Previous 31 - 40 Next
Intentions mean nothing. Every politician says they want to help the poor. It's what programs they advocate that set them apart. If a program is based on a principle like taking some people's property and giving it to other people based on need then over time such programs lead to failure as the people being looted are either impoverished themselves or leave the area where looting is possible, leaving "the poor" as the only people living there (see Detroit). A reason for high rents and high property costs in NY is rent control. A reason for landlords burning buildings to collect on insurance because of no incentive to repair or maintain the building can be rent control. The intent there was to help people live in NY with lower rent, so inequities like one apartment renting for $600 a month under rent control being located in the same building with an apartment renting for $3000 because it's not rent controlled. Unintended consequences? Sitting down and discussing basic principles usually leads to clarity about what a politician really believes. DeBlasio clearly believes govt has the "right" (not just the power) to redistribute money from those he considers "rich" to those he considers "poor." If a reform agenda is based on that basic principle, then those who believe people have a right to keep what they earn and manage their property outside of govt-dictated rent are probably not going to reach much of an agreement. Kind of like a private property advocate debating with bureaucrats in the former Soviet Union.
In response to:

BART, Shutdown: Waiting for the Apocalypses

Dot462 Wrote: Oct 17, 2013 10:18 PM
You can look up BART salaries on a website. Just Google BART salaries. You might be amazed. It's ridiculous that these people don't have to make any contributions to health costs. A 3% raise each year for three years is higher than most people are getting. This is what caused Detroit to go bankrupt. Unsustainable pensions, ridiculous wages, paralyzing union rules, corruption, bribery, who knows what. The union is yelling that the 3% raise won't cover the contributions to pension and health, but a lot of people elsewhere get NOTHING as a raise and are glad to have a job. I know it's expensive to live in the Bay Area. I lived there up until 1995 and then found that I would have had to almost double my salary in order to continue to live there (husband became disabled), so I moved to Nevada and never regretted it. It's expensive in the Bay Area so salaries generally reflect that (note the high minimum wage in S.F.), but if you can't afford to live there while working for BART, perhaps you aren't managing your money very well. Somebody has to pay for higher BART prices. Even though some people think a business can run at a loss, eventually it can't, so paying employees higher than is justified just won't work. But, I guess we'll just have to see whether it's possible to antagonize even Bay Area residents against a union.
In response to:

Weaker by the Week

Dot462 Wrote: Oct 17, 2013 10:04 PM
Maybe we're at the point where the country has to learn what doesn't work by experimenting with European style welfare statism. The Europeans are turning away from it because it is bankrupting them, but we're not there yet. So, maybe we have to allow the Dems to have enough rope to hang themselves. Obamacare helps because it may fail. Expansion of eligibility for govt handouts such as SNAP and SS disability will accelerate the huge debt that we already have. By the time Obama leaves office, the debt may be $21 trillion. People haven't learned that debt can't be run up forever with no consequences and they may have to learn it through pain and suffering. The Repubs (old guard) labeled Ron Paul a nutjob, but he was telling the economic truth. A few in the Repubs (Rand Paul and some others) are carrying on with the message about the debt, but they're already starting to be labeled nutjobs and by their own party members (e.g. John McCain). The Repubs can't do anything if they are no different than Dems. They're seen as stubborn, recalcitrant whereas Obama is seen as statesmanlike and reasoned (this is the media spin on it). I guess you're right, Mike, that the Repubs don't have a good PR guy.
There's nothing secret about this new bubble. Thanks for pointing it out again and for the references. I own a condo that went from $179K in 2005 to $77K in 2008 to comps of $23K in January to $49K in July. Whoa! Bubble? Sure. There are only three condos for sale in the building when six years ago there were 15 (roughly). I think if I wait a few months I might make a profit on this thing. Shortage of condos and houses available.
In response to:

Why Miley Cyrus Matters

Dot462 Wrote: Sep 06, 2013 9:46 PM
Too bad this Cyrus girl is getting so much attention. She's on the way on the track of several young performers such as Lindsay Lohan -- DUIs, drug overdoses, arrests, eventual death. She's a pretty girl right now, but it won't last. Self-destructive behavior usually succeeds.
In response to:

Serious About Syria?

Dot462 Wrote: Sep 04, 2013 8:41 PM
As usual, Dr. Sowell has it all. Too bad Obama doesn't consult Dr. Sowell, but of course he couldn't do that. After all, Dr. Sowell is considered an Uncle Tom (ha, ha). No, Obama couldn't consult with a black man from the dark side of libertarianism. After all, Dr. Sowell rejected Marxism, which Obama has yet to do.
In response to:

Bit by Bit Strategy

Dot462 Wrote: Jun 27, 2013 1:10 PM
TeaPartyJones can label Dr. Williams a "simpleton," but that doesn't make it so. It's true that the article could be condensed, but most people don't find "incrementalism" obvious and it's easy to forget the method over time. People need reminders of what has been foisted upon us in the past one step at a time.
I'm sure the marriages between homosexuals will be as successful as marriages between heterosexuals. A lot of marriages (more than half) go on the rocks, causing battles over custody (of pets and children), money, property. Maybe the homosexuals think they will be more successful at marriage. My bet would be that they will be wrong.
Good evidence for the need for guns in the hands not only of regular police but citizens with training and carry permits. They waited 20 MINUTES for somebody armed to show up? How ridiculous. The U.K. reaps what they sowed with the policy of banning guns.
In response to:

Fact-Free Crusades

Dot462 Wrote: Apr 16, 2013 5:37 PM
What is surprising is nobody calling for the control of knives after that person stabbed a bunch of people. One of the victims said if he could have carried a gun on the college campus (he had a CCW permit), that he would have put a stop to the knifings. Unfortunately, a bill died in the Nevada legislature that would have allowed people with CCW to carry on the college campuses. Too bad. We need trained people with guns to have their guns available to counter people who want to shoot up a bunch of people. It looks like there's hope that nothing will get through the U.S. Congress, which is better than a piece of legislation that is a hodgepodge of attempts to regulate guns.
I have yet to hear from a sane govt official from SF. This DA is supposed to be protecting law-abiding citizens from people who break the law, cause accidents, behave illegally. I moved out of SF 35 years ago, moved out of CA 17 years ago and never regretted it. There's something wrong with many of the people in SF. What should happen is all the weirdos, illegals, socialists, communists, anarchists should find SF so favorable to them that they all move there, leaving the rest of the country to the sane people.
Previous 31 - 40 Next