3rdnlng Posted March 27, 2013 Posted March 27, 2013 When local California official Susan Muranishi retires from her job in a couple of years, she’s going to be walking away with a fat paycheck -- $423,664 a year – for the rest of her life. Muranishi, an Alameda County administrator, makes $301,000 in annual base pay. But in addition to that, the San Francisco Chronicle reports she'll also receive: $24,000 in “equity pay” to make sure she makes at least 10 percent more than anyone else in the county, even in retirement. An annual performance bonus of $24,000, even in retirement. Another $9,000 a year for serving on the county’s three-member Surplus Property Authority, even in retirement. $54,000 a year in “longevity” pay for having stayed with the county for more than 30 years, even in retirement. Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/03/26/alameda-county-administrator-to-get-423644-year-after-retirement/?intcmp=obnetwork#ixzz2OkCRJqjS
Dante Posted March 27, 2013 Posted March 27, 2013 Of course California, you know, being on the cutting edge of society and progressiveness, has a great idea that will help pay for such valuable productive individuals such as county administrators. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/03/27/should-government-tax-email/
Just Jack Posted March 27, 2013 Posted March 27, 2013 Of course California, you know, being on the cutting edge of society and progressiveness, has a great idea that will help pay for such valuable productive individuals such as county administrators. http://www.foxnews.c...ment-tax-email/ Yea, I'd like to see how they would enforce that. I imagine a lot of the tech companies with headquarters in CA would leave.
Chef Jim Posted March 27, 2013 Posted March 27, 2013 (edited) Of course California, you know, being on the cutting edge of society and progressiveness, has a great idea that will help pay for such valuable productive individuals such as county administrators. http://www.foxnews.c...ment-tax-email/ Berkeley City Councilman Gordon Wozniak brought up taxing emails during a recent council meeting. He suggested the money collected, which would be part of a wider-reaching Internet tax, could be used in Berkeley's case to save the local post office. I've got a better idea Wojohowitz. Why don't we tax the idiots that still use the post office to improve my internet speed. Huh, how about that?? That's makes about as much sense as taxing car tires in 1905 to save the local buggy whip factory. I can't tell you that last time I set foot in a post office or even mailed a letter from my home. WTF is wrong with these people?? Edited March 27, 2013 by Chef Jim
3rdnlng Posted March 27, 2013 Author Posted March 27, 2013 I've got a better idea Wojohowitz. Why don't we tax the idiots that still use the post office to improve my internet speed. Huh, how about that?? That's makes about as much sense as taxing car tires in 1905 to save the local buggy whip factory. I can't tell you that last time I set foot in a post office or even mailed a letter from my home. WTF is wrong with these people?? 15 or so years ago in a city I used to live they were having budget problems. One of the suggestions were for them to computerize the payroll department. (I was astounded that it hadn't already been done) A councilman scolded the speaker claiming that if payroll was computerized there would be a loss of jobs. F'n idiots are everywhere.
OCinBuffalo Posted March 27, 2013 Posted March 27, 2013 Of course California, you know, being on the cutting edge of society and progressiveness, has a great idea that will help pay for such valuable productive individuals such as county administrators. http://www.foxnews.c...ment-tax-email/ Yea, I'd like to see how they would enforce that. I imagine a lot of the tech companies with headquarters in CA would leave. Apparently this Cordell guy is ethier a giant moron, or is still happily running his Gateway 2000 from 1997. Perhaps it was possible back then, now? No friggin way. Not with the architectures in place already, never mind the ones that will be designed and deployed in response to this idiocy. But really? I'm starting to wonder if this nonsense, that comes up every time a new Democrat is elected, is just a put-up job. They know there's no way...but it makes them look good to the far left idiots who supported their campaign = "I'm gonna...innovatively...tax more things!". It costs them nothing to say this, and nobody remembers it 3 months later. But the far left gets its "2 weeks after the election, it's already happening...Hooray!" idiot bone.
Magox Posted March 27, 2013 Posted March 27, 2013 The Federal Communications Commission is eyeing a proposal to tax broadband Internet service. The move would funnel money to the Connect America Fund, a subsidy the agency created last year to expand Internet access. The FCC issued a request for comments on the proposal in April. Dozens of companies and trade associations have weighed in, but the issue has largely flown under the public's radar. Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/245479-fcc-eyes-tax-on-internet-service#ixzz2OmiAGYML
DC Tom Posted March 28, 2013 Posted March 28, 2013 Read more: http://thehill.com/b...e#ixzz2OmiAGYML A tax intended to expand its own tax base. Brilliant. But the FCC has long argued that Universal Service is a fee that the providers choose to pass on to consumers and not a tax That sounds strangely familiar...
GG Posted March 28, 2013 Posted March 28, 2013 Read more: http://thehill.com/b...e#ixzz2OmiAGYML This story is a year old, and the "tax" is one of the few things where the goals are usually fulfilled. This will replace the $5 phone bill charge that everyone now pays to offset the hogh cost of communications service in rural areas.
Doc Posted April 2, 2013 Posted April 2, 2013 In a similar vein, Stockton, CA is bankrupt thanks in large part ot unfunded pensions. Yet in their bankruptcy proceedings, the pensions can't be touched. Or at least, that's what pro-pensioners are trying to argue. The decision will come today, but I'm betting they still are left untouched.
3rdnlng Posted April 2, 2013 Author Posted April 2, 2013 In a similar vein, Stockton, CA is bankrupt thanks in large part ot unfunded pensions. Yet in their bankruptcy proceedings, the pensions can't be touched. Or at least, that's what pro-pensioners are trying to argue. The decision will come today, but I'm betting they still are left untouched. There's no way this crap is sustainable: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-01/police-chief-s-204-000-pension-shows-how-cities-crashed.html "Stockton, California, Police Chief Tom Morris was supposed to bring stability to law enforcement when he was appointed to the job four years ago. He lasted eight months and left the now-bankrupt city at age 52 with an annual pension that pays more than $204,000 -- the third of four chiefs who stayed in the position for less than three years and retired with an average of 92 percent of their final salaries."
Just Jack Posted April 2, 2013 Posted April 2, 2013 Around here the complaint is people "retiring" to collect their pension, then they get a similar job to collect a salary also. Here's one example.... http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2013/03/donald_morris_triple_dip_pensi.html
Chef Jim Posted April 2, 2013 Posted April 2, 2013 Around here the complaint is people "retiring" to collect their pension, then they get a similar job to collect a salary also. Here's one example.... http://www.syracuse...._dip_pensi.html But try, as a financial advisor, to collect a commission and a fee and FINRA hangs you from the flag pole, as they should.
KD in CA Posted April 2, 2013 Posted April 2, 2013 There's no way this crap is sustainable: http://www.bloomberg...es-crashed.html "Stockton, California, Police Chief Tom Morris was supposed to bring stability to law enforcement when he was appointed to the job four years ago. He lasted eight months and left the now-bankrupt city at age 52 with an annual pension that pays more than $204,000 -- the third of four chiefs who stayed in the position for less than three years and retired with an average of 92 percent of their final salaries." Just stop your war on poor people. If it wasn't for unions, the evil corporations would make everyone eat dog food. The CEO of XYZ Corp made $10MM last year, so we can certainly afford to give a guy a $200,000 lifetime pension for 8 months of work.
Recommended Posts