But I’m not going to continue hijacking this topic in a likely futile attempt to educate. Anyone who really wants to get it should start with Googling the two federal acts that I named above. After absorbing the contents of wikipedia, you’ll have about 10% of the info needed to really understand what’s going on. Keep reading! Keep learning!

The taxpayers are on the hook while the corporate fat cats use the bank to speculate and skim off the money in the form of pay, bonuses and expense accounts. They flee when the bank fails and leave the mess for the taxpayers to clean up.

FDIC coverage should never have been raised beyond modest amounts. The constant threat of a bank run would keep the banks conservative – and from growing too big. It would also force them to syndicate the larger loans. We do not need the big national banks and were better served by the larger number of state only banks. The housing bubble was made possible by the FDIC and government (congressional and executive branch) policy to push AA on the banks and force (incentivize) them to lend to unqualified borrowers. And as long as they were going to do it they arranged great paydays for their officers in the process.

The same thing is happening again with the Student Loan bubble where irrational student loans are being made to people who have no intention and no prospects of ever paying them. All guaranteed by the taxpayers and generating fees and subsidized interest. The problem is not the concept of a student loan, it’s the concept of no (perceived) risk and immediate fee income for the bank. The default rates are climbing to historic highs and still the money train continues. Maybe 20% plus of our nations’ colleges should be closed, but the loan party keeps them going. For now. It will all fall down and go boom soon enough, and all the execs involved will have made off with the loot.

Printing press money. Hell of a drug.

The solution is election of a new conservative government and the roll back or shut down of the New Deal and Great Society Social schemes. It may take Calcutta levels of poverty and starvation to get the population to change their ways. Far more likely is the arrival of a police state required because of the printing press money.

We know from history you can only print money so long before you have the big bang collapse. The money becomes worthless sometimes overnight. Then the point of a gun is required for the government to get anything done.

Are you familiar with the psychological term “projection” or “projecting”? I ask because you apparently read my post, and then you projected your thinking, mindset and attitudes onto what I’d written. Your response wasn’t even remotely about my thinking or my ideas. It was all about you.

I don’t think the CEO and the executives of any corporation (whether it’s the one I work for, or the one you work for, or the one that anyone else works for) should reward themselves excessively, and fail to equally reward the employees that are taking care of the customers and bringing in the company’s profits.

Back in the “good old days” a CEO might be worth (i.e. receiving pay in the amount of) 20 or 30 times the lowest paid employees. Now we have CEOs who make 600 to 800 times as much as the lowest employees – that is my CEO and my bank tellers example above. That’s what is destroying the middle class.

The 1% (CEOs and boards of directors) are taking more than their share, more than they bring in in customers and company profits – they’re being enormously short-sighted. A hundred years ago, Henry Ford is supposed to have responded to someone who criticized his decision to pay his workers $2 when the prevailing wage at the time was $1: “If I pay them less, then they can’t afford to buy one of my cars.”

In my industry, banking/finance, when the bad times come and the middle class is all gone, who will be the customers? Poor people don’t use banks. And there won’t be very many rich people left who will still need banks… So, if we don’t find a way to correct the problems, the banks will fail.

Remember back in the 80′s when Savings and Loans were deregulated? Today we have no S&L’s left. Since the passage of Gramm-Leach-Bliley deregulated banking, a whole lot of banks have gotten in trouble and gone under. Some are still in the process of failing.

I’m a capitalist. I don’t want the banks to fail. I agree with your solutions, and I’d add repeal of Gramm-Leach-Bliley and reinstatement of Glass-Steagall, because well-regulated banks have a much better likelihood of staying in business. Even Newt Gingrich came out this week and agreed that repeal of Glass-Steagall was a mistake.

I can’t speak for anyone else who participated in last week’s protest, but I was there because I want to find some way to force government to pass the necessary laws in time to prevent the “brave new world” you like to predict. The two ways I see of forcing government to act: A) hire lobbyists, B) huge waves of populist protests, like the one that ended the Vietnam war.

Is this such a hard concept for you?

I’m not saying miscalculation/misfortune won’t strike me and mine next. Frankly, I have some relatives who are not going to end well. Friends also. Funny how freedom works – everybody does what they want to. It’s interesting to see who pays the bills in the end.

The idea is that it’s better when you are required to lie in the bed you make. When government disrupts that by allowing people to take from others when they want (or “need” to) – you have far less caution, probity and good child rearing.

Like when the (more or less) socialist presidency and congress created social security – Follow that up with divorce on demand and welfare entitlements you have 80% of blacks born out of wedlock (with white numbers climbing also but never so high). You also have elderly of all ethnics thinking the government is going to take care of them when they can’t work, as opposed to themselves & their children. In the end society becomes far more loosey goosey about how the kids are raised.

That’s a thought. Would the people of Oakland have allowed OUSD to become such a disgrace if there were no social security and children and grandchildren were a principal source of old age support?

When you, by legislation of any kind, insulate people from the consequences of their own decisions subtle and large – you get a LOT of bad behavior. By bad I don’t mean Penn State, I mean failure to hedge bets, to keep insurance, to maintain strong relationships like family, church, cult or whatever. Too much booze and Vicodin. Everyone can start thinking they really can do whatever feels good at the moment. Spouses and kids get neglected & discarded.

It’s all an illusion created with printing press money.

As far as burning up your savings trying to pay the mortgage – why would anybody do that? You are expected to sell the house you can’t afford to keep, or walk away from a purchase money mortgage. You are exected to move away to a place you could find work and could live within your means. You know, like in the Mid 1940s relocation from rural to industrial America. Or the Western Migration during the depression (family migrated as far west as St Louis then – for work).

Harold, I’m not trying to make you feel especially bad. These concepts were taught in grade school when I was there. Things change – people move with the times. They also change occupations. Family does what it can to help family. I know a family that was run out of the United States in 1963 and made a nice living in Ghana till the heat died down and they returned to the states. There are plenty of such extreme examples in business and industry. You do what you have to and keep on living. Don’t expect the government to take care of you unless you enlist. And I had friends do that too. For the most part everybody lived to laugh about their bad times and grudgingly admit they had the times of their life and learned who their real friends were, and made new ones.

It’s all just history repeating.

A friend in municipal government told me a year ago that people don’t understand that these ARE the good years. There are terrible days coming. But the sun will still rise and many of us will endure. And we will have lived in interesting times. Just don’t wait for someone external to come and save you.

So, if my job was recently ship overseas and I burn up all my savings trying to pay the mortgage, that’s my fault?

Really??

Flunk them out.

Stop trying to “educate” them, stop trying to “fix” them. Stop making any excuses for them and stop trying to make them feel anything but shame for shameful performance.

If you have a “student” that has not learned appropriate english and math skills despite the children around them in the same school learning those skills – perhaps the bottom 25% or whatever – flunk them and tell them to get themselves ready for work in the fields – or whatever other lawful menial labor is available for them. If they are good at song and dance maybe they can be the next Whitney Houston. But stop trying to teach remedial lessons to screw-ups who don’t want to learn anyway. Flunk them out and get them away from the normal kids into alternative and vocational schools. Yes, medical intervention might make the difference for a very few where the problem isn’t low IQ but rather a treatable brain chemistry problem. It would be nice to have medical screening for the screw-ups. Nice, but optional.

And as far as their “families” go – you can tell them to take their kiddies with them and leave, to go elsewhere where they can find other people who care about them.

It’s simple, really.

OUSD’s budget is apparently lower, $376 million(but still outstrips most districts in the east bay.

I would also tend to agree with Nextset on the issue poor people. Just watch the public comment portion of the school board meetings and you will see/hear “You supposed to educate my child”(In truth an education is a participatory endeavor by parents and children, it isn’t something that is done to/for you. You will hear “we must have equity”, when the reality is many poor schools receive extra funding(title 1, ELA etc)As I said before, when education is at the top of parents,kids,politicians priority list our kids will excel, but not until then because an education must be strived for, cherished and earned.

But I have to say: The point you really make is that other people have a lot of money so you believe you have a right to take some of it for yourself – because it would please you to do so and you think you are such a good/better person you should have their money.

This point is as opposed to thinking that you should be able to make more money yourself by doing something in the marketplace – or your taxes should be lowered, Or some other such expectation.

I see people who think like you seem to be thinking, and they are in court on theft charges. It started with that feeling of entitlement. You should check that – it’s a dangerous way to be thinking.

I have no problem with the position that we need to make some serious changes in the tax code. Perhaps we should discuss death taxes also – I am willing to consider the position that it is reasonable to (effectively) force wealthy to spend down or transfer wealth before dying to prevent the rise of an aristocracy beyond acceptable limits in this nation. And I even believe CA should adopt Oregon’s no self-serve gas station policy.

I have a real problem with anyone saying that their CEO makes so much money they personally have the right to have some. If you don’t like your employment, resign and seek other options in the marketplace. Earn your own money. Teach your children to do the same.

believe me, immigrants are doing just that. And there are a whole lot of ways to make money in this nation.

Herman Cain said something about “if you’re poor in this nation it’s your own fault”.

It hurts to hear it, but it’s true. Poor people are poor for distinct reasons. I’ve known poor and rich. I’ve known certain people go from poor to rich to poor in 3 generations. IQ has a lot to do with it, but discipline, control of one’s affections, and a healthy dose of not falling in love with a bunch of losers helps.

We are in a period just preceding the real fall of the US. The middle class is on the way out. Violence is likely coming. It will be fascinating to see who comes out on top when the real change hits us. Still, we can more easily see who ends up on the bottom.

Teach your students not to be on that bottom.

Why does a district with such a comparatively large budget cut the people who make schools what they are, and where is all that money going?

Look here:

excerpt- “What is the size of OUSD’s budget and how does it compare to other districts?

OUSD’s total budgeted expenditures for 2009-10 are $616.6 million. Of that amount $118 million is restricted, which means it can only be used for designated purposes such as construction, insurance, and debt servicing, to name a few. The remaining $428.6 million comprises the General Fund.

Of the $428.6 million in the General Fund, $252 million is unrestricted, meaning OUSD can use this money for a wide variety of purposes. Another $176.3 million of the General Fund is restricted, meaning OUSD has little discretion over how this money is spent because it comes with strings attached.

Overall, OUSD’s budget is larger than those of most districts its size. This is due to the large amount of restricted or categorical funding that OUSD receives. Restricted and categorical funds are reserved for specific purposes determined by the state or other government entities.

The most common kind of categorical funds are known as Title I funds. Title I funds are designed to provide services and support to low-income students. Consequently, districts with high rates of poverty typically receive more Title I monies. With 69 percent of OUSD’s student population qualifying for free and reduced lunch (one of the highest percentages in California), the District receives a greater share of Title I money than most school systems. The additional revenue OUSD receives in Title I and other categorical funds is used to provide critical service to some our most disadvantaged students, thereby helping to increase student achievement, social conditions, and the level of equity in our schools”.

http://www.ousd.k12.ca.us/199410102104342143/blank/browse.asp?A=383&BMDRN=2000&BCOB=0&C=57082

Oakland has over twice the budget of a majority of east bay districts, but is near the bottom in performance, why is that?

We have a 30+ year old ed code written and passed by a democratic legislature(funded by guess which unions)that has forced burdensome rules upon us which foster mediocrity(which is what we have now, or worse).This system was designed to cater to the lowest common denominator(vis a vis productive vs unproductive) and as a result we are on the edge of financial oblivion.

Where else does the money go?

http://www.calchamber.com/pressreleases/pages/californiaeducationstudyrevealsdisturbingtrend.aspx

Maybe Michael Moore, or better yet a fearless reporter could shine some light on this, as all the people who should be informing the public are apparently complicit in this outrageous scam.

http://californiawatch.org/k-12/spending-far-equal-among-state-s-school-districts-analysis-finds-10567

For those of you that blame charters, look at this:

http://www.abetteroakland.com/how-should-ousd-respond-to-declining-enrollment/2011-03-02