Election Results – We hate PG&E, except we hate government supplied electricity more.

The referendum to require a vote of the people before government can take over electric power generation failed to get enough votes to pass.  It seems like an odd result to me.  People voted to deny themselves the right to vote on something.

Probably PG&E could have run a better campaign.  It was about more than just politicians spending money.  In addition it was about the collective right to steal or “take” property from the PG&E owners (millions of shareholders throughout the state).

What may have won the day was this feeling that “corporations are greedy evil bastards!” and “they are always ripping us off!”  Fair enough.

It reminds me of the campaign against the railroad companies in the late 19th century.  Then the complaint then was about how “unfair” it was that some railroad routes were shorter and cost more than some longer routes.  It was an obvious rip off!  (Or so they thought, the actual reason was economics).  So, after the public demanded action, the government took over the pricing and raised the prices of all the cheaper routes.  Now things were “fair” and everyone was “happy!”

So the question is, if PG&E are greedy bastards, then what is SSJID or other government entities?   They are men, not angels, just as politically greedy as any corporate board.  So, in effect the voters decided that greedy men serve you better if they have guns and can extract money from you by force. (Through taxation.)

Look at the results of the election, by county below left.  And the map of PG&E “territory.” (There are some small govt utilities in that “service area though)

In the dark counties, the voters rejected prop 16, i.e. they hate greedy PG&E.  Notice anything odd?  These are generally the counties served by PG&E!  At first glance, sure, it makes sense, PG&E must be terrible, they would know, right? 

But on the other hand, look who approved prop 16.  They hate the government power worse. 

Is it just a case of “the grass is greener?”  That’s for you to decide.  But if public power was all it’s cracked up to be I would have expected people served by government power to not hate it so much.  It seems like they wish they could be served by PG&E!

Note particularly, the high level of hatred of government power in Orange and Riverside counties.  (Just about 60%).  Also, why did San Joaquin approve the measure and demand a vote on the matter?  Could it be that we’re tired of the propaganda from SSJID? (15% less than what?)  What about Stanislaus county, also rejecting public power.  That is the place where SSJID is telling us “they are so happy they got rid of PG&E!”  Well it doesn’t seem so from the election results.  The warning is clear; people with government power are telling us “don’t do it, it’s worse than PG&E if you can believe that!”

Election Results - June 8, 2010, Statewide Direct Primary - California Secretary of State

Technorati Tags: Proposition 16,PG&E,SSJID

Plunder! Dissects Government Unions

This might help the Manteca Bulletin readers sort things out. 

Do policemen die early?  Is being a cop a “dangerous job?”  Do government unions “protect the worker?”  I suggest the answers are no, not really, and no!  You can read why in this well researched article.

Plunder! Dissects Government Unions by John Seiler

More on cable customers taxed

Two other things I forgot.

Regarding the cable TV tax, the editor claims “There is little doubt the revenue is needed.” Little doubt? “Needed” by whom? For what? There are a lot of us who don’t believe the tremendous growth of government over the years has been a good or “needed” thing.

Next, he says “No one in Manteca at this time should have the stomach to push for new taxes. In time, though, the need will come.”

Why will the need come to raise new taxes? What is going to happen that will cause such a need?

Let me dispel two myths of why people think “new taxes” are “needed.” What about growth of the population? Does that cause the need for “new taxes?” NO! If there are more people, more houses, more businesses, then the government collects more taxes from the new people, houses, etc., in exactly the proportion of the growth.

If the population of Manteca goes from 60,000 to 120,000 there will theoretically be no need for “new taxes!” Why? Because there are twice as many people using government “services” and there will be twice as much tax collected. It all evens out.

Of course this never stops the government propaganda machine from telling us a new tax “is needed” because of “the growth in the population,” but that’s just the way it is.

The other excuse sometimes used is “inflation.” We need to raise taxes because “inflation” has made everything cost more. Sounds half-logical until you think about it. If a loaf of bread costs $1 today they collect x taxes. If the price of a loaf of bread goes to $2, then they collect 2x taxes. In other words, if the cost of everything doubles, then the taxes collected doubles. Once again, everything “evens out.”

No, the real question was raised by the author of A Monetary History of the United States; namely, why were taxes more or less stable at about 7 percent of GDP for the first 150 years of the nation, and then suddenly started skyrocketing in the later part of the 20th century. What was so “needed?” And why is the growth in the cost of government so “inevitable?”

Manteca Bulletin - Cable customers ‘taxed’ by Manteca, satellite users aren’t

One stop permit center opens

The long awaited “one stop” permit center has opened in Manteca.  Included in this video is the wild opening gala and interviews with customers about their experience and comments from various city officials.

In addition, in this video I ask the chief of Manteca Transit (bus service) about how the new bus route is working out. 

Lets do lunch -- in prison!

Does anyone believe, as the Manteca Bulletin asserts, that prisoners eat better food and have better medicine than the taxpayers? How bad would the taxpayers' food and medicine have to be?

What's odd is that the editor admits in the next paragraph that the prison guard union spews forth propaganda in their TV ads in an effort to get more money and acknowledges the guards are making extra money selling "cell phones" to prisoners.

How do you assert that the guards are manipulators and corrupt and at the same time tell us to believe the story about how the prisoners eat great food and get the best medical treatments?

That's what propaganda is. It isn't a statement that people don't believe -- effective propaganda tells us what we want to believe. We don't like to think that our society is evil or has corrupt institutions, so we are willing and long to believe that that we wouldn't treat prisoners in any but the most humane ways. We're Americans after all!

But open your eyes and look at the facts. Read about the slop prisoners are forced to eat and the deplorable medical negligence. The medical system in California prisons is so bad the federal government has been trying to put it under their control to bring it up to constitutional standards -- with little success.

Why is the press practically locked out of the prisons? Why do the courts and jails not permit inspections by third parties? Why do the prisons hold Potemkin tours of their jail facilities for the press showing the wonderful humane treatment everyone gets. It's like when the Red Cross would inspect a Nazi prison, they would always have new blankets and clean clothes and good food. Yet we find corpses being dragged out the San Joaquin jail with boot marks on their backs.

At least Sheriff Arpaio has the decency to actually say he feeds the prisoners for 40 cents a day and justifies it.

Shocking news -- group paid by city supports new tax

There should be some sort of disclosure on these things. Like, if you are paid by city or you get tax money, you should have to mention that if you're going to "endorse" a new tax.

Also, notice that every time the new tax is mentioned in the Bulletin, there is always this same "key talking points" in every article.

This is the current drum beat:

• Now they are talking about 30 new positions. Before it was 15 police and 15 fire, which is the same thing, except that 30 sounds like more.
• Now the tax is just a tiny little 50 cents for every $100. Sounds like almost nothing! Yet, somehow this will raise $4 million every year.
• Repeating the same "guarantee" that the general fund support of police and fire does not "slip below" the current level. "In other words no shifting of funds." They leave out any explanation of how anyone can ensure this. The actual text of the measure says it's "the intention" not to "supplant." That's the word it uses. "Intentions" are one thing, guarantees are another!
• The money would be split evenly (interesting choice of words!) between the police and fire departments. As for why this would be is anyone's guess, since it costs roughly twice as much to run a police dept as a fire dept in the city of Manteca. I guess it just sounds better or "more fair" to say it will go to both evenly, even though it doesn't make sense.

Professor Harold Hill visits Manteca neighbor

(note: Click on the title above to read this article from the Ceres Courier)

This must be a growth industry. This firm apparently travels from city to city telling them "we can get you money!" It reminds me of professor Hill in The Music Man, who told the town "you got trouble!" and of course, he could fix it for the right price.

The method is strikingly similar. L.E.G. comes to town, promises to sell the people on the idea that there is some "crisis." And the only way to fix this manufactured "crisis" is to raise the taxes. And for their services, they get a nice "piece of the action."

Note the following ominous boast of "100 percent win rate." And the term "finance measures" instead of the more accurate term "tax increases."

Stockton fights crime with propaganda

Others are glad to see the city and Police Department doing something,
regardless of whether it works.

Note that this is the same Stockton that we are being told we should emulate. Stockton passed a special "safety tax" a few years ago. The new tax promised to hire new police officers, etc, etc.

The result? From the same article:

Stockton had the highest violent crime rate in the state ... and is among Central Valley cities with high car theft and robbery rates.