"Paul M. Cook" > wrote in message
...
>
> "gtr" > wrote in message
> news:2015052711554471197-xxx@yyyzzz...
>> On 2015-05-25 02:03:07 +0000, Paul M. Cook said:
>>
>>>> since a four year drought is pretty common here in California, and we
>>>> have tripled our population without adding any more storage capacity, I
>>>> would say we need more storage.
>>>
>>> We're in a 100 year drought. No amount of planning would have helped.
>>
>> That's a pretty neat political conclusion.
>>
>> Nothing could have been done over 100 years to make better our current
>> circumstance? I can see no reason why anything can every be done.
>>
>> Turn off the lights when you leave.
>
> Show me a repug who when asked if we should spend money on a 200 year
> drought reservoir system that does not scream "SOCIALISM!!!!!" and we can
> talk.
>

I think the real problem is the enviro wackos, and the fact that California
is spending more than it receives on excessive salaries, benefits, and
retirements (largely unfunded) to government workers, excessive pay to state
contractors, and spending all sorts of money to pay people not to work. No
funds left for infrastructure.

On Thu, 28 May 2015 06:11:59 -0700, "taxed and spent"
> wrote:

>I think the real problem is the enviro wackos, and the fact that California
>is spending more than it receives on excessive salaries, benefits, and
>retirements (largely unfunded) to government workers, excessive pay to state
>contractors, and spending all sorts of money to pay people not to work. No
>funds left for infrastructure.

that's why it's called "The People's Republic Of California"! Only one
of two United States who are commited Communists. Whoops, I forgot
Detroit but they are bankrupt and still Communist.

William

On Thursday, May 28, 2015 at 10:18:05 AM UTC-4, BigC300 wrote:

> that's why it's called "The People's Republic Of California"! Only one
> of two United States who are commited Communists. Whoops, I forgot
> Detroit but they are bankrupt and still Communist.

Funny, last time I was in Detroit, it was still a city. And I don't
see how it's Communist, either, unless all cities are Communist.

Cindy Hamilton

On Thu, 28 May 2015 09:49:28 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
> wrote:

> On Thursday, May 28, 2015 at 10:18:05 AM UTC-4, BigC300 wrote:
>
> > that's why it's called "The People's Republic Of California"! Only one
> > of two United States who are commited Communists. Whoops, I forgot
> > Detroit but they are bankrupt and still Communist.
>
> Funny, last time I was in Detroit, it was still a city. And I don't
> see how it's Communist, either, unless all cities are Communist.
>

All you need to do is look at Kansas to see how well republican ideas
in action are (not) doing.

--

sf

On Thu, 28 May 2015 09:49:28 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
> wrote:

>Funny, last time I was in Detroit, it was still a city. And I don't
>see how it's Communist, either, unless all cities are Communist.
>
>Cindy Hamilton

do you think Detroit is a functional city? How can a city operate when
people refuse to pay their water bills? Is it your Consitutional Right
to receive free water from the city? I can guarantee you...it is
Communist and the United government has placed sanctions on the city
to curtail further irresponsible stupidity.

William

On 2015-05-28, William > wrote:

> I can guarantee you...it is Communist and the United government has

Chrystonacrutch! ....not another commie-under-every-bush whacko. I've
been listening to you Bircher boobs blather on for half a century.
Enough, already. 8|

nb

On Thursday, May 28, 2015 at 1:48:42 PM UTC-4, BigC300 wrote:
> On Thu, 28 May 2015 09:49:28 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
> > wrote:
>
> >Funny, last time I was in Detroit, it was still a city. And I don't
> >see how it's Communist, either, unless all cities are Communist.
> >
> >Cindy Hamilton
>
> do you think Detroit is a functional city?

No, it isn't.

> How can a city operate when
> people refuse to pay their water bills? Is it your Consitutional Right
> to receive free water from the city?

People will try to get away with not paying their bills. It
happens everywhere. Detroit, sadly, is so screwed up that they
can get away with it. Nobody in the Detroit city government has
ever thought that people should get water for free. However, they
have been incompetent, and unpaid bills have mounted up to
ridiculous proportions. Where it might have been possible to
get $50/month from people, it's not possible to get $1000 from
someone who hasn't paid their bill in 20 months and is living
on welfare. I deplore people who don't pay their bills, but
it's really just people being people.

> I can guarantee you...it is
> Communist and the United government has placed sanctions on the city
> to curtail further irresponsible stupidity.

Here's the first definition I found when I googled:

Communism:
a political theory derived from Karl Marx, advocating class war and leading to a society in which all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs.

That doesn't apply to Detroit. The vast majority of it is privately
owned. Apart from city-employed workers, Detroiters work for private
companies just like in every other city, or they're on welfare which
is state and federal, not a city service.

"screwed up" does not equal "communist"

I feel sorry for the stupid Detroiters who voted those morons in
year after year. They certainly are responsible for the outcome,
even if they don't own up to it. But I still feel sorrow.

I was born in Detroit, and what the city has become is really sad.
Nobody has the political will to do what needs to be done; some of
it would be public relations suicide.

Cindy Hamilton

On 2015-05-28 1:48 PM, William wrote:

> do you think Detroit is a functional city? How can a city operate when
> people refuse to pay their water bills? Is it your Consitutional Right
> to receive free water from the city? I can guarantee you...it is
> Communist and the United government has placed sanctions on the city
> to curtail further irresponsible stupidity.
>

My son is fascinated with Detroit and thinks it would make the perfect
setting for a post apocalyptic city. There are wonderful buildings
downtown that sit empty and entire swaths of housing that have been
bulldozed. It ranks up there with Chernobyl.

"taxed and spent" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "gtr" > wrote in message
>> news:2015052711554471197-xxx@yyyzzz...
>>> On 2015-05-25 02:03:07 +0000, Paul M. Cook said:
>>>
>>>>> since a four year drought is pretty common here in California, and we
>>>>> have tripled our population without adding any more storage capacity,
>>>>> I would say we need more storage.
>>>>
>>>> We're in a 100 year drought. No amount of planning would have helped.
>>>
>>> That's a pretty neat political conclusion.
>>>
>>> Nothing could have been done over 100 years to make better our current
>>> circumstance? I can see no reason why anything can every be done.
>>>
>>> Turn off the lights when you leave.
>>
>> Show me a repug who when asked if we should spend money on a 200 year
>> drought reservoir system that does not scream "SOCIALISM!!!!!" and we can
>> talk.
>>
>
> I think the real problem is the enviro wackos, and the fact that
> California is spending more than it receives on excessive salaries,
> benefits, and retirements (largely unfunded) to government workers,
> excessive pay to state contractors, and spending all sorts of money to pay
> people not to work. No funds left for infrastructure.

Isn't it always the massively powerful greenies? I mean they control the
whole state government.
>



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com

On Fri, 29 May 2015 11:21:56 -0700, "Paul M. Cook" >
wrote:

>
> "taxed and spent" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Paul M. Cook" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >>
> >> "gtr" > wrote in message
> >> news:2015052711554471197-xxx@yyyzzz...
> >>> On 2015-05-25 02:03:07 +0000, Paul M. Cook said:
> >>>
> >>>>> since a four year drought is pretty common here in California, and we
> >>>>> have tripled our population without adding any more storage capacity,
> >>>>> I would say we need more storage.
> >>>>
> >>>> We're in a 100 year drought. No amount of planning would have helped.
> >>>
> >>> That's a pretty neat political conclusion.
> >>>
> >>> Nothing could have been done over 100 years to make better our current
> >>> circumstance? I can see no reason why anything can every be done.
> >>>
> >>> Turn off the lights when you leave.
> >>
> >> Show me a repug who when asked if we should spend money on a 200 year
> >> drought reservoir system that does not scream "SOCIALISM!!!!!" and we can
> >> talk.
> >>
> >
> > I think the real problem is the enviro wackos, and the fact that
> > California is spending more than it receives on excessive salaries,
> > benefits, and retirements (largely unfunded) to government workers,
> > excessive pay to state contractors, and spending all sorts of money to pay
> > people not to work. No funds left for infrastructure.
>
> Isn't it always the massively powerful greenies? I mean they control the
> whole state government.
> >
>
Paying people not to work at jobs that don't exist.

--
A kitchen without a cook is just a room.

On 29/05/2015 2:33 PM, sf wrote:
..
>>>
>>
> Paying people not to work at jobs that don't exist.
>
A bit like the feds paying farmers not to plant crops.

--

"graham" > wrote in message
...
> On 29/05/2015 2:33 PM, sf wrote:
> .
>>>>
>>>
>> Paying people not to work at jobs that don't exist.
>>
> A bit like the feds paying farmers not to plant crops.

There is a very valid reason for that.. Think Dustbowl.



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com