Johnny, Johnny, Johnny. How soon you forget. The 2006 California State Bar Member Services Survey has an excellent rundown of attorney demographics in California.
www.calbar.ca.gov/calbar/pdfs/reports/2006_State-…
Let's see, you claim that attorneys work 80 hours per week, while Richmond cops work 60 hours. According to your own survey (yes, you're the one who posted it initially), only 7% of attorneys work more than 60 hours per week. I guess the others are too busy working to respond to the survey? So attorneys are working less than cops. The rest of your analysis is just as flawed.
Really, what you're telling me is that prospective attorneys weighing their career choices are making some very poor decisions. That's hardly my fault.
Incidentally, I wonder if you have these conversations with your cop "friends" in Richmond. I can't imagine you saying the things you say here to their faces. — December 2, 2009 6:04 p.m.
Retired fat
Aunt, Mr. Garrett began his public service in 1975, according to the article. I suspect that his retirement is based on continuous service to public agencies which all have PERS-based retirements. In other words, his retirement is based on 29 years service, not 8.— December 30, 2009 7:50 p.m.
It's Better To Burn Out Than It Is To Fade
Like I said, you want to play-try me. ============== What the hell are you talking about? And why are you posting about this a month later?— December 17, 2009 5:15 p.m.
Hedge Funds Buying Stocks, Wee Folk Selling
Actually, I agree that Richmond cops are overpaid. They make more in base pay than most SDFD supervisors. (Less than 10 SDFD chiefs make more, and they have worse benefits and no OT) Of course, the cost of living in the Bay Area is a bit more. It would seem that Harvard lawyers may be discovering what many others have in the past few years. A degree really doesn't mean squat anymore, nor is it a valid measure of one's worth to society. The computer industry really started that. Alas, that puts a bit of a dent in Johnny's "GED" rants. I do find it funny that Johnny uses lawyer's compensation to prove his point. Not going to get a whole lot of sympathy there...— December 6, 2009 1:18 p.m.
Stick It Up Your Butt
Nice pussy, BTW. ========= Really ought to shave it, don't you think? ;)— December 4, 2009 9:12 p.m.
Hedge Funds Buying Stocks, Wee Folk Selling
Sounds like the story of the attorney who appears before St. Peter. Our hero tells the good saint that there must be some mistake; he's only 35. St. Peter replies, "Yes, but in billable hours you're 96".— December 3, 2009 6:28 a.m.
Hedge Funds Buying Stocks, Wee Folk Selling
Johnny, Johnny, Johnny. How soon you forget. The 2006 California State Bar Member Services Survey has an excellent rundown of attorney demographics in California. www.calbar.ca.gov/calbar/pdfs/reports/2006_State-… Let's see, you claim that attorneys work 80 hours per week, while Richmond cops work 60 hours. According to your own survey (yes, you're the one who posted it initially), only 7% of attorneys work more than 60 hours per week. I guess the others are too busy working to respond to the survey? So attorneys are working less than cops. The rest of your analysis is just as flawed. Really, what you're telling me is that prospective attorneys weighing their career choices are making some very poor decisions. That's hardly my fault. Incidentally, I wonder if you have these conversations with your cop "friends" in Richmond. I can't imagine you saying the things you say here to their faces.— December 2, 2009 6:04 p.m.
Hedge Funds Buying Stocks, Wee Folk Selling
That is truly amazing. ================= What is truly amazing is that you added benefits to the cops total compensation, but not to the lawyers.— December 2, 2009 8:51 a.m.
Rate of Home Price Declines Continues Dropping
You seemed to somehow, don't ask me how, left out the fact that the retirement age was dropped by 5 years ======== Um, did you read the part where I clearly wrote that the system pre-1996 ranged from 2.5% at 50 to 2.9999% at 55. You scream all you want about how the retirement age dropped. It did not. I note that you somehow, I don't know how, left out the fact that before Corbett, retirements were uncapped. I know many firefighters who retired at 110%-130% of final salary. Now it's capped at 90%. Regardless of your position on that percentage, I'm guessing that balances out the retirement factor increase just a little bit...— November 30, 2009 7:35 p.m.
Rate of Home Price Declines Continues Dropping
Johnsd, Pete Wilson is an important figure in the current state of the city. Apparently, he was monkeying with property tax rates in the city when he was surprised by Prop 13. Today, that results in the city getting back a lower percentage of property taxes from the state than other cities. Then Susan Golding reduced business taxes to 25% of what they had been. It's easy for pundits to criticize city worker retirement as a function of percentage of the general fund. It doesn't seem to be so easy for them to admit that the percentage would still have gone up due to the reduced revenues created by Wilson's and Golding's policies.— November 30, 2009 7:27 p.m.
Rate of Home Price Declines Continues Dropping
I do not understand why the public sector pensions cannot be modified just like private pensions. ================ John, state law prohibits public employers from reducing an individual's vested pension without the consent of that individual. As a point of reference, the safety pension in SD was on a sliding scale prior to 1996. It started at 2.5% at 50 and added a tenth of a percent to 2.9999% at 55. The average safety employee retires at 52+, so we're really talking the difference between 2.7% and 3%, or a 10% (or so) increase. Somehow that broke the system? I don't think so. Additionally, the 3% at 50 was not the result of a contract, but rather the result of a lawsuit. In other words, it wasn't a "sweetheart deal" but rather court ordered.— November 27, 2009 6:36 a.m.