or at least the more imporatant cases that don’t turn on some factual anomaly.The Supreme Court chose to base its decision on the Fourteenth Amendment. Roe v. Wade was decided primarily on the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. A criminal statute prohibiting abortion that did not take into account the state of pregnancy or other interests than the life of the mother was deemed a violation of Due Process.
November 14, 2011 at 9:51 AM in reply to: CA Revenue comes in 6.5% lower than expected (and some common sense solutions) #732896ParticipantBG and Para: You two both crack me up. Neither system is fair–for that matter, life isn’t fair. The best qualified candidate rarely gets the job, whether due to affirmative action, white boy cronyism or candidate fraud. But the world keeps turning.
I go back to my original point–I won’t let someone get away with railing against public employee benefits being “out of control” (or any other issue) when they are a benefitting participant. That to me is hypocritical.
And as for this 401(k) equivalency argument, just no. I have several 401(k)s. They are the only real investment vehicle for the middle class (other than owning a primary residence). I have worked at several different private sector jobs (so no, not a federal government worker, BG, though I have gone through the hiring process at several government agencies and never been hired). None of my employers, individually, have been members of the 1%. A few were probably in the 10%.
I have opened a 401(k) through each employer. The fund in those accounts were take from my salary. There is no guarantee those fund will be there next year or 20 years from now (holy shit does that scare me). I watch the numbers go up and down each statement. Only one employer had a matching fund program, based on reaching a certain number of years of service. Yes, some of the way these accounts are distributed involves investing in 1% corporations–like banks. I also received–and paid for–health insurance. It was terminated when I left each job.
Someone enlighten me: some public retirement plans are 1) paid in? Others 2) only kick in with government-paid funds once you retire and apply for them (no employee contributions)? Some are 3) a combination of the two? I believe #2 and perhaps #3 is where I take issue. If you didn’t sacrifice anything (a portion of your salary) and then are being paid to be useless…does anyone have a WTF moment there?
And don’t whine “but I was underpaid”. You probably made more than minimum wage…and you had choices. Quit and join the bloated salaries of the private sector. Oh, and by the way, those jobs aren’t so cush either.
So, the main difference in my mind with the latter benefit programs in the public sector is that they are the benefit that keeps on giving, even after you no longer provide anything of value to the employer or anywhere else! Who wouldn’t love to work for 10 years and then receive part of that salary indefinitely into the future, with no risk, and no adjustment for external factors–like Wall Street fraud or economic catastrophe? What’s the difference between a working age retiree and a welfare recipient? But don’t sit on your high horse and bitch about it when you are taking it in with the other hand.
But then the plan administrators (or the management advised by the plan administrators) got greedy and started investing in those “too good to be true” “sure thing” 1000% return investments, and were either too stupid, blind with greed or completely bamboozled by Wall Street. It’s unfortunate that the 1000% return on those pensions plans is now in a severe negative position. Do those people collecting expect the loss to be absorved by the rest of the tax base? I guess so. One bad decision after another…and the rest of us empty our pockets to pay them out. For being retired at 50–a prime working age–while they turn around and become real estate flippers or go into the defense industry. And bring home more tax payer dollars. [end rant]
November 14, 2011 at 9:23 AM in reply to: CA Revenue comes in 6.5% lower than expected (and some common sense solutions) #732893Participant[quote=AN]
Who ever say anything about legitimizing one being a hypocrite? I’m just pointing out a bunch of pots calling kettle black. Many times, I see pots attacking kettles for being black, but failing to see that they’re black themselves. I just find it funny and I like to point out that pots are black too.[/quote]All this color stereotyping sounds a little racist to me. I dunno about you guys, but my kettle is red. (Uhoh, must make me a socialist!)
November 13, 2011 at 10:20 AM in reply to: CA Revenue comes in 6.5% lower than expected (and some common sense solutions) #732831Participant[quote=patientrenter][quote=EconProf]I taught for 23 years, mostly at SDSU, while also investing in SD real estate, which eventually displaced teaching in my family’s priorities……. [/quote]
It is a little bit bizarre, you’ll have to admit, EconProf, that an advocate for sensible free markets happens to have made most of his living from a sheltered government job, and from an asset bubble – California real estate – that was stoked by government actions such as easy money policies from the Federal Reserve, government guarantees from the FHA and Fannie Mae etc, and a complete failure to enforce underwriting standards on the home loan industry. [/quote]
One word: hypocrite: a person who feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude, especially one whose private life, opinions, or statements belie his or her public statements.
November 13, 2011 at 10:15 AM in reply to: CA Revenue comes in 6.5% lower than expected (and some common sense solutions) #732829Participant[quote=Hobie]Deficits (spending) does not mean we are not taxed enough.
Repealing Prop13 is not the answer. Actually it will self repeal. As more homes resell the a new tax basis is established and there you are. Wha la, more taxes in the coffers.
[/quote]Prop 13 self-repealing is not quite that simple. Many “sales” are exempted so that the Prop 13 tax rate is maintained. Exemptions are available for parent-child sales, moving ownership of a house from one form of ownership to another, and some others, all having the effect of siphoning off tax dollars from property that has multiplied in value over many years.
ParticipantDid someone say SHARK?
ParticipantI have to appreciate scholarship vs. dogma. Nice sampling, Eugene. If I ever have too much time on my hands, I’d love to read about the history of the early years of christianity–not as religion but more along the lines of what you say here.
It’s fascinating/horrifying that people take these writings as “fact” when they were predominantly written by every day Greeks or Romans, not “god”. Poor record keeping and translation (ancient Aramaic anyone?) or copying errors and missing chapters–it all has an effect on the meaning. Not to mention King James’ own political agenda back in the day.
ParticipantI have to appreciate scholarship vs. dogma. Nice sampling, Eugene. If I ever have too much time on my hands, I’d love to read about the history of the early years of christianity–not as religion but more along the lines of what you say here.
It’s fascinating/horrifying that people take these writings as “fact” when they were predominantly written by every day Greeks or Romans, not “god”. Poor record keeping and translation (ancient Aramaic anyone?) or copying errors and missing chapters–it all has an effect on the meaning. Not to mention King James’ own political agenda back in the day.
ParticipantI have to appreciate scholarship vs. dogma. Nice sampling, Eugene. If I ever have too much time on my hands, I’d love to read about the history of the early years of christianity–not as religion but more along the lines of what you say here.
It’s fascinating/horrifying that people take these writings as “fact” when they were predominantly written by every day Greeks or Romans, not “god”. Poor record keeping and translation (ancient Aramaic anyone?) or copying errors and missing chapters–it all has an effect on the meaning. Not to mention King James’ own political agenda back in the day.
ParticipantI have to appreciate scholarship vs. dogma. Nice sampling, Eugene. If I ever have too much time on my hands, I’d love to read about the history of the early years of christianity–not as religion but more along the lines of what you say here.
It’s fascinating/horrifying that people take these writings as “fact” when they were predominantly written by every day Greeks or Romans, not “god”. Poor record keeping and translation (ancient Aramaic anyone?) or copying errors and missing chapters–it all has an effect on the meaning. Not to mention King James’ own political agenda back in the day.
ParticipantI have to appreciate scholarship vs. dogma. Nice sampling, Eugene. If I ever have too much time on my hands, I’d love to read about the history of the early years of christianity–not as religion but more along the lines of what you say here.
It’s fascinating/horrifying that people take these writings as “fact” when they were predominantly written by every day Greeks or Romans, not “god”. Poor record keeping and translation (ancient Aramaic anyone?) or copying errors and missing chapters–it all has an effect on the meaning. Not to mention King James’ own political agenda back in the day.
May 4, 2011 at 2:00 PM in reply to: Relocating from SF to Del Mar or Santaluz or Olivenhain or FBR or other? #692254ParticipantStill with the bickering? Both of you to your rooms for a time out! Everybody else, stop baiting the trolls.
May 4, 2011 at 2:00 PM in reply to: Relocating from SF to Del Mar or Santaluz or Olivenhain or FBR or other? #692329ParticipantStill with the bickering? Both of you to your rooms for a time out! Everybody else, stop baiting the trolls.
May 4, 2011 at 2:00 PM in reply to: Relocating from SF to Del Mar or Santaluz or Olivenhain or FBR or other? #692930ParticipantStill with the bickering? Both of you to your rooms for a time out! Everybody else, stop baiting the trolls.
-
AuthorPosts