[SK in CV]

[quote=paramount]
Sounds like the issue is a double standard: I should respect others views (and I do), but others don’t need to respect mine? I would guess that less than 10% of the population is gay, by definition that means being gay is not normal IMO.

Nothing wrong with being gay IMO – your life your business. I just don’t think it’s normal and I don’t want my kids taught that it is.

I want to opt out, period.[/quote]

My daughter has green eyes. As do about 12% of the population. Not normal?

Nevermind. I just hope for your kids sake, they were born straight.

[SK in CV]

[quote=paramount]
Sounds like the issue is a double standard: I should respect others views (and I do), but others don’t need to respect mine? I would guess that less than 10% of the population is gay, by definition that means being gay is not normal IMO.

Nothing wrong with being gay IMO – your life your business. I just don’t think it’s normal and I don’t want my kids taught that it is.

I want to opt out, period.[/quote]

My daughter has green eyes. As do about 12% of the population. Not normal?

Nevermind. I just hope for your kids sake, they were born straight.

[SK in CV]

[quote=paramount]
Sounds like the issue is a double standard: I should respect others views (and I do), but others don’t need to respect mine? I would guess that less than 10% of the population is gay, by definition that means being gay is not normal IMO.

Nothing wrong with being gay IMO – your life your business. I just don’t think it’s normal and I don’t want my kids taught that it is.

I want to opt out, period.[/quote]

My daughter has green eyes. As do about 12% of the population. Not normal?

Nevermind. I just hope for your kids sake, they were born straight.

[SK in CV]

[quote=paramount]
Sounds like the issue is a double standard: I should respect others views (and I do), but others don’t need to respect mine? I would guess that less than 10% of the population is gay, by definition that means being gay is not normal IMO.

Nothing wrong with being gay IMO – your life your business. I just don’t think it’s normal and I don’t want my kids taught that it is.

I want to opt out, period.[/quote]

My daughter has green eyes. As do about 12% of the population. Not normal?

Nevermind. I just hope for your kids sake, they were born straight.

[SK in CV]

[quote=paramount]Teaching tolerance is good.

Teaching either directly or indirectly that homosexuality is ‘normal’ – I want to opt out. And ultimately I think that is exactly what this bill is all about.[/quote]

Right. Can’t teach gay is normal. Because gay teens comitting suicide just isn’t that big of a deal.

[SK in CV]

[quote=paramount]Teaching tolerance is good.

Teaching either directly or indirectly that homosexuality is ‘normal’ – I want to opt out. And ultimately I think that is exactly what this bill is all about.[/quote]

Right. Can’t teach gay is normal. Because gay teens comitting suicide just isn’t that big of a deal.

[SK in CV]

[quote=paramount]Teaching tolerance is good.

Teaching either directly or indirectly that homosexuality is ‘normal’ – I want to opt out. And ultimately I think that is exactly what this bill is all about.[/quote]

Right. Can’t teach gay is normal. Because gay teens comitting suicide just isn’t that big of a deal.

[SK in CV]

[quote=paramount]Teaching tolerance is good.

Teaching either directly or indirectly that homosexuality is ‘normal’ – I want to opt out. And ultimately I think that is exactly what this bill is all about.[/quote]

Right. Can’t teach gay is normal. Because gay teens comitting suicide just isn’t that big of a deal.

[SK in CV]

[quote=paramount]Teaching tolerance is good.

Teaching either directly or indirectly that homosexuality is ‘normal’ – I want to opt out. And ultimately I think that is exactly what this bill is all about.[/quote]

Right. Can’t teach gay is normal. Because gay teens comitting suicide just isn’t that big of a deal.

[SK in CV]

[quote=Raybyrnes]171000 was the previous transaction. 400 to 400 reasonable. 171 to 400 not reasonable[/quote]

the $171K appears to be the credit bid in foreclosure. Not a sales price.

[SK in CV]

[quote=Raybyrnes]171000 was the previous transaction. 400 to 400 reasonable. 171 to 400 not reasonable[/quote]

the $171K appears to be the credit bid in foreclosure. Not a sales price.

[SK in CV]

[quote=Raybyrnes]171000 was the previous transaction. 400 to 400 reasonable. 171 to 400 not reasonable[/quote]

the $171K appears to be the credit bid in foreclosure. Not a sales price.

[SK in CV]

[quote=Raybyrnes]171000 was the previous transaction. 400 to 400 reasonable. 171 to 400 not reasonable[/quote]

the $171K appears to be the credit bid in foreclosure. Not a sales price.

[SK in CV]

[quote=Raybyrnes]171000 was the previous transaction. 400 to 400 reasonable. 171 to 400 not reasonable[/quote]

the $171K appears to be the credit bid in foreclosure. Not a sales price.

[SK in CV]

[quote=GH]
Pension managers DO “manage” pensions. At least here in San Diego, the pension is not funded – promised, but NOT funded sufficiently. This seems like the act of a debtor charging away debt and hoping to “somehow” come up with the money later.[/quote]

Exactly right. But you’ve changed your assertion. The debtor would be the city. Not the pension manager. People throughout the city assailed Mike Aguirre. Incuding some, as I recall, here on this blog. Among his most controversial targets were municipal employee pension deals, primarily the police pensions, made while Susan Golding and then Dick Murphy were mayor. Short version (and you are exactly right on this) was increased benefits in exchange for not funding those benefits. That’s much less a pension management problem than a city financing problem.

[Author]

Posts