The California DMV pays three--three, mind you--employees to keep HAMRJMR, PSTLCHK, RDSN57, and DOOTERS off the road.
Interesting, but the article doesn't consider my preferred hypothesis: the kids are just too darned demoralized to fornicate.
A question for the Reverend Jackson: Who has been running the show in Newark, in Chicago, in Detroit, and in Los Angeles for a great long while now? The answer is: People who see the world in much the same way as does the Reverend Jackson, who take the same view of government, who support the same policies, and who suffer from the same biases.
My advice: never ignore "fundamental laws of finance".
Surely, many are wondering: How could Pay It Forward be so expensive if students would be paying for their own educations, perhaps even more than they do now? The answer is that it costs money to move money through time. Pay It Forward enthusiasts often ignored this fundamental law of finance.
I tend to agree: when it comes to investing, I'd probably rather bet on Warren Buffett than the general public. His track record is loads better.
Individual investors have been cutting back on cash in portfolios, the exact reverse of what Warren Buffett has been doing at Berkshire Hathaway.
Who do you think has got it right?
But this California history shows once again that in times of boom, people were too busy to fall into the hole of zero-sum hatreds. Its the old story. Prosperous people or people who take seriously the prospect of prosperity are nicer and more tolerant.
The story ends with the predictable "give us more money." More money has been going to employee pension funding -- and even then there is a reported unfunded pension fund gap. We get the gap, high prices, floods, and questionable service. There is never enough money when there is a politically influential and unionized workforce.
I'd say it doesn't really answer the question, it just pushes the question one level deeper.
But it's an interesting question: why do pollsters with poor track records keep getting hired?