nancynall.com » Culling the bookmarks. Again.

Culling the bookmarks. Again.

I need some new idiots. Allow me to explain.

A while back I opened a new book­mark sub-folder for blogs. Called it “idiots.” It was use­ful in that it reminded me not to take the con­tents within seri­ously. I had a strict set of stan­dards: The idiots had to be fun idiots, not depress­ing ones. I wasn’t inter­ested in screech­ers, unless they were amus­ing, campy screech­ers. I started with seven or eight idiots, and one by one they have dis­ap­pointed me and I deleted them from the feeds. I’m down to four. Four can’t sus­tain a coffee-break web-surf, although god knows, Rod Dreher tries. But even he has backed down on the enter­tain­ing hand-wringing hys­te­ria of last fall, when the Wall Street melt­down had him run­ning to Costco for 25-pound bags of rice and fret­ting how unpre­pared we were for food riots. Now he’s back to wearily shak­ing his head and dis­ap­prov­ing of his fel­low con­ser­v­a­tives. If he can’t find a slut to kick around soon, I may be drop­ping him, too. Even Lileks is a bore these days, although it’s amus­ing to see how capa­bly he’s motor­ing through the finan­cial cri­sis at his news­pa­per, keep­ing his sunny side up, up. He’s made him­self a TV star, he’s back to fil­ing point­less columns about his dif­fi­cul­ties with cus­tomer ser­vice, he’s — ohmigosh — “fisk­ing” George Will for two mil­lion words. You need a fresher schtick to stay in my idiots folder.

So send me some idiots to check out. No, on sec­ond thought, don’t. If I relent­lessly culled all my book­marks down to the ones I actu­ally visit, I’d be down to the Lol­cats, Gawker, Jezebel, Roger Ebert and a hand­ful of oth­ers, and I prob­a­bly should. Cull, that is. I have enough ways to be dis­tracted while work­ing. And at the moment, I have enough work I don’t need the dis­trac­tions. And Roy still does an excel­lent job as sort of an Idiot’s Digest.

Also, I have some fic­tion ideas I’d like to explore this sum­mer, although I know I’ve said that before.

Besides, it’s time I spent more time in the ana­log world, and maybe admit­ting I can’t read the entire Inter­net every day is a good start. This, for exam­ple, was pub­lished in Jan­u­ary, and I had to learn about it from freakin’ Face­book on Mon­day.

Also, I don’t want to end up like Kevin Smith:

As you men­tioned, Zack and Miri didn’t do as well as expected. How did you take that?
I kind of dropped out of soci­ety. I just kind of wrapped myself in a weed-infused cocoon … a coma, if you will. And it was great. It was really, really won­der­ful, man. I don’t want to be one of those peo­ple who’s all, “Let me tell you about legal­iza­tion!” But, my God, I don’t think I’ve ever been hap­pier in my life. And after years and years of … you know, I used to lit­er­ally fight with peo­ple online. I would waste days online, talk­ing to total strangers, some of them prob­a­bly chil­dren. I was a joke.

Don’t become a joke: New motto.

Blog­gage:

The line in Obama’s Correspondent’s Din­ner rou­tine that made me laugh loud­est was the poke he took at Michael Steele — in the heezy, yo! Dana Mil­bank, not so funny, but an amus­ing wrapup of the GOP’s gaffe-a-palooza.

Speak­ing of Roy, he has an amuse bouche up now, about reac­tion to Ted Kennedy’s improved health. A few of the usual bit­ingly funny lines are therein.

Admit it: The guy who res­cued the wee duck­lings is your new hero. And yes, I know there are those who say the duck­lings would have been fine with­out the res­cue, but we wouldn’t have the cute video, oth­er­wise.

And now I’m going to make some calls, then go ride my bike for a long time. I plan to pass by an open field near the Milk River, where there will be crowds of Canada geese goslings (Canada goslings?). They will be nearly as cute as the ducks, but their par­ents are big­ger and meaner. I won’t pass too close.

42 responses to
“Culling the bookmarks. Again.”

  1. jeff borden said on May 20th, 2009 at 10:10 am

    I have found Andrew Breitbart’s blog “Big Hol­ly­wood” my favorite looney tunes bat­shit insane blog. Peo­pled with angry, bit­ter wannabes and nev­er­wases, each day these silly lit­tle peo­ple parse the out­put of Hol­ly­wood for lib­eral bias if they are not earnestly dis­cussing the deeply con­ser­v­a­tive ideas inform­ing “Trans­form­ers.”

    What they know of the busi­ness of enter­tain­ment would fit neatly under a penny with plenty of room left over for Jonah Goldberg’s world view. And the jeal­ousy towards those who have eclipsed them in every way except resent­ment oozes from the screen of my lap­top.

    It’s a hoot.

  2. coozledad said on May 20th, 2009 at 10:23 am

    Read­ing con­ser­v­a­tive blogs reminds me that in some ways, Lacan had a point. After awhile, the phal­lo­cen­tric con­structs start to merge together so you almost can’t tell which screw­ball is run­ning with the talk­ing points. Unless it’s Jeff Gold­stein, who always writes like a self-conscious under­fucked under­grad­u­ate.
    Even read­ing the stuff through a digest, like Roy’s, makes me want to wear a beret and and a striped shirt and learn French.

  3. Dorothy said on May 20th, 2009 at 10:28 am

    I don’t knit, but I cro­chet. And I’ve tried to learn to knit. But I’m too slow at it. That does not pre­vent me from enjoy­ing Stephanie Pearl-McPhee’s blog, though: http://​www​.yarn​har​lot​.ca/blog/ She’s a fab­u­lous knit­ter.

    I can’t recall if we’ve dis­cussed her on here before, but she is a very good writer, and even if she’s just talk­ing about some­thing she’s knit­ted, she’s enter­tain­ing as hell. Scroll down on that page and just read the May 15 entry called “In which I try not to com­plain.” I’m sure you all know she cre­ated the word “Kin­n­ear­ing”, right?? http://​telegraphjour​nal​.canadaeast​.com/​r​s​s​/​a​r​t​i​c​l​e​/​601590

  4. Danny said on May 20th, 2009 at 11:23 am

    Cal­i­for­ni­ans staged a real tea party yes­ter­day in the spe­cial elec­tion. Let the belt tight­en­ing begin.

  5. jeff borden said on May 20th, 2009 at 11:28 am

    Cal­i­for­nia is going to be the first state to default. This is not very good news for any­one and will have a rip­ple effect that is going to touch the other 49 states as the costs of bor­row­ing will sky­rocket. The anti-tax loons in the Golden State will get their Armaged­don, but we’ll all wind up pay­ing for it.

    Who knew Howard Jarvis would set the state on this path 25 years ago?

  6. coozledad said on May 20th, 2009 at 11:29 am

    The Fol­som Street Fair was yes­ter­day?

  7. Danny said on May 20th, 2009 at 11:38 am

    Ha, anti-tax loons.

    Jeff, we pay some of the high­est taxes in the coun­try here in CA. So no, the rea­son we have a bud­get cri­sis is that we have had a group of unrea­son­able and inef­fec­tive leg­is­la­tors who have not been will­ing or able to do their jobs. And this has gone on for decades.

  8. jeff borden said on May 20th, 2009 at 11:57 am

    Danny,

    I live in Cook County, Illi­nois. We have the high­est tax rate in the coun­try, bar none, higher than New York City or San Fran­cisco or Hon­olulu. It’s also likely the most cor­rupt county in urban Amer­ica. Believe me, I know taxes and cor­rup­tion and inep­ti­tude and iner­tia. Like any sen­tient human, I hate waste and mal-, mis- and non-feasance, but I also con­cur with Oliver Wen­dell Holmes, who said pay­ing taxes was his down­pay­ment on civ­i­liza­tion.

    I’m no expert on Cal­i­for­nia pol­i­tics, but isn’t it true that a very, very small num­ber of politi­cians in Sacra­mento can pre­vent action from being taken by the vast major­ity? What I have read sug­gests there are a hand­ful of Grover Norquist-worshipping rightwingers whose intran­si­gence has brought the Golden State to the tip­ping point.

    Again, you can cite chap­ter and verse on waste in Cal­i­for­nia. But there is a very real like­li­hood the state will crash and burn finan­cially, and that will be felt by all of us. Mean­while, I’m read­ing about poten­tially mas­sive lay­offs of teach­ers, police, high­way work­ers, health agency staffers, etc. at a time when the national econ­omy is still wheez­ing.

    Is it really pos­si­ble Cal­i­for­nia can cut enough to cover that mas­sive deficit?

  9. Sue said on May 20th, 2009 at 12:14 pm

    I don’t read idiot blogs but I appre­ci­ate those who blog about them for my amuse­ment.
    I can rec­om­mend a non-idiot blog: http://​sub​ur​bankamikaze​.com/
    It’s funny and well writ­ten; not sur­pris­ingly, she’s a jour­nal­ist. And on the same wave­length as Nancy, appar­ently; Sun­day she wrote about credit cards.
    Not sure if SK is for you? Con­sider, as an exam­ple of excel­lent writ­ing from a won­der­fully twisted mind, rea­son num­ber 9 in the clas­sic “25 Rea­sons Why You May Not Reach Your Sil­ver Anniver­sary (http://​www​.sub​ur​bankamikaze​.com/​s​u​b​u​r​b​a​n​_​k​a​m​i​k​a​z​e​/​2​0​0​7​/​0​9​/​2​5​-​r​e​a​s​o​n​s​-​w​h​y​-.html):
    “PMS coin­cides with Williams-Sonoma cut­lery sale at least twice a year.”
    I under­stood that one com­pletely. Unfor­tu­nately, so did my hus­band.

  10. Danny said on May 20th, 2009 at 12:19 pm

    I’m always skep­ti­cal of the teach­ers, police and fire fight­ers being cut. They usu­ally float this out every year, pre­sum­ably as a scare tac­tic to get a bond mea­sure to pass or some­thing of the like.

    Cuts are inevitable, but an alter­nate to cuts would be a rene­go­ti­a­tion of salaries, pen­sions and ben­e­fits. It’s hap­pen­ing to every­one in the pri­vate sec­tor, so it makes lit­tle sense that the pub­lic sec­tor should be immune.

    Regard­ing cuts, I’ve been search­ing for the story, but unable to find it. Any­way, the gist of it was that CA has added an aver­age of 40 plus employ­ees per day for some­thing like the last 15 years. And the stan­dard devi­a­tion wasn’t high, so this increase has been steady even in so-called bud­get cri­sis years. So a lot of cry­ing of wolf has been going on for too long. Now the wolf (or bear, as it relates to the econ­omy and CA) is really here and they need to make up for lost time.

  11. kayak woman said on May 20th, 2009 at 12:42 pm

    That duck res­cue story is really cute but it is a year or so old. It went around last sum­mer too.

  12. jeff borden said on May 20th, 2009 at 12:46 pm

    Inter­est­ing.

    Illi­nois also is con­fronting a siz­able bud­get gap, but noth­ing on the level of Cal­i­for­nia. Most of this is due to the very pre­dictable growth in pen­sions and enti­tle­ments, lead­ing our new reformist gov­er­nor to sug­gest an increase in the state income tax. I would not oppose such a tax because I tend to view income taxes as fairer than, say, sales or prop­erty tax hikes, which dis­pro­por­tion­ately hit the poor and those on fixed incomes.

    Chicago deals with its bud­get woes by sell­ing off munic­i­pal ser­vices to pri­vate ven­dors in the name of both effi­ciency and rev­enue gen­er­a­tion. This some­times works well –the leas­ing of a poorly used toll road called the Chicago Sky­way was a grand slam– but not always as the deba­cle of our pri­va­ti­za­tion of park­ing meters under­scores. Part of me sees value in pri­va­ti­za­tion, but other parts of me seethe with anger that assets bought and paid for with tax­payer dol­lars are now con­trolled by pri­vate enti­ties. The city also keeps find­ing new ways to screw us over with red light cam­eras and teams of “traf­fic aides,” who swarm the res­i­den­tial neigh­bor­hoods look­ing for cars with out­dated city per­mits and the like. Plus, all you need now is two or three park­ing tick­ets to get the Den­ver boot.

    I’m not sure I wouldn’t rather pay a higher tax than be nib­bled to death by these ever-increasing fees.

  13. Danny said on May 20th, 2009 at 1:10 pm

    Jeff, here is a link to the vot­ing results. It looks like all of the 5 tax increase pro­pos­als were rejected by a mar­gin of around 30% (~35% YES, ~65% NO). The last mea­sure which was to limit elected offi­cial salary increases in years of bud­get deficits passed by a mar­gin of almost 50% (~74% YES, ~26% NO). Wow, what a land­slide. Exit polls indi­cated that the mar­gins were large across almost all vot­ing demo­graph­ics.

    yeah, I’m with you on the nib­bling part, but I really tend not to like pri­va­ti­za­tion of roads.

  14. Catherine said on May 20th, 2009 at 1:27 pm

    Jeff B asks: Who knew Howard Jarvis would set the state on this path 25 years ago?

    Um, every­one I know.

    Wish I could find the cita­tion, but any­way: there’s inter­est­ing analy­sis of CA fund­ing for pub­lic edu­ca­tion. Dollar-wise, it looks like a big num­ber, but percentage-wise, it has for decades been among the low­est. Pretty nicely cor­re­lated with the state’s NAEP results (44 states higher than CA in math, 6 states lower — yay, we’re not Mis­sis­sippi!). So, let’s not blame edu­ca­tion for CA’s bud­get prob­lems.

  15. Dorothy said on May 20th, 2009 at 1:39 pm

    Hey my cousin won in Penn­syl­va­nia yes­ter­day! He’s Kevin McCarthy in this arti­cle:

    http://​www​.post​-gazette​.com/​p​g​/​0​9​1​4​0​/​9​7​1​3​5​9​-​1​78.stm

  16. Danny said on May 20th, 2009 at 2:00 pm

    Cather­ine, this arti­cle says that advo­cates of increased edu­ca­tion spend­ing often site the con­tro­ver­sial 46th in nation (spend­ing per stu­dent) fig­ure, but that the fed­eral gov­ern­ment fig­ures it based upon the national teach­ers’ union and ranks Cal­i­for­nia as 29th in per stu­dent spend­ing. And spend­ing is NOT the whole story on per­for­mance. A very large ille­gal immi­grant pop­u­la­tion bur­dens the sys­tem with non-english speak­ing stu­dents who have around a 50% dropout rate. That is a big fac­tor in per­for­mance sta­tis­tics.

  17. brian stouder said on May 20th, 2009 at 2:18 pm

    Dorothy – con­grat­u­la­tions to your cousin! And now – just like with Andrew Mellon’s dad, you can always refer to your cousin as “the Judge”

  18. Dexter said on May 20th, 2009 at 2:28 pm

    Kevin Smith and his weed-cocoon…the guy’s 38 years old, and he says it is “great” to stay all fucked up for a long period of time , unplug the world, and just, just…well, I’ll just say this: this sor­did story reminds me of a line from “Waitin’ ‘Round To Die” by Townes Van Zant:

    Some­times I don’t know where this dirty road is tak­ing me
    Some­times I can’t even see the rea­son why
    I guess I keep on gam­blin’, lots of booze and lots of ram­blin’
    It’s eas­ier than just a-waitin’ ’round to die”

    Except that Smith just IS waitin’ ’round to die.

    Fat Ass Smith needs a bicy­cle and a place to gawk at goslings.

  19. Catherine said on May 20th, 2009 at 2:34 pm

    Danny, I’m not talk­ing about the per-student spend­ing fig­ure. I prob­a­bly wasn’t clear, but the study I read was about % of state GDP spent on pub­lic edu­ca­tion. Cal­i­for­nia has his­tor­i­cally been able to get away with spend­ing less of its GDP on edu­ca­tion than other states because its per capita GDP is higher, so the dif­fer­ence in real dol­lars is not as obvi­ous. Again, don’t blame teacher salaries, or pub­lic edu­ca­tion in gen­eral, for CA’s bud­get prob­lems.

    And, I think you may be con­flat­ing sev­eral fac­tors when you say, “A very large ille­gal immi­grant pop­u­la­tion bur­dens the sys­tem with non-english speak­ing stu­dents…” All immi­grants are not undoc­u­mented. Some immi­grants do speak Eng­lish. And, quite a few non-English speak­ing stu­dents are NOT immi­grants. In fact, a recent Pew study esti­mates that only 5% of CA’s stu­dents are undoc­u­mented.

    I think it helps to tease these fac­tors out if you’re actu­ally try­ing to address these kids’ issues & affect the dropout rate.

  20. Danny said on May 20th, 2009 at 2:48 pm

    Cather­ine, just to be clear, I never made the state­ments that would be the con­trary to yours below:

    “All immi­grants are not undoc­u­mented. Some immi­grants do speak Eng­lish. And, quite a few non-English speak­ing stu­dents are NOT immi­grants.”

    And I don’t know about the Pew study you cite, but other stud­ies put the fig­ure at much higher in the areas that are see­ing the 50% dropout rate and two of my best friends are teach­ers and another is a nurse who over­sees the school region from Chula Vista down to the bor­der. They all say that the school sys­tem is not really inter­ested in putting a fine point to the fig­ure (for fund­ing rea­sons) and that they cer­tainly don’t ask immi­gra­tion sta­tus of the stu­dents or their par­ents as they prob­a­bly would get sued if they did.

  21. Catherine said on May 20th, 2009 at 3:12 pm

    Yes, the Pew num­bers are nec­es­sar­ily an esti­mate. Here’s the link, I’m not so good w/ the html so didn’t include it pre­vi­ously:
    http://​pewre​search​.org/​p​u​b​s​/​1​1​9​0​/​p​o​r​t​r​a​i​t​-​u​n​a​u​t​h​o​r​i​z​e​d​-​i​m​m​i​g​r​a​n​t​s​-​states

    And the dropout rate doesn’t really cost the state any­thing in edu­ca­tion dol­lars… no stu­dent = no ADA… It’s more a mat­ter of the social costs of dropouts, yes?

  22. Sue said on May 20th, 2009 at 3:13 pm

    Will Cal­i­for­nia become the AIG of financially-troubled states? Too big, too essen­tial to the rest of the coun­try to be allowed to fail?

  23. Danny said on May 20th, 2009 at 3:22 pm

    And the dropout rate doesn’t really cost the state any­thing in edu­ca­tion dol­lars… no stu­dent = no ADA… It’s more a mat­ter of the social costs of dropouts, yes?

    Right, and so back to my point that the spend­ing fig­ures aren’t as strongly tied to the per­for­mance fig­ures that you stated. The high dropout rate is. If you have a high dropout rate, you’ll have low per­for­mance sta­tis­tics.

  24. Catherine said on May 20th, 2009 at 3:44 pm

    Cart before the horse. Low per­for­mance leads to dropout not the other way around.

  25. Jolene said on May 20th, 2009 at 4:01 pm

    The dropout rate you cite is actu­ally pretty typ­i­cal for black and His­panic stu­dents nation­wide. In some places, it’s worse. Detroit, for instance, has a dropout rate of about 75%, which, as Cather­ine sug­gests, is both cause and con­se­quence of lots of other prob­lems.

  26. moe99 said on May 20th, 2009 at 4:42 pm

    Kayak woman–the arti­cle about the Spokane banker who res­cued the duck­lings this spring men­tioned that it was the sec­ond time. Since it was the first time I had seen it, I was charmed.

  27. Sue said on May 20th, 2009 at 4:47 pm

    Now I have to go find my copy of “Make Way for Duck­lings” and read it, minus chil­dren, but so what? Along with “Blue­ber­ries for Sal”, while I’m at it.

  28. Catherine said on May 20th, 2009 at 5:01 pm

    Blue­ber­ries for Sal is my all-time #1 favorite pic­ture book. MWFD is up there too. That line of ducks walk­ing to the pond made me think, “Jack, Kack, Lack, Mack, Nack, Oack, Pack and Quack.”

  29. Sue said on May 20th, 2009 at 5:17 pm

    Mmmmm, I want my chil­dren to be lit­tle again. No, wait (shakes her­self)… no, I don’t. Ok, I’m alright again.

  30. moe99 said on May 20th, 2009 at 6:27 pm

    Cather­ine,

    Don’t for­get The Lonely Doll. I wanted a wardrobe like that! The spank­ings admin­is­tered by the papa bear really date it how­ever.

  31. Jeff (the mild-mannered one) said on May 20th, 2009 at 8:39 pm

    When i get a bit jaded with human­ity and its abil­ity to inflict inhu­man­ity on each other, for some rea­son i roll through my over­long book­mark scroll and click this — http://​eddies​rail​road​.blogspot​.com

    I’m not a big rail nut, and i get to the Chicago area too rarely, but it isn’t that. There’s just some­thing about the per­sis­tent, non-obsessive, but com­pre­hen­sive pas­sion of this guy for trains and train stuff that just makes me happy to read through every month or so.

    There are a num­ber of the­o­log­i­cally moti­vated blogs that prob­a­bly wouldn’t do much for many around here, but i’m par­tial to Michael Spencer, the Inter­net Monk (and his group blog at Boar’s Head Tav­ern), and Brant Hansen at Kamp Krusty (yes, it looks odd, and is actu­ally even odder than that).

  32. LA mary said on May 20th, 2009 at 9:10 pm

    Hey Danny, you voted for Arnold, didn’t you? And you crit­i­cized me for oppos­ing his first round of bal­lot mea­sures that he spent mil­lions get­ting on the bal­lot?
    Any­way, Cather­ine is right about immi­grants in rela­tion to edu­ca­tion. I won’t go into how many kids I know who are immi­grants and they speak Eng­lish and they’re doc­u­mented and they are either good stu­dents or not. Just like kids who are not immi­grants.
    I will say that at least LAUSD could lose a few hun­dred of the pen­cil push­ers rather than teach­ers. I’ve been to the down­town LA head­quar­ters a few times, and there’s an awful lot of peo­ple look­ing like they don’t have much to do. I don’t know if it made the news in your parts, but a few years ago some­one noticed that not only was every­one in one depart­ment from the same for­eign coun­try, most of them were related to each other. This is like, thirty employ­ees all in one office. House­clean­ing could start right there.

  33. LA mary said on May 20th, 2009 at 9:15 pm

  34. whitebeard said on May 20th, 2009 at 9:29 pm

    Thank you, Jeff TMMO, for Eddie’s rail­road blog. have to sign off , power blink­ing on and off. It is Con­necti­cut Light & Power, also called Can­dle Light & Prayers

  35. brian stouder said on May 20th, 2009 at 10:04 pm

    Mary – inter­est­ing clip. The charms of ol’ Craig Fer­gu­son – other than his accent – are utterly lost upon me.

    Two items of Old Busi­ness; here is a map of the (mar­velous!) Fort Wayne Children’s Zoo, show­ing walk­ing dis­tances. I think the girls and I racked up at least 4 miles – if you include the park­ing lot dis­tances

    http://​www​.kid​szoo​.org/​p​d​f​s​/​W​a​l​k​i​n​g​M​a​p​2​0​09.pdf

    And sec­ond – I meant to respond to (and whole heart­edly agree with) Jeff Bordon’s com­ments about the Arthur Penn movie Bon­nie and Clyde.

    When I first saw that movie, I was quite struck by that same jar­ring change of pitch he describes – where the movie shifts from a some­what jolly romp with dusty car chases and lots of ratt-a-tat-tat, into a graphic and bloody war of attri­tion, right down to the unfor­giv­ing end.

    I wouldn’t have seen it in a the­ater (I was 6 in 1967, when it was released); do you sup­pose an edited ver­sion made it onto TV by 1973 or ’74? What­ever effect the edited ver­sion had, watch­ing the uncut the­atri­cal ver­sion (prob­a­bly some­where in the ’80′s, from the video store) was all new – and really, just about sick­en­ing.

    Also, back in the day, I remem­ber a paper­back book with a black cover and that gag pic­ture of Bon­nie point­ing a long gun at Clyde on the cover; it was all about them – and from what I skimmed, it was (rightly) harsh in its assess­ment of those peo­ple.

    But it also had pho­tos, includ­ing pics of the real Bon­nie and Clyde after their deaths. They were appar­ently morgue shots, only of their faces; Bon­nie looked OK, but Clyde’s face was cov­ered with blood.

    (come to think of it – I’d NEVER have such a book lay­ing around our house…our kids would never sleep again!)

  36. Danny said on May 20th, 2009 at 10:25 pm

    Mary, Cather­ine was try­ing to argue that poor per­for­mance was tied to lack of spend­ing on edu­ca­tion and that now it was going to get worse, but that fig­ure on spend­ing is dis­putable and there are other fac­tors affect­ing per­for­mance. Now if you two are say­ing that the load of ille­gal immi­grants here aren’t a bur­den on the sys­tem and that this par­tic­u­lar demo­graphic is not falling through the edu­ca­tional cracks, then I got a bridge to sell you.

    But to your sec­ond point, yeah, there needs to be some house clean­ing. Because the employ­ment growth rate in state gov­ern­ment should have been tied to the pop­u­la­tion growth rate and salaries and ben­e­fits increases to infla­tion. If that’d been the case, we’d have a sur­plus right now.

    Oh, and Ahnuld’s first round of props a few years back were when he was act­ing fis­cally con­ser­v­a­tive. If he had made a stronger case, they may have passed. Instead, he backed off and made a deal with the leg­is­la­ture. And now we see how that all worked out.

  37. Catherine said on May 20th, 2009 at 11:11 pm

    Danny, I think you are mak­ing the oppo­site point from what you intend. CA is either spend­ing more edu­cat­ing immi­grants, which would indeed be a bur­den, or it is not spend­ing more on immi­grants and they are falling through the cracks. But you are try­ing to have it both ways: immi­grants cost more to edu­cate AND they are falling through the cracks.

    Leav­ing aside your erro­neous con­flat­ing of immi­grant with undoc­u­mented and non-English speak­ing, both of these things can­not be true. In fact, many stu­dents are falling through the cracks, but the state is not spend­ing sig­nif­i­cantly more money on those stu­dents. If they were, the out­comes might be dif­fer­ent, and the future social costs avoided. But to accom­plish that, we’d have to spend more on edu­ca­tion. Here’s a link (sorry for the long URL) to a recent study that con­cludes, “The cur­rent dis­tri­b­u­tion of spend­ing per pupil across Cal­i­for­nia dis­tricts is not well-correlated with fac­tors that increase costs and decrease per­for­mance, such as stu­dents liv­ing in poverty or Eng­lish learn­ers.”
    http://​irepp​.stan​ford​.edu/​d​o​c​u​m​e​n​t​s​/​G​D​F​/​S​U​M​M​A​R​I​E​S​/​I​m​a​z​e​ki.pdf

    My point is, and has always been, don’t blame edu­ca­tion spend­ing, par­tic­u­larly on “ille­gal immi­grants” for CA’s bud­get prob­lems.

  38. joodyb said on May 20th, 2009 at 11:11 pm

    re idiots, i know i am just a snark slut, but Gawker (and NN.C) make me LOL daily.

  39. Dexter said on May 21st, 2009 at 12:19 am

    JeffMMO:
    I enjoyed the blogspot train blog you linked; here’s another you will surely enjoy. After you view the Harley-Davidson video, play around on artistmac’s site … he has hun­dreds of short videos on trans­porta­tion in Chicago, and many videos of Chicago life. He’s quite a good chron­i­cle mas­ter.
    My faves are his early videos as he takes his 77 Caprice Clas­sic out on the Dan Ryan, and also I loved his visit to Kenosha where he video­graphed a Green Hor­net rolling street­car.
    http://​www​.youtube​.com/​w​a​t​c​h​?​v​=​j​q​W​I​r​y78orA

  40. Danny said on May 21st, 2009 at 12:37 am

    Cather­ine, you have an imag­i­na­tion of con­fla­tion. I never made the point that edu­ca­tion or ille­gal immi­grants are respon­si­ble for bud­get woes. I responded to your state­ment that spend­ing on edu­ca­tion is inad­e­quate and that this is the rea­son for poor per­for­mance (pre­sum­ably you were going with the 46th in nation fig­ure on spend­ing align­ing with the 44th in per­for­mance) with the counter-argument that the fed­eral fig­ure ranks CA at about 30th in nation in spend­ing and that the poor per­for­mance is for other rea­sons. So, to para­phrase you, my point is, and has always been, don’t blame LACK OF edu­ca­tion spend­ing for poor per­for­mance.

    The bud­get issue is sep­a­rate.

  41. Catherine said on May 21st, 2009 at 1:25 am

    Danny, in your com­ment at #10, you appear to state that bloated state spend­ing on teach­ers is part of the bud­get prob­lem. If I mis­in­ter­preted it, mea culpa.

    And, as I explained in #19, your pre­sump­tion of the basis of my argu­ment was not accu­rate. You’ve got to weight the data prop­erly, as a % of GDP.

    Stud­ies show that teacher qual­ity is the #1 pre­dic­tor of stu­dent per­for­mance. Schools that are clos­ing the per­for­mance gap with poor or minor­ity stu­dents have one thing in com­mon — highly qual­i­fied teach­ers. If you think you can get qual­ity with­out pay­ing for it, I’ve got a bridge for you.

  42. Jeff (the mild-mannered one) said on May 21st, 2009 at 8:25 am

    Megan McAr­dle in her Atlantic Monthly blog – http://​is​.gd/BETP – does not make me feel good about either the sit­u­a­tion in Cal­i­for­nia, or what’s likely to hap­pen next in Ohio, let alone Michi­gan.

    I wish all teach­ers could get 15% pay raises tomor­row, and i begrudge garbage col­lec­tors noth­ing in ben­e­fits, let alone police and fire. All i know is: if you have col­lect over a third of my household’s gross income to pay for the com­mon weal, than the com­mon­wealth is either over­spend­ing or mis­spending from the pub­lic purse.

    More to the point, we lit­er­ally have pub­lic build­ings (yes, the 1886 build­ing where my office is) that are falling apart, dams and bridges and roads and storm­sew­ers that we are daily told have decades of deferred main­te­nance com­ing due in, among other things, bricks hit­ting the pave­ment out­side the door i use.

    And what i hear/read Danny say­ing is, in Cali, add lit­er­ally mil­lions of ille­gal immi­grant chil­dren to the same sort of mis­gov­ern­ment and expen­di­tures, and you get to cut to first in line for bank­ruptcy. And i think Megan is exactly right – CA declar­ing will imme­di­ately cost me money in OH, so there’s not a bit of schaden­freude to be had in this prospect. But tax increases alone (which are inevitable at this point) will not solve the prob­lem.