Here is chapter 2 right now. So far I'm calling this novel "Waking Up".

Justin Morrison sat near the front in a semi-amphitheater at the San Francisco University of Law school. He wanted to be close to the professor but not right up in front. The class consisted of 54 up and coming lawyers who were able to afford the $52,000 per year costs via loans or scholarships or by just writing a check because the family had money. Justin Archibald Morrison came from a family with money. He did not have to negotiate loans with various reputable and disreputable banks, or work miscellaneous jobs in order to make ends meet while attending the 3 years at the law school before he took the bar exam and passed smoothly into the legal profession, enabling him to be hired by the numerous legal corporations that argued in front of courts of law or processed legal paper work for clients who paid large sums of money. The dreams of a 6 or 7 figure salary tended to attract applicants to law school. It was rarely ever about some fascination or philosophical interest in the subject of law.

In Justin Archibald Morrison’s case, his enrollment into the SFU School of Law was more about assuming his place in the heritage of the Morrison clan than it was about Justin’s interest in either education or the law. His father had been a City supervisor in the 1980’s. His much older brother was already a district court judge. His sister was married to a scion of the Getty family. His next older brother was already a Captain in the city police force after 6 years of service. His aunt was a top administrator for the San Francisco Library. His Two Uncles both worked at upper levels in the City bureaucracy, one for the Municipal Transportation authority called MUNI, the other for the zoning commission — the bureau that decided if establishments could exist in certain locations, or whether building enhancements were up to code or permissible.

Justin’s grandfather had been a state Senator for 32 years from San Francisco. Stephen Evan Morrison was born from Irish immigrants who arrived in the city in the 1890’s. His father was an accountant and his mother was a housewife. After attaching himself to a financial firm that made money in the growing real estate market of San Francisco and south of San Francisco in San Mateo county, Stephen Morrison aggregated his own investments, wealth, and political connections within the close-knit circles that constituted San Francisco’s economic and social elites of the post-earthquake years after the armistice of the first world war. He was a pro-union advocate in the 1930’s that stood against the rising fascist nationalist movement, and was regularly elected to represent the Mission district in the state legislature at Sacramento from 1932 to 1964, when the Mission was still an Irish enclave.

[Sacramento, a California city in the middle of the central valley, settled in 1839, was named for its river, coming from the Spanish “sacramento”, in honor of the Holy Sacramento. Catholicism has heavily influenced California throughout the state’s history.]

The Morrison family owned a large number of properties throughout the city and bay area, some of which were commercial, some residential. The income from the rents, leases, and profit agreements on these properties was in the upper hundreds of millions of dollars. The family used a variety of LLC (limited liability corporations) and proprietary legal contracts to organize the income from these properties and financial arrangements. A separate business firm was created merely to facilitate the accounting management of all the income producing properties and financial arrangements. Multiple lawyers were needed on an ongoing yearly basis to interpret the law as regards their properties and capital investments.

…

For some people, having this long term historical connection with all the upper level places in the regional society would create a sense of entitlement, a sense of deserving special privileges merely because of luck of their heritage.

And so the first remark Justin made to his history professor when he was a Junior at an exclusive private school in Pacific Heights near the Upper Fillmore — when he was confronted with his lack of participation during class discussions — was …

“my daddy pays for this school’s existence and your salary”

After which the particular professor decided to backoff and reconsider his career options, acknowledging that sometimes there were other factors influencing the system of education than ethics, effort, and actual proficiency or knowledge. Money does sometimes pay for an education, but not always in the way to be effectually desired. The grade was obtained but the information was not processed or retained. Plenty of such private schools across the urban regions of the United States catered heavily to the reality of the kids of wealthy parents who only cared about grades and credentials, not substance. Being the responsible carrier for the cumulative knowledge of humanity was never a consideration in the morbid thinking by those members of the aristocracy who only concerned themselves with maintaining their status in the hierarchy of power and privilege.

Deer will travel miles just to lick a rock or a muddy pond or body of water with a high concentration of salt. We need salt. Every cell in your body needs sodium as a necessary transport mechanism for nutrients into and out of the cell membrane. You also need salt to produce stomach acid. Your body will tell you if you need salt. If you crave salt, eat salt.

Here's what the actual research shows : the more you restrict your sodium intake, the more likely you are to die.

Here's another video on the matter from a you tube channel called "What I've Learned". The fellow who does the channel is an American transplant in Japan, and has a slew of very informed and accurately sourced information.

Ignore the bullshit ad that might show up before this video begins

Perpetual hypocrisy is one thing. Castigation and hypocrisy is quite another matter.

This is where we are at in the country of the United States. A major motion picture that has apparently been nominated for SIX Golden Globe awards called "Vice" is about Dick Cheney during the Presidential administration of George Dubya Bush. It's now 2018. Ten years later and the zeitgeist is willing to speak some truth about what happened.

Even while they white wash the more scatological and despotic parts, it's still amazing how we are getting major motion cinema events portraying a United States presidential administration as predatory, authoritarian assholes.

For what it's worth, the Grant and Reagan administrations still hold the record for criminal convictions, with Nixon nearby. Herr Trump is in competition for first place. Willing to allow the Russians help him take over the government seems to have upset all the patriotic americans who work in the various institutions. Thank. God.

When the primary goal is to make profits rather than serve the public, privatization fails. Some community goals cannot be quantified into costs and benefits. Is having a beach that is not polluted good? Of Course, but how do you quantify that with dollars?

Answer : you can't. So predatory firms manipulate the public dialogue and make people think that local and regional government inhibits economics, rather than (in historical reality) prevent the vultures from fucking up everything that is good and cool and awesome -- just so a few privileged people can make a few extra bucks.

Keeping it real y'all.

This is what I wrote in response to Mr. Quentin Kopp, who attempted to run for mayor in the early 1980's against Dianne Feinstein as an attempt to have Republicans invade San Francisco politics. Mr. Kopp likes to use disreputable sources to justify his bigoted mindset.

To the Editor:

I have a lot of respect for ex-mayor of San Franciscan Quentin Kopp. Except for one thing. Mr. Kopp mentioned in the latest December issue of the Richmond Review that “California possesses more than 4 million illegal aliens and the National Economics Editorial estimates that pay $3.5 billion in taxes, but cost California about $30 billion yearly.”

The same thing could be said of lower middle class natives. Currently most mid-western states get more in taxes than they actually pay in return. So why is Mr. Kopp focusing on “illegal aliens” ONLY? Most white middle class suburban Califonrians also pay less taxes than they actually gain in costs, AND by the same rate as the excoriated “illegal aliens” of which you speak. So why are we bringing up these specious statistics?

According to “mediabiasfactcheck.com“ — a reputable and renowned unbiased fact check organization — the National Economics Editorial is considered an extremely biased and questionable resource

From the LINK: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/national-economics-editorial/

National Economics Editorial (NEE) is a news site that purports to support Economic Nationalism. While NEE does cover some economic issues it is, as the name implies, mainly an editorial site. The opinions expressed in the stories cover current affairs with a pronounced right wing bias. NEE is, on the whole, long on rhetoric and short on factual content and credible sourcing. Due to the overt bias and lack of factual information, NEE is rated Questionable.

So why are we enabling this biased argument in the Richmond district community newspaper? Why are we getting opinions that are external to the neighborhood of the Richmond district from an obviously biased and bigoted source, purporting to be parochial and genuine to the interests of the community?

this is what the Editor of the Richmond Review (Paul Kozakiewicz) said in response

Hello. I don't understand your comparison of illegal aliens and middle class suburban white folks. Illegal aliens are in the country illegally, have bypassed those hard-working immigrants that are waiting in line to enter this country, and occasionally commit crimes against U.S. citizens, which would not have occured were they not in the country illegally. Should our country have open borders and allow anyone in the world in at any time? Are the costs to the American taxpayer in Kopp's column wrong? Am I missing something here?

This was my reply to this editor

I am not hear to argue with you and I respect your opinion. But your last name does not appear to be native american indian, which means you are an immigrant too.

I didn’t realize that the editor’s purpose is to criticize what was a letter in response to Mr. Kopp’s usage of a biased source of information. How about using a more reputable source like the Rand corporation or the center for immigration studies

https://cis.org/Report/Impact-Immigration-California

or how about The Harvard Business School

https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Publication%20Files/09-013_15702a45-fbc3-44d7-be52-477123ee58d0.pdf

I don’t know you personally, but I was born in San Francisco on 6th & Geary at the old French Hospital, and I think my views were expressed respectfully. There are a lot of costs, some of which are enabling corporate tax havens for large multinational corporations. You also make colorful presumptions about committing crimes against US citizens not supported by actual studies of immigrant populations which state that crime rates are actually less

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/03/30/upshot/crime-immigration-myth.html

That would be the New York Times BTW.

You have a right to your own opinion, but not your own facts. Or if I am wrong, give me some reputable source, and the National Economics Editorial is not a reputable source. Which I believe I proved.

So don’t side step the truth of my allegations with banter and rhetorical questions that are more opinion than fact sir.

Hopefully the editor of the Richmond Review will not exercise censorship. That would truly be disappointing.

Take care,

Gino Napoli.

I have as of yet received no response. Mr. Kozakiewicz has said nothing one way or the other.

This is how y'all have to deal with these people by the way, which is why I am posting this interaction. More than likely Mr. Paul K is pretty cool, but is ignorant in certain matters because he is being preyed upon by ideologues who are feeding him false information. All you have to do is point out where the reliable information is, say that you have respect, admit that you might be wrong (which is 100% truth) and wait. That is the only honest dialogue you can have.

Life goes on ...

I am going to try to be more active on my blog. The literal meaning of "blog" is Biographical Log.

In other words, saying something interesting, expressing something real, sharing experiences and real world circumstances.

So today, I get a "refund" from CalStrs -- California State Teacher Retirement System -- because apparently it took more money away then was legal. So I got $83. Wow. I would rather sock away $83 into a fund that will enable me to retire at age 59 for $4200 a month before taxes. But some bumpkin proletariat out there was manipulated into filing a law suit, under the delusional notion that he/she was being screwed out of his/her money, and the state system lost under the semantic letter of the law.

Meanwhile the goons are storming the legislature and city councils crying foul because having a large pension insurance fund doesn't help the folks on Wall Street make money. Oh, but apparently the Free Market applies to managing money, and large pension funds inhibit the creativity of Wall Street. Really now. You mean how to creatively screw people out of money by slicing up millions of mortgages into meaningless financial entities that got rated triple A because the ratings agencies were paid very well to pretend and overlook the entire fraudulent scheme that crashed when AIG could no longer insure against the fragility of the market.

Fuck these people. They only care about sinking their teeth into other peoples money and dish out this free market nonsense as camouflage. A large pension fund is absolutely better for everyone in the system. It is also the most efficient way to manage money -- because the costs are minimized and the vagaries of the irrational market are spread out and sunk into an aggregate fund. Individual accounts are subject to individual fees, along with the whims and/or inexperience of those who manage such individual accounts, and their is ample historical evidence that only the financiers benefit.

Yea of course, some people can gain more than others, but so many others lose, you have to wonder why change a system that benefits everyone into something that might (at the very extreme best case scenario) only benefit a few at the expense of the many?

Answer: because the donor class funds the corrupted politicians to screw the middle class and they make sure their corrupted view is available in the media jungle, preying and trouncing upon the weak and ignorant.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwvjkJXaIJE