View Full Version : Kaliforina Socialism, not working.....
Team Sergeant
01-25-2015, 09:42
Socialist Kaliforina is slowly going under......kaliforina is America's Greece.
More homeless camps are appearing beyond downtown L.A.'s skid row
By Gale Holland contact the reporter
January 24, 2015, 10:00 AM
Evicted four months ago from their Highland Park apartment, Louis Morales and his 18-year-old stepson, Arthur Valenzuela, live half-hidden by brush along the nearby Arroyo Seco riverbed..
Morales, 49, keeps a framed bible verse and a stuffed monkey in his tent. Water hauled by bike from a park heats up on the camp stove.
Next door, their friend Johnny Salazar fixes bikes and shattered computer screens on the cheap for people who live in the neighborhood. A brother and sister Morales has known for years live up the river, and three couples stay down by the bridge.
"Everybody here is from Highland Park," Valenzuela said. "We don't allow other people."
Over the last two years, street encampments have jumped their historic boundaries in downtown Los Angeles, lining freeways and filling underpasses from Echo Park to South Los Angeles. The Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority, a city-county agency, received 767 calls about street encampments in 2014, up 60% from the 479 in 2013.
cont:
http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-homeless-encampments-20150125-story.html
mark46th
01-25-2015, 10:15
I uses to work in downtown L.A. One of my favorite places to eat was on 4th St. I had to literally step over people passed out on the sidewalk. Yeah, the beef and potato burritos were that good.
I grew up in NorCal, left in 1970 and returned in 2012 after a 23 year military career and a secondary-career educator in Texas for nearly 20 years.
From my experiences and POV, many things have changed around here, mainly the increasingly diverse population growth and once expected seasonal weather patterns, but some things haven't - one being the size and impact of California's economy on the US and the world, and another being the relatively high unemployment numbers of a large migrant 'unskilled' labor force which has always led to such 'encampments' as those described in the LA Times article. I grew up out here seeing them up and down the valleys and in the cities, and still see them as I travel frequently throughout the region. I've seen them in every state and large city I've ever visited or lived in, and throughout the world as I've lived and traveled overseas.
I think this comment is the KEY takeaway from the article: "'Now that we're fixing up our communities, we're actually seeing a problem that's been there in plain sight for decades," said the LAPD's Chovan. "Gentrification just brought it to light.'"
As to whether such encampments portend a 'failure' to the reality vs the mythical Eden-like dream of the future of California (which in spite of its warts remains America's most populous and economically powerful state), I'm not so sure.
RANKED: The 50 US State Economies From Worst To Best
http://www.businessinsider.com/ranked-the-50-us-state-economies-2014-8?op=1
California’s economy is large enough it could be admitted into G-8
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2014/07/08/californias-economy-is-large-enough-it-could-be-admitted-into-g-8/
And so it goes...
Richard
The Reaper
01-25-2015, 19:20
Just got home from Vegas.
I saw an average of a half dozen or so every morning on the way to the show.
TR
I uses to work in downtown L.A. One of my favorite places to eat was on 4th St. I had to literally step over people passed out on the sidewalk. Yeah, the beef and potato burritos were that good.
Ah! Mine was in Latin gang territory south of Hollywood. A Bolivian family ran it. Every Sunday, for a couple of years, I'd pick up a double tortilla green chili pork burrito on my way to work at LAX. I'd pull up in my new '82 Camaro and the family would come out and take up positions to make sure that I had no problems with the gangsters. Good times; good eats!
Pat
California's economy was built up during the years when it had a much more business-friendly Democratic legislature. Since the late 1970s, it has been replaced by a very far-left legislature and because of the Dill Act signed in the late 1970s by then (and current) Governor Jerry Brown, the state's public-sector workers were allowed to unionize. Today the state is controlled by an iron triangle made up of the labor unions, the trial lawyers, and the environmental lobby. And because of how left the legislature is, they have made California into one of the most highly taxes, regulated, and spending states in the union. California has since lost millions of people as a result, but it continues to hang on because of the nice weather and also because of the large, established industries there. One can only imagine what its economy would be if it had a more economically-friendly legislature.
Interesting opinion, but I actually live here after having spent the previous 20 years in Texas. My electrical bill is - on average - about 70% less than what I paid in Texas, my property taxes (on 6x the amount of property I owned in Texas and a home valued at 3x the value of my home in Texas) are less than 20% of what I paid in Texas, and my water/sewage bill is about 10-15% of what I was paying in Texas. Unlike Texas, I do pay a state income tax, but that (for me) equates to less than what I paid in overall taxes/living expenses when living in Texas, and the climate and quality of life here living but 90 miles to the Pacific Coast and 90 miles to Lake Tahoe has proven itself to be much better than what I experienced in Texas. And having one of the world's great wine regions surrounded from the middle is a bonus to my wife and I.
As far as population and business goes:
http://journal.firsttuesday.us/rateofpopulationgrowth/1306/
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06000.html
And for businesses there's a lot more to what attracts them to a state/region than taxes - which may be why 2 of America's 3 largest state economies (which are 3 of the world's 20 largest economies) are in what many consider to be 'poor' for business, and it's always important to factor into any business equation regarding location that a state like California neither desires nor cultivates businesses it considers to be environmentally problematic for its workers, its communities, its region, and itse governing bodies.
http://taxes.about.com/od/statetaxes/a/Best-states-for-business-taxes.htm
Budget-wise, the state has made a dramatic turn-around and is actually operating under a fiscally sound budget plan which, unlike the LA Times article's theme, shows reasonable hope for continued positive long term growth and quality of life for this state, its businesses, and its residents.
I live here and don't see myself moving again - unless circumstances arise which would force me to reconsider my position, of course.
But who knows, anything can happen - except me ever buying an effin' Prius...but so it goes... ;)
Richard
Richard,
I've made the same argument about the taxes with my sister in TX and you are correct.
But, you inherited property that is covered by Prop. 13 and, I presume, you have no substantial taxable income now that you've retired. What would your property taxes be if you had not inherited the land (which is still protected by Prop. 13)? What would your state income tax be if you had a full time job, in CA, that would allow you to own that land? Would you have moved there and bought that property if you were in your late 30s or early 40s today? Is it possible that nostalgia is clouding your perceptions?
Got any Delta Smelt recipes? ;)
Pat
And what if frogs had wings? ;)
But so it goes...
Richard
And what if frogs had wings? ;)
But so it goes...
Richard
He wouldn't bump his ass so much, but he'd probably be the hero of Calaveras County. ;)
Pat
Post
I disagree. The strength of both NY and CA is that they have always managed to adapt - eventually, and not always without painful struggle - to the constant 'change' occurring in both the national and global economic environments, and, based upon what I've experienced in my lifetime, I suspect will continue to do so in the future.
IMO and based upon my experiences, states like California and New York are tough to "make it in" if you're unmotivated, dumb, or shackled by 'issues' (re to the LA Times and numerous other articles).
My family has always operated upon a notion of taking a 'long view' to positioning ourselves to be more or less 'debt free' - no mortgage, no car payments, no loans, pay our bills on time, low taxes, etc - and able to continue to live within our means heading into our 'Golden Years.' My parents did it, my wife and I have done it, and we've taught our children how to do it for their lives.
My wife will retire this year and - with my retirement and SS, and her retirement and SS - we've estimated that I may need to sub (I'm a 'go to' substitute for 2 HS and 2 JHS here in the area) about 1 day per week for us to enjoy the same standard of living we have now.
To us, that is a part of our vision of the so-called 'American Dream.'
Others may have a different 'dream'...but this is America - and so it goes.
Richard
PS - nice rejoinder, Pat. :D
Our national and global economies work on taxes, regulations, and spending - 'excessive' is in the eye of the proverbial beholder(s) and the results speak for themselves...whether we agree with them or pretend to understand them or not.
MOO.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0FAdEzhorq4
However, YMMV.
Richard
NurseTim
01-26-2015, 23:09
I disagree. The strength of both NY and CA is that they have always managed to adapt - eventually, and not always without painful struggle - to the constant 'change' occurring in both the national and global economic environments, and, based upon what I've experienced in my lifetime, I suspect will continue to do so in the future.
IMO and based upon my experiences, states like California and New York are tough to "make it in" if you're unmotivated, dumb, or shackled by 'issues' (re to the LA Times and numerous other articles).
My family has always operated upon a notion of taking a 'long view' to positioning ourselves to be more or less 'debt free' - no mortgage, no car payments, no loans, pay our bills on time, low taxes, etc - and able to continue to live within our means heading into our 'Golden Years.' My parents did it, my wife and I have done it, and we've taught our children how to do it for their lives.
My wife will retire this year and - with my retirement and SS, and her retirement and SS - we've estimated that I may need to sub (I'm a 'go to' substitute for 2 HS and 2 JHS here in the area) about 1 day per week for us to enjoy the same standard of living we have now.
To us, that is a part of our vision of the so-called 'American Dream.'
Others may have a different 'dream'...but this is America - and so it goes.
Richard
PS - nice rejoinder, Pat. :D
For now and maybe for a few years to come, but I'm afraid the 1-2 days a week will slowly increase due to necessity. I pray I'm wrong for your sake.
If California and New York had been built into great economies based on high taxes, high spending, and lots of regulations,...
Re this topic, I think the underlined adjectives are your views (and a few others) and, based upon the 'ledger', not necessarily representative of the views of either the world business community or the global economy.
Richard
IMO, if Texas had the regulatory and tax climate of California and New York, it would not be where it is today. Note also people leaving California and New York. Texas has gained two seats in the House, while New York has lost two.
Texas has actually gained 4 seats (32 => 36) as of the 2010 census and has its own issues - of which there are many. California lost no seats and remains at 53.
Illinois, Iowa, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, New York, and Ohio all lost a seat or two while Texas (4), Florida (2), Arizona and Georgia, Nevada, South Carolina, Utah, and Washington ( 1 ea) gained seats. There are a number of reasons for that, with taxes being but a part of it.
As for people 'leaving' CA - I guess you missed this factoid (link below) and the fact that California's apportioned representation in the House of Representatives has never lessened but grown since its admission to the union and remains at 53 (no change in the last two decades).
http://journal.firsttuesday.us/rateofpopulationgrowth/1306/
But change is inevitable. Improvise, adapt, and overcome - or suffer the consequences. Maybe you don't see it in NY, but out here, I see a people and a local government continuing to embrace that concept and working to make it happen.
MOO - and so it goes...
Richard
Entire post.IMO, your POV would benefit if you were to provide data that show
how California's economy is resting on its laurels, or
how the state government's regulations and taxes drive / keep out businesses, or
how the state's public sector workers and their pensions drag the economy, or
how the state is lagging behind in terms of innovation / research and development. IMO, such data would be even more compelling were they cast against national averages and/or similar data for those states that you consider to be more business friendly.
FYI, the data that might help achieve these goals, or goals that you define are available at http://www.census.gov/ and http://www.bls.gov/. To frame the data, the state legislature's database here (http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billSearchClient.xhtml) may help.
MOO, I think your take on California politics continues
to disregard the steady decline of the aerospace industry,
to ignore the impact of the Cold War,
to overlook how the voter initiative/referendum process impacts economic and social policy, and
to neglect the latitude that the state's municipalities have in shaping their economic development, even those cities that have to guide their policies past the state's coastal commission.
FWIW, in regards to (4), I work in the planning department of a structural engineering consultancy. I write memos and reports that are scoped to help clients develop land. Most of the projects I work on these days are in California. Sometimes the clients are developers. Sometimes the clients are municipalities. Sometimes the clients represent existing land uses (like mixed use developments, shopping malls, hospitals, airports, and colleges/universities).
In my department's experience, when projects don't come to fruition it is because of either an overabundance of stakeholder NIMBYism, or miscalculations in the master planning process, or municipal departments misreading bureaucratic politics, or stuff changing from the client's perspective. AFIAK, no project has been a causality of "progressivism." On the contrary, if progressivism were the driving force in California's economic development, buildings in California would be going up even faster than they already are.
My $0.02.
And what if frogs had wings? ;)
But so it goes...
Richard
They would be registered and taxed.
Richard, you made a compelling personal argument that is virtually a paradigm shift from many the anti-California arguments.
Yet, with all due respect Richard, Pat asks an equally compelling question which calls for relevance and perspective. Dodging the question that way totally negates your point. And I'm not talking smelt...
California hasn't lost seats, but it has lost population due to people leaving.
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06000.html
People want to have an economy that can adapt to natural economic woes...
http://www.calmis.ca.gov/file/lfmonth/CaLMR.pdf
Richard
They would be registered and taxed.
Richard, you made a compelling personal argument that is virtually a paradigm shift from many the anti-California arguments.
Yet, with all due respect Richard, Pat asks an equally compelling question which calls for relevance and perspective. Dodging the question that way totally negates your point. And I'm not talking smelt...
The data for his questions is accessible and can be researched. My situation is, of course, anecdotal based upon my experiences and those of the long-term residents associated with this community of which my family has been a part for over 60 years.
As far as somebody migrating to California from another state or country, it can be an expensive proposition unless you come from a relatively similar economic area and with a sound personal financial situation...but the constantly increasing population growth would seem to indicate people are managing to find ways to make it work.
Be that as it may, there is a building boom going on around here and has been for decades. For example, the local population has increased dramatically since I left for the Army - then we had 1 HS and now there are 10; the population then was around 12k and now it's around 162k and growing. https://www.biggestuscities.com/city/elk-grove-california
The closest development to me is called Diamond Ranch (about 1/4 mile from my ranch) with a planned community of 4,000 single homes of which around 1,000 are completed and have been sold as soon as they are built. I walk my dogs over there nearly daily and watch as the construction is continuing with the next set of streets and housing pads for the next group of homes is nearing completion. I don't know how they're being financed, but this link is a sample of the cost of one of the houses (similar in size to our home in Dallas) and annual property tax (which is about 60% less than what I paid in Dallas and about twice what I pay now).
http://www.trulia.com/homes/California/Sacramento/sold/1000320070-7481-Diamond-Ranch-Dr-Sacramento-CA-95829
http://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/7444-Diamond-Ranch-Dr_Sacramento_CA_95829_M18734-20945
California is a big state with a large and varied population, and the data (taxes, employment, housing and utilities, growth, etc) will vary quite a bit from county to county and community to community - as with every place I've ever lived.
Perhaps that helps give a better perspective as to my POV.
Richaard
Not any expert on that, but I'd think ....IMO, this statement underscores the most problematic aspect of your approach to historical and contemporaneous issues.
You read something, agree with it, and then you begin to fit facts to your POV while ignoring evidence to the contrary or glaring inconsistencies within that POV (or between what you read and your POV).
Simultaneously, you frequently disregard opportunities to use different/additional sources of information to enhance or to refine your POV.California's economy was built up during the years when it had a much more business-friendly Democratic legislature. Since the late 1970s, it has been replaced by a very far-left legislature and because of the Dill Act signed in the late 1970s by then (and current) Governor Jerry Brown, the state's public-sector workers were allowed to unionize. Today the state is controlled by an iron triangle made up of the labor unions, the trial lawyers, and the environmental lobby. And because of how left the legislature is, they have made California into one of the most highly taxes, regulated, and spending states in the union. California has since lost millions of people as a result, but it continues to hang on because of the nice weather and also because of the large, established industries there. One can only imagine what its economy would be if it had a more economically-friendly legislature.
If California and New York had been built into great economies based on high taxes, high spending, and lots of regulations, I'd agree, but they were not. What the results show, IMO, is that such policies inhibit economic growth and cause population loss. Texas, a very economically friendly state, shows the opposite to be the case (it is in many ways how California used to be). Of course taxes, regulations, and spending are necessary, and a state having higher taxes, regulations, and spending than another state doesn't mean it will suffer economically, but it is when they get excessive that there is a problem. It's like the differences between the U.K. and Germany versus France, Italy, Spain, etc...
For 2014, California's economic growth rate was 2.1%. For 2013 and 2012, it was 2.7%. By contrast, for 2014, 2013, and 2012, Texas's growth rate was 3.1%, 3.7%, and 6.9%. New York's for those years was 1.4%, 0.7%, and 1.7% - You frame an argument that California has been coasting for decades and to back up your argument you present a total of three data points for that state and compare it to six other data points. This comparison is made without any mention of the impact of the Great Recession and its continued impact upon the global economy, without any mention of the impact of Sandy on New York's economy, and without any mention of the fracking boom in Texas. Here is one example: LINK (http://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2014/03/21/california_ceos_rate_it_worst_us_business_climate_ for_8_years_running_100963.html)Your "one example" contradicts your argument that California's economy is resting on its laurels by pointing to the ongoing tech boom. Your piece also qualifies its argument by pointing out that the opinion of the state's economic climate is drawn from information from small business executives. That is, Mr. Bruno's piece makes a very specific set of points to support a well defined argument and for that reason, his piece is compelling. In contrast, your posts in this thread remain scatter shot. For example...California, by virtue of its sheer size and nice weather and skilled workforce, continues to have economic growth and business growth, but it could probably be a lot better if the regulations and taxes weren't excessive.
That I never claimed and would be surprised if that was the case. Due the sheer number of high-tech companies established there and the world-class universities, I would say it probably is a world-leader in innovation and research. You are contradicting yourself. In this thread, you have asserted that California's "very far left legislature" drags down its economy and that the state manages to "hang on" because of the weather and established industries. Now, you are pointing to new industries and the benefits of the state's colleges and universities (some of the most prominent of which are public). Which is it?
Well states like Texas and Florida, North and South Carolina, Colorado, etc...do not have the issues with unions, taxes, regulations, budget, etc...that California has. This isn't to say low-tax states automatically do better, as they don't. It depends on the mix of taxes, regulations, spending, infrastructure, workforce, etc...Again, you are contradicting yourself. You have repeatedly insisted in this thread that California's economy lags because of unions, high taxes, and regulations. If your interpretation has merit, then why are you now arguing that states with lower taxes and less regulation don't necessarily do better?The aerospace industry though wouldn't be responsible for increasing California's taxes and regulations in particular or of unionization of public employees.I am not going to do your research for you. I have already provided you with the resources to buttress some of your points.
In the event you decide to take this topic seriously, I suggest that you do some research on the impact the aerospace industry has had upon the state's environment, the resulting litigation, and how these two factors have shaped the ongoing debates over environmental policy.
You might also do some research on the relationship between the aerospace industry and the sub urbanization of California. You could also take a look at the relationship between the built environment in sub urban environments, car ownership, and the impact upon the state's highways and freeways. (The Census bureau's data base includes contemporaneous and historical "journey to work" data.)
You might also do some research on Boeing's contract disputes with its unions. You might also do some research on the unions themselves. Do national unions, like the Teamsters, make a choice between private and public sector industries when they seek to organize workers? (No) Do labor laws and court decisions that support public sector workers also support private sector workers? (Sometimes)
What impact did the Cold War have? I'm not sure why you are asking this question given your earlier efforts in other threads to demonstrate your familiarity with the history of the Cold War.
Perhaps you could answer your own question if you were to re-familiarize yourself with on how much of the defense budget went to the Golden State during the Cold War (contracts to private firms, funds to government sponsored labs, bases for the armed services). Then, you could square those numbers with your view of the state legislature as being "very far left." (If the legislature is as liberal as you claim, then why did not find ways to keep defense dollars out of the state?)
Not any expert on that, but I'd think a company is already aware of things like regulations by the time it decides to build a building in California.The fact of the matter is that on a national level (my department works on projects from Hawai'i to Pennsylvania), getting development and redevelopment projects approved by municipalities is a PITA because of all the moving parts and pieces. Regulations and requirements can be scattered throughout a city's code, its master planning documents, its specific planning documents, its zoning maps, and various other documents.
The interpretations of these regulations can vary from department to department within a city's government (e.g. planning and traffic). Development plans can fall into the gray areas between well established norms (e.g. mixed use developments with residential units vs. mixed use developments with "live/work" residential units). Opposition to development plans can come from the "usual suspects" and it can come out of nowhere -- residents, existing businesses, competing developers, and other stakeholders can come out of the woodwork during council meetings and hearings.
The closest development to me is called Diamond Ranch (about 1/4 mile from my ranch) with a planned community of 4,000 single homes of which around 1,000 are completed and have been sold as soon as they are built.
Richard
Isn't it possible that this development is made up mostly of intrastate migrants? Perhaps they are Bay Area residents who are retired and don't want to deal with the traffic, high local taxes, and onerous regulations, but still want to live in a very beautiful state and stay close to Yosemite, Tahoe, SF, the Pacific, and the San Andreas Fault. :D Any data on how many are interstate buyers there are? Run a U-Haul check on the cost of renting a vehicle from CA to TX vs. TX to CA. There's a premium on escape. ;)
Pat
WTF...that's all this deserves.
California Students Vote to Boycott Israel -- and U.S.
February 10, 2015
https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2015/02/10/california-students-vote-boycott-israel-and-us
The boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel picked up additional momentum this weekend when the University of California Student Association approved a resolution calling on the UC regents to divest from corporations complicit in violations of Palestinians’ human rights. But the system-wide student government went even further than that, endorsing a second resolution urging the university to divest from national governments it describes as being “engaged in human rights abuses and violence,” including not only the government of Israel, but also those of Brazil, Egypt, Indonesia, Mexico, Russia, Turkey, Sri Lanka -- and the United States.
The resolution cites a range of abuses on the part of the U.S. government: drone strikes in Pakistan and Yemen, high rates of incarceration, disproportionate targeting of racial minorities by police forces, the detention and deportation of undocumented immigrants, and its activities in “directly supporting and propping up numerous dictatorships around the world with weapons sales and foreign aid.”
BDS activists celebrated the Student Association's stance: the Students for Justice in Palestine chapter at the University of California at Los Angeles issued a statement describing the vote in favor of the first, Palestinian-specific resolution as “undoubtedly the largest victory thus far in the campus divestment movement in the United States.” The group noted that student governments at six individual UC campuses, as well as the union representing UC teaching assistants and other graduate student workers, have already endorsed divestment.
Advocates of the BDS movement are often criticized for singling out Israel -- of all the objectionable regimes in the world -- for special criticism. Indeed, the conservative Cornell University law professor William A. Jacobson described the combination of resolutions at UC as illustrative of the problems with the approach. “The U. Cal. student government has proven a point I’ve made repeatedly in terms of the academic boycott: If you are going to boycott Israel, then you need to apply those standards to the whole world, which will result in boycotting yourselves,” he wrote in his Legal Insurrection blog.
Just because the system-wide UC Student Association passed the resolutions -- the full texts of which are linked in the meeting minutes -- doesn’t mean the Board of Regents will necessarily take them up. In 2010, the University of California released a statement affirming the board's policy of divesting from a foreign government, or with companies doing business with that government, only in cases in which the U.S. government has declared a regime guilty of committing acts of genocide (which it has not done in the case of Israel). In forwarding that statement, a UC spokeswoman said Monday that the university’s position and policies have not changed.
ddoering
02-11-2015, 14:09
We should kick Mexico's ass again and make them take California back.
We should kick Mexico's ass again and make them take California back.
Just the southern part.
Say, from the bay area, across to Stockton, then down to Fresno and onto Bakersfield, then across to the Cali/Nevada line.
California does have some redeeming qualities, especially up in the Northern part. We don't want to give the Mexicans all of it, now do we?
:D
Last hard class
02-11-2015, 19:54
WTF...that's all this deserves.
Looks to me like the BDS has ripped a page from the old G/L task force playbook.
Another view:
One thing that slowly is coming to light, however, is that the anti-Israel movement is not the grassroots, student-led movement it purports to be. In fact, it has a highly coordinated, well-funded action plan assisted and coordinated by outside groups.
A column in the UCLA Bruin newspaper details what is happening, Co-author of UCSA resolution needs to disclose affiliations:
In 2014, Kurwa [the student leader who drafted the UCLA boycott resolution] joined the leadership of the U.S. Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation. This is particularly relevant to student government because this same organization has published a handbook about orchestrating campus divestment against Israel. The handbook encourages students to contact university administrators as part of their campaign, but avoid revealing their full intentions during these interactions. And while the handbook states that divestment was “introduced in North America as a stepping stone toward a broad, comprehensive boycott of Israel,” it tells students to publicly claim that divestment only targets “Israel’s occupation.” Kurwa should explain why an off-campus group he helps lead is instructing activists to deceive university administrators and students.
Furthermore, Kurwa should have disclosed that outside interests are extremely involved in running campus divestment across America. In the spring of 2013, divestment lobby groups created the National Campus BDS Support Team to “streamline and enhance support for campus campaigns” by providing research, talking points, texts and professional legal reviews for student divestment resolutions. These off-campus organizations have a combined annual budget of at least $42 million. Kurwa is listed on Support Team materials as a contact for SJP chapters around the country.
To stage their national conferences, Kurwa and SJP’s leadership use money from an off-campus organization called American Muslims for Palestine (AMP)….
Full Link:
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCwQFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Flegalinsurrection.com%2F2015%2F02 %2Fu-cal-student-govt-votes-to-divest-from-most-of-the-world%2F&ei=7fvbVNhzi_GgBIC6gPAE&usg=AFQjCNEdHRhzFn6vOr7SZSICRYJgM8OMng&bvm=bv.85970519,d.cGU
Not military, but UW tactics nonetheless.
Perfect environment to find impressionable people and if you do it right you can get the universities to foot most of your local group bills.
LHC
One thing that slowly is coming to light, however, is that the anti-Israel movement is not the grassroots, student-led movement it purports to be. In fact, it has a highly coordinated, well-funded action plan assisted and coordinated by outside groups.
Not military, but UW tactics nonetheless.
Perfect environment to find impressionable people and if you do it right you can get the universities to foot most of your local group bills.
LHC
Concur.
Our universities and community colleges are being used as channels for various recruitment - and safe heavens by certain faculty, students, think tanks, religious groups and other special interests., student visas, spouses of students...etc.,etc.,
http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/lee-kaplan/backgrounder-the-students-for-justice-in-palestine/
Great post.
An interesting interactive infographic - drag the cursor over a county and click on it to see how it stacks up with others out there in the data points listed.
Where Are the Hardest Places to Live in the U.S.?
The Upshot came to this conclusion by looking at six data points for each county in the United States: education (percentage of residents with at least a bachelor’s degree), median household income, unemployment rate, disability rate, life expectancy and obesity. We then averaged each county’s relative rank in these categories to create an overall ranking.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/26/upshot/where-are-the-hardest-places-to-live-in-the-us.html?WT.mc_id=2015-Q1-KEYWEE-AUD_DEV-0101-0331&WT.mc_ev=click&bicmp=AD&bicmlukp=WT.mc_id&bicmst=1420088400&bicmet=1451624400&ad-keywords=FEBAUDDEV&kwp_0=9516&kwp_4=71328&kwp_1=123480&_r=0
Richard