Jim

found while doing field work this week: 4 long-toed salamanders 1 Pacific giant salamander 2 Cope's salamanders 6 Ensatinas 8 tailed frogs 6 Cascade frogs 1 wet bear

I got the Nomads Rx here: http://www.opticus.com/ Used climbing in Bolivia 2 months, various PNW climbs, also use for biking. I like 'em.

Quite impressive. Congrats and thanks for sharing the photos.

I'll bow out of this circular discussion. Here's the facts: We have a $5M+ budget deficit in WA over the next two years. The WA voters have turned down even a modest tax increase on candy and such - so any increase in revenue isn't in the picture. WA must have a balanced budget. Thus, more cuts are coming. My opinion: I'd rather see some trims to unsustainable benefit packages then reduced services to the poor or other vulneralble programs. If you have a solution, let's hear it.

Scalia is sharp as a tack - but evil. Thomas? Dumb as a stump. How the heck did that guy ever get considered? Oh, yea.

We're not politicians, we're citizens. We're not constrained by focus-grouped-out-the-ass politics and the fear of "political suicide" when we talk about potential solutions. Politicians don't talk about raising taxes or the impact of giving away tax cuts instead of funding its obligations because it's not part of the story or because it wouldn't go a long way toward solving the mess, they don't talk about it because they think it would be "political suicide". I expect politicians (silly me) to exercise leadership, to get the story right, and frame issues. Instead, American politics has drifted into a model of governance where our political leaders have become Burger King employees "giving us what we want" based on constant polling and focus grouping. The problem with that, of course, is that we don't always know what we want or what's needed for the long term health of the community. California is a perfect example: people don't want taxes but they want and need services. They have an initiative process and legislative constraints that compound the schizophenia and build the kind of straightjacket that Washingtonians are finding themselves in. Ignoring the facts and ignoring fiscal reality is exactly what pols are doing when they don't address how we got here (worse when they find scapegoats who've nothing to do with it), and leave one half of the revenue story completely off the table. Claiming that raising taxes is "impossible" and leaving it at that means they're putting their own skin ahead of what's best for the communities they're supposed to serve. A one-term wonder making noise, raising hell, putting forward good ideas and changing the parameters of the debate are worth twenty legislators willing to play in the neoliberal cat box these douchebags have created for us. You make good points about the reality of the leadership vacuum. There is that messy thing about democracy though. Who would reasonably think a tax increase package is going to pass today in WA. I'm all for the long haul and working towards that goal - but - with an over $5M shortfall in the coming two year budget, I'm also a realist. Can't stick you head in the sand and make beleive it will go away if only....

Maybe you could hook up with Pat and your jurisprudence expertise could run it through the courts in time for the budget talks. In the meantime it's the law. Was I just bestowed an honorary law degree? Kewwwwwllllll. I didn't know anyone else with the correct connections.

Yea.

Hey - I vote for who I think can do the best job. I visit my state and federal representatives' offices twice a year. I give to progressive causes. But it doesn't give me the privilege of ignoring reality and what the voters have put on the table. You can continue making all the noise you want - but fiscal reality is staring the policy makers in the face. They don't have your luxury of ignoring the facts. And - I do believe that some minor tweaks need to be made to unsustainable benefit packages in government.

Maybe you could hook up with Pat and your jurisprudence expertise could run it through the courts in time for the budget talks. In the meantime it's the law.

And yet, Eymanoid ditto-heads aren't obstacles to solving the crisis, progressives are. Thanks for "keeping it real". While I agree that it's a stupid law, there was, well a vast majority of voters who went for it - so it wasn't just crackpots and lost souls. Maybe people are just stupid and vote against their best interest - I dunno. But a majority went for it and here we are.

The state legislators are considering "closing tax loopholes", but it appears that this will require a 2/3rd majority as it would raise taxes according to that wonkly I-960. So I guess this, and last year's election, already show where the voters are on taxes. So we're back to: 1) make structural changes including benefits/pensions 2) service cuts. My guess is that we'll see more of #2... least for a while.

Next round: OLYMPIA – The gap between Washington’s projected state revenues and current expenses grew to about $5.1 billion for the coming biennium, prompting a call from Gov. Chris Gregoire for the Legislature to focus on painful cuts rather than budget “trims.” The Legislature will use this forecast to craft a budget of about $31.9 billion for the two-year budgeting cycle that begins July 1. If lawmakers can’t do that before April 24, the scheduled end of the current legislative session, they’ll need a special session. “We cannot trim our way out of it,” Gregoire said two hours after the forecast was announced. “Cuts will be felt everywhere around the state.”

"The stone age didn't end for lack of stones." If you allow prices to coordinate supply and demand, then increasing scarcity drives increasing efficiency, conservation, and substitution. If oil does start to get extremely scarce relative to effective demand, we'll switch to something else to fuel transport before we come anywhere close to exhausting every last oil-field. I'm hoping for so much - least for my kid and her cohorts.

No, no, a generic "you". I'm with you. I always thougt that after reiterment the way to go was move out of the city and find some elbow room. Makes less sense as I get older. Plus there's likely more Bingo games in town anyway!

...and why would you want to live in the 'burbs and have a long commute? Hmmm. Startups in simple bicycle production?

Talk about going long! The energy card is the one different item now, however. Don't know when that one will come to play.

I'm on the phone on hold to my broker right now. Betting the farm that treasury bill interest rates will rise. Yes, you should do the reverse and go long on T-bills with every nickel you have. Whew....rolling the dice here. Risky business..... Oh man - not sure I'd jump on either wagon big time.

Don't think we'll see the second coming of Weimar-style inflation but negative real rates and quantitative easing = consistent inflationary pressures on most commodities. Had this discussion with a good friend the other day. Tough to hedge as a little guy without trading costs eating up any gains. Pretty much all you can do is minimize debt and stay liquid. Lots of scary downside risks in just about anything you can hedge in. People with local knowledge of which neighborhoods have upside potential and lots of cash could find a haven in busted real estate markets that are waaaay into the cash-flow positive zone. Good friggin' question! I guess it depends on how old you are and what your comfort level is regarding our crawl towards energy crunch time. 15 yrs? 30 yrs? Stuffing it in the mattress seems premature but the alternative.....?

Are you a pentagon advisor in your spare time?

but it's a sunk cost -- we already paid for them. i think the boys will feel nekkid now that they're gone though, and it's not like anyone in charge is gonna tell them no when they ask for a restock, right? i hope this thing works, but the fact that i don't even know what "works" means in this situation isn't a good sign - is there some sorta libyan jeffersonian over there ready to jump up and regulate soon as the big-Q is scragged? You're again asking too many logical questions.

That would be a Lagamorph actually.

Wages fine. Unfunded pensions with auto increases despite the economy. No. So another 6% from the WA budget. Where's should it come from in your opinion? certainly not from austerity measures as it will compound the problem Tighter budgets when the economy is not good - it's temporary and helps reduce the pressure on the budget. When the economy improves, the "austerity" is relaxed. Damn, you're dense. What a concept. "Unlike the federal government, states are not able to issue debt routinely. Issues of general obligation debt require at least the approval of the legislature and in many states, voter approval. The issue of revenue bonds requires legislation to create an agency to issue bonds and the creation of a revenue stream to repay the debt. These practices mean that the issuance of debt is fully in the public view. It is extremely rare for a state government to borrow long-term funds to cover operating expenses, although. Louisiana did in 1988 and Connecticut did in 1991. There do not appear to be any other examples of this practice from recent years."

You seem to throw bombs at anyone's opinion but have no solution of your own. How convenient.

Private companies do it all the time. And w/r/t retirement... so do individual employees at private companies. Sometimes you have to cut 401k from 10% to say 6% when times are not so good. Sometimes you even have to cut below the amount where you get matching funds. That's life, j_b. Some kind of variable bonus compensation that's indexed to economic growth over and above a particular floor would do wonders for aligning the incentives of the public and private sector workers, and would serve as an automatic belt tightening mechanism during recessions. Seems like a reasonable idea that actually tries to address, for instance, reality.