[urbanrealtor]

[quote=luchabee]Real-estate right?

Ever tried running a small machine shop or done manufacturing, etc? You want to talk about regulation . . .

Obviously, many business owners in CA are not as nimble, as they are fleeing the state, closing shop, letting people go. My sister-in-law just got laid off from a small firm. Another family member of mine let his employees go, as the compliance and taxes didn’t warrant their continued employment and the burden managing them. Out in the I.E., we may approach a 20% real unemployment rate, but the CA legislature is doing nothing to promote growth. In fact, after the largest tax increase in history, they still want to increase taxes.

From my perspective, a taste of what is to come from the federal government. Maybe those millions and millions of green jobs will save us though? I’ve always wanted a windmill on top of my car.[/quote]

Real estate, financial holding firm, performance venue, coffee shop, restaurant.

I have a lot of experience in business.

I really don’t think that its the taxes that are keeping us down.
Just dropping taxes fixes little right now.
I do think there is a good argument for some deregulation of some industries but deregulation again does little just as a mindless mantra.

The neo-classical view that the economy always achieves the best when left alone flies in the face of reason and centuries of economic history. The credit freezes that riddle our history from 1800 to 1910 are testament to that. It makes more sense to say that sometimes the economy sucks and sometimes the government is in a position to help with that.

If you can’t run a business that succeeds, it is a weak argument to say that the government forced you into failure. It reminds me of Hillary (or John McCain or John Kerry or Al Gore) claiming that the media caused them to lose. If you can’t play, step back.

“The game is the game”
-Marlo Stanfield

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=luchabee]Real-estate right?

Ever tried running a small machine shop or done manufacturing, etc? You want to talk about regulation . . .

Obviously, many business owners in CA are not as nimble, as they are fleeing the state, closing shop, letting people go. My sister-in-law just got laid off from a small firm. Another family member of mine let his employees go, as the compliance and taxes didn’t warrant their continued employment and the burden managing them. Out in the I.E., we may approach a 20% real unemployment rate, but the CA legislature is doing nothing to promote growth. In fact, after the largest tax increase in history, they still want to increase taxes.

From my perspective, a taste of what is to come from the federal government. Maybe those millions and millions of green jobs will save us though? I’ve always wanted a windmill on top of my car.[/quote]

Real estate, financial holding firm, performance venue, coffee shop, restaurant.

I have a lot of experience in business.

I really don’t think that its the taxes that are keeping us down.
Just dropping taxes fixes little right now.
I do think there is a good argument for some deregulation of some industries but deregulation again does little just as a mindless mantra.

The neo-classical view that the economy always achieves the best when left alone flies in the face of reason and centuries of economic history. The credit freezes that riddle our history from 1800 to 1910 are testament to that. It makes more sense to say that sometimes the economy sucks and sometimes the government is in a position to help with that.

If you can’t run a business that succeeds, it is a weak argument to say that the government forced you into failure. It reminds me of Hillary (or John McCain or John Kerry or Al Gore) claiming that the media caused them to lose. If you can’t play, step back.

“The game is the game”
-Marlo Stanfield

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=luchabee]Likely, we will have a 15% unemployment rate in CA when all is said and done, if we are not already there. California is our test case for the US as a whole and our new regulatory, tax and spend state. The only thing keeping the federal government propped up is our ability to print and borrow money. This will stop soon, unfortunately.

Liberal policies are predicated on the idea that American businesses are what they once were, but with globalism, we really don’t have much anymore. So, like GM and California, liberals have killed our competitiveness and the nation as a whole is next. In sum, globalism would have turn us into England inevitably (no significant manufacturing base, etc.), but liberalism helped to get us there a whole lot quicker.

Likely, sdgirl, you have never employed anyone in CA or met a payroll . . . So you may have not thought about all the burdens to running a business in the US and CA under Democrat rule.[/quote]

I have.
Its not that tough.

It just requires that you be competitive and fork over the money for quickbooks and turbotax.

Most business owners who are complaining about how hard it is should go to some place like Europe or Japan where the gov’t subsidizes crappy companies as a matter of ongoing policy (rather than a special bailout). Weeding these pussies out is part of the reason that California’s economy can compete with most of Europe’s.

Also, being a Euro-style industrial or post-industrial nation is not such a terrible idea (though I would still prefer to live here).

Neither England (not a nation state by the way), nor Switzerland, nor Germany have particularly crappy standards of living.

It really is more complicated than taking Ayn Rand as gospel.

“We agree that the government that governs least governs best and by that measure we have built a great government in Iraq”
-Stephen Colbert

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=luchabee]Likely, we will have a 15% unemployment rate in CA when all is said and done, if we are not already there. California is our test case for the US as a whole and our new regulatory, tax and spend state. The only thing keeping the federal government propped up is our ability to print and borrow money. This will stop soon, unfortunately.

Liberal policies are predicated on the idea that American businesses are what they once were, but with globalism, we really don’t have much anymore. So, like GM and California, liberals have killed our competitiveness and the nation as a whole is next. In sum, globalism would have turn us into England inevitably (no significant manufacturing base, etc.), but liberalism helped to get us there a whole lot quicker.

Likely, sdgirl, you have never employed anyone in CA or met a payroll . . . So you may have not thought about all the burdens to running a business in the US and CA under Democrat rule.[/quote]

I have.
Its not that tough.

It just requires that you be competitive and fork over the money for quickbooks and turbotax.

Most business owners who are complaining about how hard it is should go to some place like Europe or Japan where the gov’t subsidizes crappy companies as a matter of ongoing policy (rather than a special bailout). Weeding these pussies out is part of the reason that California’s economy can compete with most of Europe’s.

Also, being a Euro-style industrial or post-industrial nation is not such a terrible idea (though I would still prefer to live here).

Neither England (not a nation state by the way), nor Switzerland, nor Germany have particularly crappy standards of living.

It really is more complicated than taking Ayn Rand as gospel.

“We agree that the government that governs least governs best and by that measure we have built a great government in Iraq”
-Stephen Colbert

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=luchabee]Likely, we will have a 15% unemployment rate in CA when all is said and done, if we are not already there. California is our test case for the US as a whole and our new regulatory, tax and spend state. The only thing keeping the federal government propped up is our ability to print and borrow money. This will stop soon, unfortunately.

Liberal policies are predicated on the idea that American businesses are what they once were, but with globalism, we really don’t have much anymore. So, like GM and California, liberals have killed our competitiveness and the nation as a whole is next. In sum, globalism would have turn us into England inevitably (no significant manufacturing base, etc.), but liberalism helped to get us there a whole lot quicker.

Likely, sdgirl, you have never employed anyone in CA or met a payroll . . . So you may have not thought about all the burdens to running a business in the US and CA under Democrat rule.[/quote]

I have.
Its not that tough.

It just requires that you be competitive and fork over the money for quickbooks and turbotax.

Most business owners who are complaining about how hard it is should go to some place like Europe or Japan where the gov’t subsidizes crappy companies as a matter of ongoing policy (rather than a special bailout). Weeding these pussies out is part of the reason that California’s economy can compete with most of Europe’s.

Also, being a Euro-style industrial or post-industrial nation is not such a terrible idea (though I would still prefer to live here).

Neither England (not a nation state by the way), nor Switzerland, nor Germany have particularly crappy standards of living.

It really is more complicated than taking Ayn Rand as gospel.

“We agree that the government that governs least governs best and by that measure we have built a great government in Iraq”
-Stephen Colbert

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=luchabee]Likely, we will have a 15% unemployment rate in CA when all is said and done, if we are not already there. California is our test case for the US as a whole and our new regulatory, tax and spend state. The only thing keeping the federal government propped up is our ability to print and borrow money. This will stop soon, unfortunately.

Liberal policies are predicated on the idea that American businesses are what they once were, but with globalism, we really don’t have much anymore. So, like GM and California, liberals have killed our competitiveness and the nation as a whole is next. In sum, globalism would have turn us into England inevitably (no significant manufacturing base, etc.), but liberalism helped to get us there a whole lot quicker.

Likely, sdgirl, you have never employed anyone in CA or met a payroll . . . So you may have not thought about all the burdens to running a business in the US and CA under Democrat rule.[/quote]

I have.
Its not that tough.

It just requires that you be competitive and fork over the money for quickbooks and turbotax.

Most business owners who are complaining about how hard it is should go to some place like Europe or Japan where the gov’t subsidizes crappy companies as a matter of ongoing policy (rather than a special bailout). Weeding these pussies out is part of the reason that California’s economy can compete with most of Europe’s.

Also, being a Euro-style industrial or post-industrial nation is not such a terrible idea (though I would still prefer to live here).

Neither England (not a nation state by the way), nor Switzerland, nor Germany have particularly crappy standards of living.

It really is more complicated than taking Ayn Rand as gospel.

“We agree that the government that governs least governs best and by that measure we have built a great government in Iraq”
-Stephen Colbert

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=luchabee]Likely, we will have a 15% unemployment rate in CA when all is said and done, if we are not already there. California is our test case for the US as a whole and our new regulatory, tax and spend state. The only thing keeping the federal government propped up is our ability to print and borrow money. This will stop soon, unfortunately.

Liberal policies are predicated on the idea that American businesses are what they once were, but with globalism, we really don’t have much anymore. So, like GM and California, liberals have killed our competitiveness and the nation as a whole is next. In sum, globalism would have turn us into England inevitably (no significant manufacturing base, etc.), but liberalism helped to get us there a whole lot quicker.

Likely, sdgirl, you have never employed anyone in CA or met a payroll . . . So you may have not thought about all the burdens to running a business in the US and CA under Democrat rule.[/quote]

I have.
Its not that tough.

It just requires that you be competitive and fork over the money for quickbooks and turbotax.

Most business owners who are complaining about how hard it is should go to some place like Europe or Japan where the gov’t subsidizes crappy companies as a matter of ongoing policy (rather than a special bailout). Weeding these pussies out is part of the reason that California’s economy can compete with most of Europe’s.

Also, being a Euro-style industrial or post-industrial nation is not such a terrible idea (though I would still prefer to live here).

Neither England (not a nation state by the way), nor Switzerland, nor Germany have particularly crappy standards of living.

It really is more complicated than taking Ayn Rand as gospel.

“We agree that the government that governs least governs best and by that measure we have built a great government in Iraq”
-Stephen Colbert

[urbanrealtor]

Well our current system of finance allows for some items to be immune to contracts of indebtedness.

Lots of retirement items are also immune from lawsuits.

Before that we had debtors prisons and credit crunches every 15 years that filled them up.

Question:
Would the debtors go better next to the illegal immigrants or the pot heads?

Another question:
Would allowing one to sell oneself into slavery be a road out of the debt mess?

So many wonderful ideas…

[urbanrealtor]

Well our current system of finance allows for some items to be immune to contracts of indebtedness.

Lots of retirement items are also immune from lawsuits.

Before that we had debtors prisons and credit crunches every 15 years that filled them up.

Question:
Would the debtors go better next to the illegal immigrants or the pot heads?

Another question:
Would allowing one to sell oneself into slavery be a road out of the debt mess?

So many wonderful ideas…

[urbanrealtor]

Well our current system of finance allows for some items to be immune to contracts of indebtedness.

Lots of retirement items are also immune from lawsuits.

Before that we had debtors prisons and credit crunches every 15 years that filled them up.

Question:
Would the debtors go better next to the illegal immigrants or the pot heads?

Another question:
Would allowing one to sell oneself into slavery be a road out of the debt mess?

So many wonderful ideas…

[urbanrealtor]

Well our current system of finance allows for some items to be immune to contracts of indebtedness.

Lots of retirement items are also immune from lawsuits.

Before that we had debtors prisons and credit crunches every 15 years that filled them up.

Question:
Would the debtors go better next to the illegal immigrants or the pot heads?

Another question:
Would allowing one to sell oneself into slavery be a road out of the debt mess?

So many wonderful ideas…

[urbanrealtor]

Well our current system of finance allows for some items to be immune to contracts of indebtedness.

Lots of retirement items are also immune from lawsuits.

Before that we had debtors prisons and credit crunches every 15 years that filled them up.

Question:
Would the debtors go better next to the illegal immigrants or the pot heads?

Another question:
Would allowing one to sell oneself into slavery be a road out of the debt mess?

So many wonderful ideas…

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=paramount]Even if Teachers total compensation is included, I think we all know where the money is going…

Honestly though, I don’t want to fight this battle, and I do think teachers deserve a good salary and benefits.

[/quote]
California is at 124.8% of average for teacher salaries.
http://www.aft.org/salary/2007/download/AFT2007SalarySurvey.pdf

California cost of living is 136.6% of average.
California cost of housing is at about 200% of average.
http://www.top50states.com/cost-of-living-by-state.html

This would suggest to me that they make comparatively less than most teachers nationally.

Would you disagree?

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=paramount]Even if Teachers total compensation is included, I think we all know where the money is going…

Honestly though, I don’t want to fight this battle, and I do think teachers deserve a good salary and benefits.

[/quote]
California is at 124.8% of average for teacher salaries.
http://www.aft.org/salary/2007/download/AFT2007SalarySurvey.pdf

California cost of living is 136.6% of average.
California cost of housing is at about 200% of average.
http://www.top50states.com/cost-of-living-by-state.html

This would suggest to me that they make comparatively less than most teachers nationally.

Would you disagree?

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=paramount]Even if Teachers total compensation is included, I think we all know where the money is going…

Honestly though, I don’t want to fight this battle, and I do think teachers deserve a good salary and benefits.

[/quote]
California is at 124.8% of average for teacher salaries.
http://www.aft.org/salary/2007/download/AFT2007SalarySurvey.pdf

California cost of living is 136.6% of average.
California cost of housing is at about 200% of average.
http://www.top50states.com/cost-of-living-by-state.html

This would suggest to me that they make comparatively less than most teachers nationally.

Would you disagree?

[Author]

Posts