What are the Long-Term Costs to Society when Political Agendas Trump Ethics and the Law?

Not to be vulgar but on the Joe Rogan podcast Elon Musk joked that a person in California could, "Shoot heroin while taking a dump on the mayor's car in front of City Hall and nothing would happen to them." Unfortunately, it's the same situation at CalPERS and in many courts in California and the United States; if a person fits their political agenda, nothing is going to happen to them even if they break the law or act unethically.

Let me give you real world examples. CalPERS has a Code of Conduct and a Nepotism Policy that prohibits a person from hiring a family member or a close personal friend. This is to protect the fund from collusion. A manager must recuse themselves from the hiring process if they have a close personal or familial relationship with a candidate. However, many managers have intentionally hired their personal friends for positions and have also given them personal consulting agreements with CalPERS for millions of dollars. This was all reported to CalPERS leadership with specific names and contract numbers. However, because those managers fit their political agenda, nothing happened. Their friends were able to keep their positions and their multi-million-dollar contracts.

An Investment Director's secretary at CalPERS was paid by an Investment Manager to read confidential emails between the Director and the Chief Investment Officer. They would brag to staff that they were doing it and that they would get away with it and they did. The Investment Manager wanted to be kept informed of what was transpiring at the top. Specifically, she wanted to know of when certain deals were being made that she wasn't privy to. But she especially wanted to know when the Investment Director was going to be out of the office so she could also skip town and not claim it on her timesheet, getting paid for hundreds of hours that she did not work. The Investment Manager would pay the secretary for "outside business services" (bribes) to keep the information coming. This was reported to senior leadership. However, because both of these women fit their political agenda and were hired solely based on race, CalPERS leadership did nothing to them even when they found the Investment Manager guilty of time theft.

As a favor, the secretary ended up filing false complaints of racism against Caucasian staff members who whistle blew against the Investment Manager for other serious crimes she was committing including but not limited to engaging in workplace violence, slander, and making racist comments. The CalPERS Investigative Team was the one who identified that the secretary had been "gassed up" to file the false complaints of racism at the Investment Manager's direction and agreed to do so based on their personal relationship outside of work. However, CalPERS did nothing to this secretary or manager because they fit their political agenda. CalPERS was scared to take action against them because they fit a certain racial profile; CalPERS didn't want to be sued. CalPERS had also potentially violated the California Constitution by promoting and hiring persons solely based on race, so they were covering up their tracks. What's worse, besides taking money from the investment manager for information, the secretary had a known drug problem and a had a drug possession conviction on her record. She would leave work early to patron local bars on CalPERS and the State of California taxpayer dime when the Director was out of the office and unable to supervise her. CalPERS was made aware of this but did nothing. Those two staff members still work at CalPERS.

We've also seen this in the judicial system-judges refusing to take action even if compelled to do so pursuant to the law if the case may garner them negative public attention. I've personally witnessed cases where men will refuse to work and support their children garnering hundreds of thousands of dollars in back child support. However, the California Family Court won't take action because the judge doesn't want to be sued. These men live off the taxpayers, taking welfare and refusing to work, dodging their obligations and the judges support it. The men will claim they're disabled but refuse to submit paperwork from a medical professional confirming this. The judge refuses to compel them to provide it because they don't want to be sued. The judges won't enforce formal seek work orders and won't put them in jail, allowing these men to get away with serious crimes pursuant to the Family Code. California citizens are paying for these men and their refusal to work because the judges refuse to take action. It's easier to put judges in positions of power that refuse to take action than it is to change the law and that's what society has done in recent years.

About a month ago, a judge blocked the deportation of over 260 violent illegal gang members from our society. The intention was to get these criminals off the street and deported back to their country where they will be placed in jail in order to keep us safe. However, due to a politicalized agenda, the judge attempted to block the deportation.

What are the long-term benefits and costs of this politicalized agenda? Society is moving in a direction of normalizing corruption, crime, fraud, violence and unethical behavior. What would the judge think if one of the 260 illegal gang members attacked one of his children? Would he or she be ok with that? Or robbed him or her at gun point? Should society pay for a man who refuses to work and take care of his children? Is that society's obligation or his? At CalPERS, should the taxpayers pay for the secretary and Investment Manager's time theft against the system? Should our member contributions go to pay for their crimes? What are the long-term effects of a woman being able to file false claims of racism to get out of trouble or to help a friend? California and CalPERS already have a negative reputation and it's just going to get worse unless this is stopped.

Elon Musk's DOGE identified billions of dollars in fraud that were sent to NGO's created by politicians for kickbacks. He was attempting to save the American's tax dollars from fraud. He was trying to redirect money to the US to pay down the deficit. The amount of interest we pay to China is not sustainable. However, some people in society began vandalizing Teslas in response. How does this make sense?

California used to be the belle of the ball and now it's a shell of its former glory. Society is at a critical point-do we allow people to commit crimes, glorify them and bail them out because they fit a political agenda? Or do we go back to doing what's right? If you steal, lie, or commit fraud, regardless of race or gender there should be a consequence. Accordingly, we should be an asylum for refugees who are truly escaping a violent political regime, but we should not agree to take their gang members or those who will most likely transfer that violence to our society members. At CalPERS and in the state, if you fit a certain political agenda, you can commit crimes and be protected. At CalPERS, they intentionally hire people who are not qualified to fit a political agenda. And then, when those people commit fraud and crimes, they sweep it under the rug and the members and taxpayers are paying for it. The societal consciousness needs to stand up for what's right again.