16 Jul 03 04:06, Roy J. Tellason wrote to Roy Witt:

 RJT>> Are ya?  Good news,  that...

 RW>> At this late date, the recall movement has announced that they have
 RW>> enough signatures to put the recall measure on the ballot.  Too bad
 RW>> it doesn't include the Democratic side of the legislature as well.
 RW>> They're insisting that higher taxes is the only way to balance the
 RW>> budget and get the state out of it's 38 billion dollar deficit.

 RJT> Does it never occur to these people that one other way to deal with
 RJT> it is to spend less?

LOL! That's what they were told when they sent emmisaries from the
legislature to the cities to tell them they need to get behind the tax
increases. That and 'isn't it about time you filed bancruptcy?'

 RJT>   I never see any of them mention that possibility,  not ever...

The Republicans have said it all along. Even as a minority in California
legislatures, the pubs have been able to stymy any tax increases, since
the law requires a 2/3s majority vote to pass. Now the democraps have put
an initiative on the ballot to make it 55% to pass. I sure hope these
dummies who elected this group don't fall for that one.

 RW>> The only spending cuts they've come up with, affect the tax payer.
 RW>> Nothing about cutting spending in places like perks for
 RW>> legislaturers.

 RJT> Of course not.  The bunch we have here in Harrisburg has voted
 RJT> themselves raises,

Must have gotten that from the California Democraps.

 RJT>   making it a point to do stuff in the middle of
 RJT> the night,  and to make them automatic so that they specifically
 RJT> have to vote against it happening to keep it from going through.
 RJT> The latest bit is a fifty percent hike in their retirement
 RJT> benefits...

Sheeesh...that's what we get for electing lawyers.

 RJT> Our governor,  having been a DA and then mayor of Philly,  is making
 RJT> more in retirement pay from that stuff than I make while working!
 RJT> But I get to contribute to it.  Grr...

Welcome to the club.

 RW>> In January, the employer's unemployment taxes go up 51% to fill
 RW>> the caufers, which are going to have a much bigger demand because
 RW>> of the state jobs going down the drain. California should file
 RW>> bancruptcy, but that'll never happen.

 RJT> Nope,  that'd be too like the politicians admitting that they
 RJT> screwed up.

There're no secrets in this state. That's exactly what they did.

 RJT> And I have a new wrinkle to contend with while collecting
 RJT> unemployment, which I've been at a whole couple of weeks already.

I did that last year.

 RJT>   I apparently fit some sort of a "profile" that
suggests that I'll
 RJT> go the whole way through all of my benefits before getting employed
 RJT> again.  (And if I should choose to do so,  what of it? It's my
 RJT> choice,  right?)

Not if you look at the law and how you must keep up your efforts to find a
job. Of course, it's no big deal that you can't find one, that's what the
money is for. They keep changing the system so that you can never get a
foot up. In 1970, I took off a whole year on unemployment; all I had to do
was lie about the effort I put into finding a job. I tried that again in
78, but they required an interviewer or receptionist to sign a sheet of
paper that I had to turn in to get my money.  And again in 85. Last year,
I found out there's no unemployment office to file a claim with, just a
telephone number.  I didn't have to provide proof, nor did I have to
report anywhere, accept by mail.  I'd lie on the form and get a check in
the mail, just like clockwork.

 RJT>   But I had to go in there today, and have to go
 RJT> back again next week,  and when I asked today what the deal was with
 RJT> all this stuff I found that it has to do with the feds
 RJT> getting involved in it,  since they've gone and extended things
 RJT> they're apparently putting some more conditions on getting that
 RJT> money...

Yeup. That's the worst case scenario too.  The government screws up the
economy and puts you out of work, then the government makes it harder for
you to collect what's yours while you look for work.  California doesn't
levy taxes on 'unemployment compensation', yet the feds do...bend over,
here's the shaft..

 RJT> Nothing like getting the feds involved in a state matter to make it
 RJT> much more fun!  :-S

Yeup.


... 'Intel Inside' is a Government Warning Required By Law.
--- Fidonet's Zone 2 is full urapeonz