Victory For California !!! (Davis, Arnold: high school, tax, costs)

[nmnita]

Originally Posted by Donna7

Have them come to Ohio as it is now officially a red state. I've been wanting to relocate back to CA for a while now. We'll see how long they last in this God-forsaken state, NE OH especially. Let them come to the Rust Belt which has been losing jobs since the mid 70's. Let them live with people who pronounce "warsh" for "wash". We won't even get into the weather/climate as it is what it is and politics will not change it.

Personally, I think these Facebook people who are threatening to leave CA because Brown has been elected governor are full of hot air. I'd like to say that they're full of something else, but then I might get a warning from the moderator. Excuse my rant.

Have a good day.

just like Alex Baldwin promised to leave America if Bush was elected.

As for warsh and wash, my parents spent most of their lives in Ca (never lived in the midwest) and mom called it a warsh rag instead of a wash cloth. You need to get out more and see how people refer to various items. It might bug you, but it isn't all that unusual. In Texas people do not can their fruits and veggies in the summer, they put them up. The rest of us put them up too, but after we have canned them. Don't be so judgemental about how people in regions talk.
Nita

[Fontucky]

Originally Posted by Footballfreak

My dumbass conservative "friends" on Facebook are having a heart attack over Brown and they are threatning to leave the state! Good let them! More California for the rest of us

If I wasn't so busy running this place, I'd research your past posts and find the one where you explained why you had decided to vote for Meg.

[TimC2462]

Originally Posted by EscapeCalifornia

Exactly. AB32 is a license to tax or ban nearly everything since just about all all economic activity and all animal life produces CO2.

I better not fart, or some state officials will tax me.

[mommabear2]

Originally Posted by Searcher521

It was explained to me that Brown's victory is good for California because it will help reach the economic bottom faster so that the state can get to work on the painful tasks associated with recovery. It is not going to be a picnic.

Sadly, I agree with that assessment.

[mommabear2]

Originally Posted by JohnG72

First of all, someone please point me to the specifics where Arnold COULD have done something and failed to do so. I'm all ears. No vague posting either. Specifics. And it has to be a situation where the dem's in the legislature would not have insta blocked the idea.

Second, there are no excuses for the dems. This is the second go round....remember that the first resulted in their governor being recalled? Well in their infinite wisdom, the voters of california not only saw fit to elect democrats to the governors office, and majority to the assembly and house, but also to change the required vote to pass a budget from 2/3'rds to a simple majority and also to hand the gerrymandering reins over to the dems as well. So no excuses. Dems control all aspects of state government and are fully responsible for the next four years. Plenty of time to fix any problems, plenty of time to correct the direction of the state.

FWIW, the dems will do none of the following, but the following would correct most of the states problems in a four year period:

1.) Make California more business friendly. Remove restrictive legislation and fees and compliances to bring California into line with more business friendly states like Arizona and Texas.

2.) Reduce business and income tax on the middle class and wealthy. The poor don't pay income tax so thats always a huge red herring thrown up to make dems seem "fair". If you don't believe me, go look at California's tax tables. The only poor people that pay income tax are single working people, and its not much.

3.) Change treatment for drug addicts. Eliminate state prison as a sentencing option for drug possession crimes, even chronic ones.

4.) No pay raises for ANYONE employed by the state for the next 4 years.

5.) Make the assembly and legislature part time positions that meet for 3 months total a year. Reduce expenditures accordingly.

6.) Cap the amount of money a school district can spend on administrative costs.

Anyway, point being that the states problems CAN be fixed, but even holding all power, the dems will not do it.

Another BTW....those making $60K+ as single and ~$90K+ as a family, look forward to being considered "rich" for tax purposes.

Wow, amazing. Someone with intellect and economic sense. You must not be from around here... definitely not a not an LA native... no?

[nighthouse66]

Originally Posted by CALGUY

The problem is, they are not fined nearly enough, and jail time is a joke.
Give them some REAL time for breaking the law and see how they are when released.
By real time Iam talking two years for a first offense.
That will most definetely cut down on it's illegal use.
Damm good thing for pot smokers that I am not the one pulling the strings , because they would all be doing some serious jail time.
Until the time comes when it would be legal to smoke it (and I don't think it ever will be), it is against established law, and laws are meant to be enforced.
The social problems in this country are all a derritive of mamby pamby law ecforcement, and courtroom liberalism.
Using MJ is considered a victimless crime.
Tell that to someone who's loved one was mowed down by some jerk high on weed while behind the wheel.
It IS NOT a victimless crime, and should be treated as the serious crime it is.
Smoking it in the privacy of one's house is understandable IF, the person smoking remainded there until the high wore off, but too many times those using it are out in the public domain where they create the problems.
I for one am extremely pleased the measure was defeated.
Bob.

ok, dwight schrute. so, exactly what evidence are you presenting that marijuana is not a victimless crime?
by the very same criteria that you demonize weed, you should also be for making alcohol illegal. you are aware of these facts? a 1992 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration review of the role of drug use in fatal accidents reported, “There was no indication that cannabis itself was a cause of fatal crashes” among drivers who tested positive for the presence of the drug.22 A more recent assessment by Blows and colleagues noted that self-reported recent use of cannabis (within three hours of driving) was not significantly associated with car crash injury after investigators controlled for specific cofounders (e.g., seat-belt use, sleepiness, etc.
alcohol on the other hand, well, i don't need to share thos statistics with you, do i?
i doubt very much that cold hard facts will change your mind. but have you considered the rationality of locking people up for smoking something that grows naturally, to clog our prisons and waste taxpayer's money- when cops should be out gathering up real criminals like child molesters? are you saying that an already inundated system should concern itself with a petty weed smoker, at the expense and good sense of longer sentences for violent criminals? it appears that you are.

i also think you are confusing laws and morality. its illegal in carmel california for a woman to wear high heels in town. it was illegal for years in the south (where i am from) for mixed couples to marry. triumphing the law can not only sometimes be misguided but it can often be IMMORAL. laws are not meant to be our moral compass, but an outgrowth of common sense and morality. sometimes the laws are obviously wrong. to go back to the days of "reefer madness" makes absolutely no sense, on any level, and luckily, you are a very, very small minority. good luck with your ideas though.

[CALGUY]

Originally Posted by nighthouse66

ok, dwight schrute. so, exactly what evidence are you presenting that marijuana is not a victimless crime?
by the very same criteria that you demonize weed, you should also be for making alcohol illegal. you are aware of these facts? a 1992 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration review of the role of drug use in fatal accidents reported, “There was no indication that cannabis itself was a cause of fatal crashes” among drivers who tested positive for the presence of the drug.22 A more recent assessment by Blows and colleagues noted that self-reported recent use of cannabis (within three hours of driving) was not significantly associated with car crash injury after investigators controlled for specific cofounders (e.g., seat-belt use, sleepiness, etc.
alcohol on the other hand, well, i don't need to share thos statistics with you, do i?
i doubt very much that cold hard facts will change your mind. but have you considered the rationality of locking people up for smoking something that grows naturally, to clog our prisons and waste taxpayer's money- when cops should be out gathering up real criminals like child molesters? are you saying that an already inundated system should concern itself with a petty weed smoker, at the expense and good sense of longer sentences for violent criminals? it appears that you are.

i also think you are confusing laws and morality. its illegal in carmel california for a woman to wear high heels in town. it was illegal for years in the south (where i am from) for mixed couples to marry. triumphing the law can not only sometimes be misguided but it can often be IMMORAL. laws are not meant to be our moral compass, but an outgrowth of common sense and morality. sometimes the laws are obviously wrong. to go back to the days of "reefer madness" makes absolutely no sense, on any level, and luckily, you are a very, very small minority. good luck with your ideas though.

Instead of all the rant you posted, my question is, "What part of the word illegal do you not understand?
Bob.

[Cyanna]

Originally Posted by Inter441

Brown is back !! Clown Arnold Schwarzenegger is out . No republican hell yeah !! Californians good job on saying no to legalizing marijuana

Is anyone on this board even old enough to remember the last time Brown was Governor, and the mess he made of things? Not only is he a joke, albeit a very dangerous one, but he is also a kook! The only people who are going to benefit from having this man in office again are the lazy scroungers and the illegals.

[415_s2k]

Originally Posted by Footballfreak

My dumbass conservative "friends" on Facebook are having a heart attack over Brown and they are threatning to leave the state! Good let them! More California for the rest of us

I always like it when people chime in with that...

If you can find a job in your career path that pays enough for you to survive in another part of the US and hate CA, then why stay? We could stand to lose a few people, you know...?

[415_s2k]

Originally Posted by Cyanna

Is anyone on this board even old enough to remember the last time Brown was Governor, and the mess he made of things? Not only is he a joke, albeit a very dangerous one, but he is also a kook! The only people who are going to benefit from having this man in office again are the lazy scroungers and the illegals.

It was any different under Arnold