Sex, Politics And Videotape

Gotta love it when those who made a career screwing the people of California find themselves occupying the other end of the phallus.

Humiliation for veteran politician, 70, as he is handed sex tape 'featuring wife 30 years his junior and lover she met in rehab'

Take a moment to gaze upon the loveliness of Nadia Lockyer (bow chika wow wow), currently serving as Alameda County Supervisor, and you'll know that this tape likely has the potential to sell an internet subscription or two.

According to a few reports, the life-long politician was attempting to use his influence on the local attorney general's office in an attempt to quash the leakage of his wife's extra-political affairs.

Since the action in the video is clearly voluntary, the man with the tape does indeed own the rights to it. Reportedly, the Top Cop of California politics is out of luck on this one.

Lockyer is a smarmy sort of guy, as anybody with a 40 years in statewide office can be. It wouldn't surprise me if he found way, crookedly... or even more crookedly than that... to put an end to this in his favor.

I'm hoping he fails.
I want this tape released in the interest of Free Speech and the Public's Right To Know.
He(and she)has earned every bit of it.

Crocodile Tears

Not sure, but I'm thinking California is making some positive history at the moment along the lines of governmental reform. Yeah, California has led the way on a lot reform type things, but as of late, not so much, that's why this latest event is newsworthy.

Some background...
California's constitution requires a balanced budget by a certain deadline every year. This would be June 15th.
It was a requirement without consequence. For the last 25yrs or so, the budget has only been on time once, and has been as much as six months late, or longer.
A 2/3 vote of both houses was always needed to pass a budget. This led to much of the lateness, as Republicans fought tax increases that the Democrats always insist are necessary to achieve balancing.
The Constitution also requires a 2/3 vote to raise taxes.
In the past, when ever the gimmicks and hat tricks ran out, there were always the 2-3required GOP votes, after much arm wrestling, to get the budgets passed/taxes increased. Generally, these were sacrificial lambs, those who were term-limited out of the voters wrath.

Some nearer background:
Last election cycle saw a proposition put before, and approved by, the voters, sponsored by liberal teet-sucker groups with the full support of the Democrat Party, that would allow a balanced budget with a simple majority vote. The hitch: if not met by the constitutional deadline, all legislators' pay and per diem would be forfeited. Not merely deferred.
The Democrats loved this proposition. Loved it hard. Now, by simple majority vote, they would be able to have their way without those pesky GOP guys throwing wrenches and demanding compromises.

Today: California faces a 9-point something billion dollar deficit. The GOP, powerless to have any say, stayed out of the budget process while the Governor (Brown, yeah... that Brown)begged and pleaded them to go along with additional tax increases while placing more tax increases on the ballot.

The GOP held firm, promising a only to place taxes on the ballot IF public employee pension reform was also on the ballot. (A large part of the state's budget woe results from unfunded pension obligations.) The Governor was unwilling to throw his benefactors under the bus, so we now have what we have.

At basically the midnight hour, June 15th, the Democrats passed a 'balanced budget' that included understated obligations, over-stated revenue sources and non-existent taxes and fees... cheering publicly that they had performed their duty and would be receiving their pay checks as scheduled.
The next day, Governor Brown vetoed the fairy tale budget calling it, basically... a fairy tale budget.

Last Monday...
State Treasurer John Chiang, the one who signs the paychecks, declared the budget null, in bad faith, and about $2 Billion out of balance. He also announced that the legislators had not met their obligation, and have forfeited all pay and per diem (somewhere around $400+ per day) until they do.

There was much wailing and gnashing of teeth before the cameras from the Democrats on California's Capital Hill.

I'm loving it.
Politicians who are not doing their job are not getting paid.
What's not to love?

The only improvement I'd like to offer: take all their pay,their jobs and including health and pension benefits. In short: terminate them. That's what would happen to me if I didn't do my job, wouldn't it?

(I expect our next Governor to be of Chinese decent, and named 'John')

Non-Sufficient 'Me'-ness

California has this Unclaimed Property Division. I'm sure you all know what that is. You know, the place where you go to find money you didn't know you had? Yeah.

They also have a website, where one can go to see if your name is on the list. I ran my name through the search, and found that I was owed about $400 from a finance company.
I last had any business with said company, HSBC, sometime in 2003, when I paid off a car loan. It looked like maybe I had gone a payment too far, so I applied for return my funds.

This included:
An official request form.
A notarized affidavit claiming that I was who I am.
Any document that contained my name and Social Security Number (like a pay stub, S.S. Card, etc.)
A photo-copy of a government issued photo I.D.

I gathered all this up, and sent it off to the State Controller's office for processing (which was stated that I should allow up to 180 days for anything to happen).

This was on February 7th of this year.

Last week I received a letter (dated August 3rd, just within the 180 window), denying my claim.

The reason: I must furnish documentation showing that I had an account, or did business with, the company (HSBC) that reported the unclaimed property.

Now I'm pissed off.
The State already knows that funds are owed to 'Me'.
They have advertised that fact publicly on their website.
In response, I have already sufficiently documented my 'me'-ness.
And why isn't the fact that HSBC, who held the funds for 'Me', under my name, before surrendering them to The State in my name proof enough that I had a relationship with them?

California has already been sued, and lost, in the courts over it's rather shady attempts to keep unclaimed assets for itself. The website is a result of one such lawsuit that claimed the State wasn't following the law in attempting to find the proper owners.
(Other suits have been to prevent the State from continuing it's overly aggressive attempts to seize inactive accounts and safe-deposit boxes.)

It looks like I may need to place a phone call to my local politician to see if he can cut some red tape for me.


(cross posted @ Grumpy Old Men)

The Evil Widescreen

The influential lobby group Consumer Electronics Assn. is fighting what appears to be a losing battle to dissuade California regulators from passing the nation's first ban on energy-hungry big-screen televisions.

California used to have a reputation for truly progressive policies. Policies that cast off the old way of East Coast thinking, and allowed the state to prosper for generations, serving as a magnet for migrants from every corner of the nation.
Sadly, it hasn't been that way for over a generation.

Now, what passes for 'new' thinking is just the same old nannyism, chasing dubious ideals with policies that have always failed in the past.

This latest in just another chapter in the screwing of California citizens, dressed in the same old lies:

"We would not propose TV efficiency standards if we thought there was any evidence in the record that they will hurt the economy," said Commissioner Julia Levin, who has been in charge of the two-year rule-making procedure. "This will actually save consumers money and help the California economy grow and create new clean, sustainable jobs."

(Exactly how banning certain televisions will increase jobs in California has not been explained, and needn't be, for the result will be the same, and the Starbucks/Wholefoods crowd just eats up mindless rhetoric like this.)

The claim is that we will be saving $30 per year in electricity savings for every television set. More bullshit. California already has the highest cost in the nation for consumer electricity rates. The state refuses to allow any more electricity generating plants to be built (it's been at least 30yrs since a new plant has come on-line), and keeps punishing the folks for using more electricity.

They look at past usage; before there were computers, Hi-Fi stereo, microwave ovens, and nice color televisions in every home, or in more than one room, and declare that we are wasteful and need reining in. Instead of allowing us to have the higher standard of living modern technology delivers, we lectured about not being 'green enough', while they raise the cost of electricity, and willfully contribute to it's scarcity.

And in the next breath claim to be on a mission to increase California living standards. The big surprise is that they haven't manage to drive us into Second World living conditions already, though they are working on it.

Oh, and that $30 we are supposed to be saving? It will likely just get taxed away through even higher costs per kilowatt, which never seems to stop increasing because... the more you cut back, the more they need to raise the rates to recoup
the profit they lost, or else we'll face blackouts when they shut down the power plants that can't make money.

It's the same thing with the water utility. When we have a drought, rates rise to spur conservation. When the drought eases, water rates rise again to build more increased reservoir capacity to hold all the extra water. It never ends...

Look at your own electric bill. Are you paying up to 30 cents per kWh? We are.

No Tears For The Clowns

It seems that California has a governor for the first time in years, but the state still teeters on the brink.

Q.If you purchased a bottle of 100% Pomegranate juice, what would you expect to find inside that bottle?
A. If answered in the most common sense manner, you are over qualified for success in California state politics.

Nothing really sums up the hows and whys quite like this article:
Budget Battle Devolves Into Food Fight

Assembly bill 606 creates a commission to serve the marketing interests of the blueberry industry. Another bill defines "honey" to mean the natural food product resulting from the harvest of nectar by honey bees, and a third bill adopts regulations establishing definitions and standards for 100-percent pomegranate juice.

and this:

Governor Schwarzenegger said he plans to invite Assembly Speaker Karen Bass back to the bargaining table, but the Speaker's office said no call had come by Tuesday night.

Bass boycotted the meeting of the "big 5" lawmakers because she says the governor is demanding reforms instead of focusing on the budget deficit.

To clarify: Bass walked out of negotiations because the only solutions she was willing to address were which taxes to raise. The Governor is proposing reforms that alter the structure of government in an attempt to get more from less while also eliminating overlapping agencies.

Meanwhile, the state has ruled that you can use an IOU from the state to pay the state money that you owe it. So, California is now effectively issuing scrip to cover the money it doesn't have. Not too unlike the Federal Reserve is doing.

My suggestion: print more scrip, and balance the budget with it.
Then the sky is the limit. Californians can have it all. Big governemnt. No taxes. Free health care.
Maybe we can even allow everybody to retire early at 90% pay, instead of just the public employees?

Terror Reigns In California

California's budget woes continue.

Last week, the Democrats sent a budget to the governor that was filled with more tax increases.
The governor, who finally bought himself a spine, vetoed the thing, with a statement along the lines of "Go to hell." Finally, he and I are seeing eye to eye.

As mentioned before, California requires a 2/3 vote of both houses to pass any tax increase, and unable to get the 3 or 4 GOP votes needed to go along, they tried something illegal:
First, they wrote a repeal of some taxes, and replaced them with other taxes in what was viewed as a revenue neutral adjustment to the tax code. This is legal according to the state constitution...
Then, they reinserted the repealed taxes, this time calling them 'fees', claiming this was legal since they didn't actually vote to raise new taxes.

They tried this move last winter and were challenged in court. Before the court could hear the case, the Governor, who was expected to sign the deal, vetoed it under threat of recall from the voters.

The games never stop here. Starting tomorrow, the state will have to issue IOUs in order to keep operating because, basically, we are out of cash, and nobody will buy the state's bonds anymore, or extend credit.

Recalls have already been started against a select few GOPers who provided the necessary votes to pass last winter's tax hikes, and a recall has already been started against the Governor for the same reason.

Ratcheting up the language, the Speaker of Assembly,Karen Bass has already issued a statement saying that those who sign recall petitions are 'terrorists' who are holding the entire state under threat of anarchic-style violence.
We'll see if she has the brass pair to back that kinda talk. I was among the first to sign the recall against the Governor last month, the first day the petition was approved.
They now have my name, address and intent. If they want me, they know where to find me.

In the mean time, it's gonna get even more interesting in California before it gets any better

At Least I'm Enjoying The Ride

It was national news last February when California instituted the largest tax increase in the history of any state, attempting to close a $42 billion budget shortfall.

It still wasn't enough, and we are now faced with an additional $24 billion shortfall.
The Democrats in Sacramento are vowing to raise taxes yet again, come hell or high water.

This was after the voters rejected a round of tax increases at the ballot box just a month ago.

It's unlikely that enough Republicans will go along this time in order to satisfy the 2/3 requirement for tax increases, but, we believed that last time. See what good it did us?

Gov. Schwartzenegger has vowed, in no uncertain terms, to veto any tax increase that comes before him. We believed that last time, as well.

The sooner this whole state goes to hell the better off we'll all be.

On a positive note:
Tonight, I blew past a highway cop at 85mph. It's about the only thing I like about living in California, and Riverside County, especially.

C.H.E.A.T.E.R.S.

It's always necessary to keep a sense of humor about things when The State is running on empty, and various jurisdictions attempt nearly anything to recapture what they think belongs to them.

And when talking about California, you'll need to double down on that sense.
Here's a new one:CHP encourages residents to report out-of-state license plates.

So it goes like this: Anybody relocating to California has twenty days to re-register their vehicle and pay the applicable property tax. It's always about the money,ain't it?

The 'plan' works this way: If I see a car with an out of state plate, I am to report the vehicle to the California Highway Patrol (CHP). The Law will investigate the report and attempt to bleed the offender of his money, and I get the warm fuzzies for performing my civic duty.

One problem with the idea: almost nobody from another state migrates to California anymore. And if they do, it's because of a major employment opportunity that pays big bucks.
In the by-gone era, folks came here to build a life. Not anymore.
Those who arrive today generally already have a life in bloom.
Of course, it's in the character of the state's ruling class to continually harass the achievers, while continuing to subsidize the underachievers.

They just don't get it. The best way to subsidize the lower end of the spectrum is to create an atmosphere that allows the upper end to do it for you.

Of course, I don't see the law agencies making a plea for the citizens to report all those wetbacks standing outside Home Depot who work for cash and don't pay their fair share of income and payroll taxes.

From where I sit, there is a whole lot more potential revenue to be found there, outside Home Depot, than there is in the rare professional who could just as easily be some where else.

I don't know.
Maybe I'll play along.
I'll just start reporting every foreign plate I see cruising the streets of Anaheim this tourist season. I'll concentrate near Disneyland.
And let the state agencies further drain their resources while chasing information and investigating whether these cars 'belong' to them or not.

In A Hole? Stop Digging

Many of the repos I scoped out last summer, before making an offer on my current home, are still on the market. And the banks are continuing to get stupid, rejecting offers for a matter of a few thousand dollars.

Example: my neighbor two doors down, was in trouble and tried to short-sale his home. On the market for six months, he finally got an offer for $259,000. The bank rejected the offer, and countered for $261,000. The buyer walked.
Unable to sell, and the bank unwilling to truly grasp the situation, the owner went repo. The house has been vacant for three months, asking price $235,000.
That's right.
After rejecting the offer, the bank now owns the house and is having tremendous difficulty selling for $24,000 cheaper than the offer they rejected.
Also, as the owner of the house, the bank is additionally liable for the property taxes and association fees that go with it. Every day they own it, they lose money, as taxes are prorated on a per day basis. Figure in the cost of the dude who shows up once a month to whack the weeds, and the liability insurance they are obligated for, and it all adds up to one very stupid bank.

But it's not just one bank. I hear similar stories from my neighbors almost weekly.
My neighbor, who didn't actually own the house, offered to buy it from the bank at market rate (about 60K more than it's current asking) prior to foreclosure. They wouldn't work with him. Flat out refused.

Now that all this stuff is cheap, many folks who were not able to buy at inflated prices can now afford to.
The problem is overly tight lending requirements. The banks got burned by overly loose requirements, and have overcompensated in the other direction.
It's just very difficult to get funding now. And FHA is not making it any easier. They've just upped the required down payment, squeezing even more people out of the market.

This has actually been going on this way for a while. Lenders are too skittish. I gave the escrow company $3000 to start the process last year. FHA came back at me, and wanted to know where I got $3000.
Huh?
Same job for 17yrs. They already knew my level of income, and my current rent payment. Was it really that unusual for a gainfully employed middle-aged guy who had zero credit cards, no dependents, and minimal expenditures to have a couple of months worth of rent languishing in a bank account for a rainy day?
To please them, I had to show my bank statements for a year, just so they could see how such a reasonable sum of cash was acquired.

If they would stop giving prospective customers a hard time, and start lending to people with a steady work history and a halfway decent credit score, most of these empty homes would have people in them by now.
These are very cheap prices considering the size of California wages. Any two-earner couple with average paying jobs can easily afford a home of their own. IF the lending was loosened up to reasonable standards.

But it seems the finance people are chasing away the smaller and reliable good money after playing fast and loose with the large and reckless bad money.
Meanwhile...
Repos stack up, further depressing the already below market cost of reselling them. And the longer the banks holds the properties, the more money they will continue to lose.
It's a vicious circle of their own making.

California: To Hell In A Bucket

This is my ex-neighbor's house.
Originally purchased, newly built, in February,2007
It went back on the market, as a repo, ten days ago.

Five bedrooms, 3 bath, 3490sf.
Original purchase price: $486,000
Current asking price: $218,000

Earlier phases of this development were sold for about $100,000 more than these before the market started to show signs of softening. Those are showing heavy rates of repo as well as these in my tract are.
Currently, out of twenty homes on my side of the block, fourteen have already been resold as repos, are currently bank owned, or are soon to be returned to the bank.

This is part of the problem in California's budget mess:
Anybody with a working brain could tell you that 15-25% yearly increases in home values was not a sustainable situation when you actually stop to figure in the types of lending practices that were driving the housing market.
In California, property taxes are based upon most recent selling price of the home, not current market value. The tax is equal to 1% of assessed value. Also, a home purchased for a higher price is entitled to a reassessment at lower values when the market takes a dip.
SO, everybody in my neighborhood just had their property taxes cut in half, or better.
Increases in assessed values cannot be recaptured at higher than 2% per year. At this rate, assuming these properties do not change hands, it will take 36 years before these homes can be taxed at their original selling price, and this process cannot even begin until overall property values begin to rise.

So, all those $500K homes are now being taxed as $250K homes (or less), resulting in tragic losses of projected income for the counties and the state who rely upon it.

With the economy basically in the shitter, and unemployment above 10% and climbing, there will be fewer people able to afford the inflated prices their mortgage reflects, and more overpriced homes will continue to flood the market.

California, being governed by the weakest and feeblest minds politics can buy, took advantage of the housing boom years, and all of the windfall tax revenue increases as nearly every pre-existing home was flipped at the ever increasing prices.
Yeppers, you guessed it: they inflated government spending, added new programs, and rewarded their political benefactors.
And they did it with orgasmic delight, never stopping to think that the party keg just might run dry.