Gawain 0 #1 August 23, 2003 And frankly, good riddance. His campaign against Davis in 02 was the worst I ever saw. Additionally, the beginning of his campaign this time was sorely out of focus (zeroing in on Arnold first was a "big mistake") of the recall (Davis). Of course, in true political fashion, Simon says it has nothing to do with the daily phone calls from ST-congressional and ST-GOP leaders pressuring him to throw in the towel. Here are a couple links: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,95521,00.html and http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/08/23/california.recall/index.html Now, personally, I like McClintock. I've heard his "plan" for the first day, and first 30 days overall in office. I think he's the better candidate, but I do not believe he can win. My focus, and reason I signed petition, was to act on a wholesale change in the executive leadership (if you can call it that) in this state. That being said, my focus is now to ensure that Bustamonte does not get the office (his tough love, $10B in new taxes, yes, BILLION is total bullsh*t). So, who does that leave me to vote for in the near term? Now, before everyone starts picking sides and stuff, remember this: I've heard/seen those that like certain individuals because of their experience in politics. Now, if you examine the make-up of our legislature, state senate and Govenor's office, you have a virtual "who's-who" of career politicians west of the Mississippi. Highly educated, well bred, etc. In five short years, in spite of revenues being up 25% in the past two alone, they've managed to increase spending, without a net by 40%. It is these experienced and career individuals who got us into the mess and unfortunately, I'm not convinced that McClintock is from a different cut of cloth. For those on the conservative side, your concerns about Buffet's role in the economic planning have merit. I will offer one other perception which I believe is specifically why Buffet is needed: Berkshire Hathaway's main business holdings are in Insurance, Re-insurance, Intermodal Transport, Agriculture, clothing apparel, and manufacturing. These business sectors regardless of technology levels, have been the back bone of California businesses for decades. What's been the biggest sore-spot for businesses leaving California? Workman's Comp/Insurance. What industry would squeeze the individual more if it could (and recently many were able to adjust their rate schedules)? Insurance. What recent stike cost the US economy $1-2B per day? Longshoreman's strike (read: Long Beach, containers and Intermodal transport). What sector of the economy has beared the brunt of nearly all the new regulations, taxes and fees over the past 3 years? Business. What portion of business in Calfornia is not in the Fortune 100 and thus less likely able to absorb the overhead cost increases? I'm not certain, but performing my own searches through a couple detailed Business Intelligence engines, the number of company sites with less than 250 employees outnumbers sites with more than 250 employees by a factor of at least 7:1 according to surveyed companies. In my daily work visiting small/medium sized companies, I estimate this ratio to be about 25:1. When the small business sees their Workman's Comp premium jump from 1200/mo to 3600/mo that cripples the business 100%. The large business just lays off a couple people. Where's the greater affect? Even using the conservative 7:1 ratio, the rampant disregard by the Insurance Commissioner and the legislature means that the potential impact near term is graver than ever. Higher taxes and fees are not going to solve that problem. People that know how to run those businesses can provide valuable insight to reforming the framework they operate under. *phew*.... Chop away folks...So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
