California Nightmare

So if we have the highest tax rates in the country and cannot make do, the question should be asked why.  What is it about the spending that is a problem?  What is it about the tax rates that contribute to lower revenues?  What is it about the non-taxpayers in the state that contribute to the calamity?

When those questions are answered honestly, the problem will be clear and the answers self-evident, even to Moonbeam.

California Deficit Swells to $16 Billion, Governor Says

               

By Michael B. Marois - May 12, 2012 12:49 PM PT

California’s budget deficit has swelled to $16 billion after tax collections trailed projections amid the tepid economic recovery, Governor Jerry Brown said in a comment on his Twitter post.

The shortfall has widened from the $9.2 billion Brown estimated in January, after lawmakers resisted the Democrat’s call for cost cuts, the federal government blocked other reductions and April income-tax revenue missed budget forecasts by $2 billion. On May 14, he’s set to unveil a revised spending plan and to say how he would erase the gap.

Brown, 74, set out an initial budget in January with $92.6 billion in spending for fiscal 2013, which begins in July. That plan stripped more than $4 billion from health and welfare programs while relying on higher income and sales taxes. The levy increases will go before voters in November. If rejected, schools will lose $4.8 billion midway through the year.

“We are still recovering from the worst recession since the 1930s,” Brown said in a YouTube video cited on his Twitter post. “Tax receipts are coming lower than expected and the federal government and the courts have blocked us from making billions of necessary budget reductions. The result is that we are now facing a $16 billion deficit.”

Brown this week submitted more than 1.5 million signatures to place the tax measure on the ballot. It would temporarily raise the state sales tax, already the highest in the U.S., to 7.5 percent from 7.25 percent. It would also boost rates on income starting at $250,000. The 10.3 percent levy on those making $1 million or more would rise to 13.3 percent, the most of any state.

taxes

The End of California: Not from the Earthquake

• THE WEEKEND INTERVIEW
• Wall Street Journal
• April 20, 2012, 7:19 p.m. ET

Joel Kotkin: The Great California Exodus

A leading U.S. demographer and 'Truman Democrat' talks about what is driving the middle class out of the Golden State.

By ALLYSIA FINLEY

'California is God's best moment," says Joel Kotkin. "It's the best place in the world to live." Or at least it used to be.

Mr. Kotkin, one of the nation's premier demographers, left his native New York City in 1971 to enroll at the University of California, Berkeley. The state was a far-out paradise for hipsters who had grown up listening to the Mamas & the Papas' iconic "California Dreamin'" and the Beach Boys' "California Girls." But it also attracted young, ambitious people "who had a lot of dreams, wanted to build big companies." Think Intel, Apple and Hewlett-Packard.

Now, however, the Golden State's fastest-growing entity is government and its biggest product is red tape. The first thing that comes to many American minds when you mention California isn't Hollywood or tanned girls on a beach, but Greece. Many progressives in California take that as a compliment since Greeks are ostensibly happier. But as Mr. Kotkin notes, Californians are increasingly pursuing happiness elsewhere.

Nearly four million more people have left the Golden State in the last two decades than have come from other states. This is a sharp reversal from the 1980s, when 100,000 more Americans were settling in California each year than were leaving. According to Mr. Kotkin, most of those leaving are between the ages of 5 and 14 or 34 to 45. In other words, young families.

The scruffy-looking urban studies professor at Chapman University in Orange, Calif., has been studying and writing on demographic and geographic trends for 30 years. Part of California's dysfunction, he says, stems from state and local government restrictions on development. These policies have artificially limited housing supply and put a premium on real estate in coastal regions.

"Basically, if you don't own a piece of Facebook or Google and you haven't robbed a bank and don't have rich parents, then your chances of being able to buy a house or raise a family in the Bay Area or in most of coastal California is pretty weak," says Mr. Kotkin.

While many middle-class families have moved inland, those regions don't have the same allure or amenities as the coast. People might as well move to Nevada or Texas, where housing and everything else is cheaper and there's no income tax.

And things will only get worse in the coming years as Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown and his green cadre implement their "smart growth" plans to cram the proletariat into high-density housing. "What I find reprehensible beyond belief is that the people pushing [high-density housing] themselves live in single-family homes and often drive very fancy cars, but want everyone else to live like my grandmother did in Brownsville in Brooklyn in the 1920s," Mr. Kotkin declares.

"The new regime"—his name for progressive apparatchiks who run California's government—"wants to destroy the essential reason why people move to California in order to protect their own lifestyles."

Housing is merely one front of what he calls the "progressive war on the middle class." Another is the cap-and-trade law AB32, which will raise the cost of energy and drive out manufacturing jobs without making even a dent in global carbon emissions. Then there are the renewable portfolio standards, which mandate that a third of the state's energy come from renewable sources like wind and the sun by 2020. California's electricity prices are already 50% higher than the national average.

Oh, and don't forget the $100 billion bullet train. Mr. Kotkin calls the runaway-cost train "classic California." "Where [Brown] with the state going bankrupt is even thinking about an expenditure like this is beyond comprehension. When the schools are falling apart, when the roads are falling apart, the bridges are unsafe, the state economy is in free fall. We're still doing much worse than the rest of the country, we've got this growing permanent welfare class, and high-speed rail is going to solve this?"

Mr. Kotkin describes himself as an old-fashioned Truman Democrat. In fact, he voted for Mr. Brown—who previously served as governor, secretary of state and attorney general—because he believed Mr. Brown "was interesting and thought outside the box."

But "Jerry's been a big disappointment," Mr. Kotkin says. "I've known Jerry for 35 years, and he's smart, but he just can't seem to be a paradigm breaker. And of course, it's because he really believes in this green stuff."

In the governor's dreams, green jobs will replace all of the "tangible jobs" that the state's losing in agriculture, manufacturing, warehousing and construction. But "green energy doesn't create enough energy!" Mr. Kotkin exclaims. "And it drives up the price of energy, which then drives out other things." Notwithstanding all of the subsidies the state lavishes on renewables, green jobs only make up about 2% of California's private-sector work force—no more than they do in Texas.

Of course, there are plenty of jobs to be had in energy, just not the type the new California regime wants. An estimated 25 billion barrels of oil are sitting untapped in the vast Monterey and Bakersfield shale deposits. "You see the great tragedy of California is that we have all this oil and gas, we won't use it," Mr. Kotkin says. "We have the richest farm land in the world, and we're trying to strangle it." He's referring to how water restrictions aimed at protecting the delta smelt fish are endangering Central Valley farmers.

Meanwhile, taxes are harming the private economy. According to the Tax Foundation, California has the 48th-worst business tax climate. Its income tax is steeply progressive. Millionaires pay a top rate of 10.3%, the third-highest in the country. But middle-class workers—those who earn more than $48,000—pay a top rate of 9.3%, which is higher than what millionaires pay in 47 states.

And Democrats want to raise taxes even more. Mind you, the November ballot initiative that Mr. Brown is spearheading would primarily hit those whom Democrats call "millionaires" (i.e., people who make more than $250,000 a year). Some Republicans have warned that it will cause a millionaire march out of the state, but Mr. Kotkin says that "people who are at the very high end of the food chain, they're still going to be in Napa. They're still going to be in Silicon Valley. They're still going to be in West L.A."

That said, "It's really going to hit the small business owners and the young family that's trying to accumulate enough to raise a family, maybe send their kids to private school. It'll kick them in the teeth."

A worker in Wichita might not consider those earning $250,000 a year middle class, but "if you're a guy working for a Silicon Valley company and you're married and you're thinking about having your first kid, and your family makes 250-k a year, you can't buy a closet in the Bay Area," Mr. Kotkin says. "But for 250-k a year, you can live pretty damn well in Salt Lake City. And you might be able to send your kids to public schools and own a three-bedroom, four-bath house."

According to Mr. Kotkin, these upwardly mobile families are fleeing in droves. As a result, California is turning into a two-and-a-half-class society. On top are the "entrenched incumbents" who inherited their wealth or came to California early and made their money. Then there's a shrunken middle class of public employees and, miles below, a permanent welfare class. As it stands today, about 40% of Californians don't pay any income tax and a quarter are on Medicaid.

It's "a very scary political dynamic," he says. "One day somebody's going to put on the ballot, let's take every penny over $100,000 a year, and you'll get it through because there's no real restraint. What you've done by exempting people from paying taxes is that they feel no responsibility. That's certainly a big part of it.

And the welfare recipients, he emphasizes, "aren't leaving. Why would they? They get much better benefits in California or New York than if they go to Texas. In Texas the expectation is that people work."

California used to be more like Texas—a jobs magnet. What happened? For one, says the demographer, Californians are now voting more based on social issues and less on fiscal ones than they did when Ronald Reagan was governor 40 years ago. Environmentalists are also more powerful than they used to be. And Mr. Brown facilitated the public-union takeover of the statehouse by allowing state workers to collectively bargain during his first stint as governor in 1977.

Mr. Kotkin also notes that demographic changes are playing a role. As progressive policies drive out moderate and conservative members of the middle class, California's politics become even more left-wing. It's a classic case of natural selection, and increasingly the only ones fit to survive in California are the very rich and those who rely on government spending. In a nutshell, "the state is run for the very rich, the very poor, and the public employees."

So if California's no longer the Golden land of opportunity for middle-class dreamers, what is?

Mr. Kotkin lists four "growth corridors": the Gulf Coast, the Great Plains, the Intermountain West, and the Southeast. All of these regions have lower costs of living, lower taxes, relatively relaxed regulatory environments, and critical natural resources such as oil and natural gas.

Take Salt Lake City. "Almost all of the major tech companies have moved stuff to Salt Lake City." That includes Twitter, Adobe, eBay and Oracle.

Then there's Texas, which is on a mission to steal California's tech hegemony. Apple just announced that it's building a $304 million campus and adding 3,600 jobs in Austin. Facebook established operations there last year, and eBay plans to add 1,000 new jobs there too.

Even Hollywood is doing more of its filming on the Gulf Coast. "New Orleans is supposedly going to pass New York as the second-largest film center. They have great incentives, and New Orleans is the best bargain for urban living in the United States. It's got great food, great music, and it's inexpensive."

What about the Midwest and the Rust Belt? Can they recover from their manufacturing losses?

"What those areas have is they've got a good work ethic," Mr. Kotkin says. "There's an established skill base for industry. They're very affordable, and they've got some nice places to live. Indianapolis has become a very nice city." He concedes that such places will have a hard time eclipsing California or Texas because they're not as well endowed by nature. But as the Golden State is proving, natural endowments do not guarantee permanent prosperity.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

californ ia

California: Laws to Make you Safer

California bans use of tanning beds by minors



Sun, Oct 9 2011

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Minors in the state of California will no longer be allowed to use tanning beds after Governor Jerry Brown signed a bill on Sunday prohibiting anyone under the age of 18 from using ultraviolet tanning devices.

California is the first state in the nation to ban minors from using tanning beds, legislators said.

Previously, California had banned minors under the age of 14 from using tanning beds, but allowed those between 14 and 18 years of age to use tanning beds with parental consent.

The bill was part of a cluster of legislation signed on Sunday designed to "improve the health and well-being of Calfornians," according to a statement from the Governor's office.

"I praise Gov. Brown for his courage in taking this much-needed step to protect some of California's most vulnerable residents -- our kids -- from what the 'House of Medicine' has conclusively shown is lethally dangerous: ultraviolet-emitting radiation from tanning beds," the bill's sponsor, state Senator Ted Lieu, said in a statement.

"If everyone knew the true dangers of tanning beds, they'd be shocked. Skin cancer is a rising epidemic and the leading cause of cancer death for women between 25 and 29."

The law will go into effect on January 1, 2012, according to Lieu's office.





 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
dipshits on parade

California Laws: Monnbeam away

Consider this new law, signed by Moonbeam, with the next post - also a new law signed by Moonbeam.



New law lets 12-year-olds consent to preventive care for STDs


October 9, 2011
1:26 pm

California Gov. Jerry Brown stepped into the middle of a debate over parental rights Sunday by signing legislation giving children 12 or older the power to consent to medical care involving the prevention of sexually transmitted disease.

Asssemblywoman Toni Atkins (D-San Diego) sponsored AB 499 with the aim of providing young people with timely preventative treatment, including the human papillomavirus [HPV] vaccine that proponents say can reduce the risk of certain cancers, precancerous cervical cell changes and genital warts.

The measure was backed by groups including the California STD Controllers Assn., the Health Officers Assn. of California, ACT for Women and Girls and the American Civil Liberties Union.

The bill was opposed by the California Catholic Conference, which opposed previous measures that allow minors to consent to certain treatments without the involvement of parents.

That group wrote to legislators that "this bill is dangerous because it expands a faulty law which assumes that children know better than their parents and because it will allow minors access to HPV vaccines which may cause them permanent harm."





 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
liberal crap

California: Teach Everything and add some new stuff

New state law requires LGBT history in textbooks



Wyatt Buchanan, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau
Friday, July 15, 2011



Sacramento --

Public schools in California will be required to teach students about the contributions of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Americans starting Jan. 1 after Gov. Jerry Brown on Thursday signed a controversial bill to add the topic to the social sciences curriculum.

Textbooks now must include information on the role of LGBT Americans, as well as Americans with disabilities, though California's budget crisis has delayed the purchasing of new books until at least 2015.

"History should be honest," Brown, a Democrat, said in a statement. "This bill revises existing laws that prohibit discrimination in education and ensures that the important contributions of Americans from all backgrounds and walks of life are included in our history books."

The governor called the legislation, SB48, introduced by Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, "historic."

The law - the first of its kind in the nation - adds the two groups to an existing list of minority and other groups that are required to be part of the social sciences curriculum.

Safer schools

Gay rights supporters heralded Brown's action as a major victory. They said the law will help make public schools a safer place for LGBT students as well as give those students, and their classmates, examples of accomplished and important LGBT people.

Throughout the debate on the measure, backers noted the recent spate of suicides among young LGBT people and said it would help to combat bullying that typically occurs beforehand.

Opponents, however, fiercely opposed the measure, citing religious objections to homosexuality and questioning whether such instruction is necessary. They expressed dismay with Brown's signing of the bill.

"If children in other countries are learning math and science, and American children are learning about the private lives of historical figures, how will our students compete for jobs in the global economy?" said Sen. Sharon Runner, R-Lancaster (Los Angeles County), the vice chairwoman of the Senate Committee on Education.

Beyond California

The provision on inclusion in textbooks could reach beyond California, too, as many book publishers tailor their texts to California's standards because of the state's large population. The bill does not prescribe how schools will teach the subject, and Leno said that decision will be made by local school officials and teachers.

"What the bill calls for is for the contributions of LGBT people to be included," Leno said, adding, "We wrote it broadly for a reason. We would be subject to more criticism than we've already been getting if we were more dictatorial."

Leno said the mandates apply broadly, though, telling reporters it would affect kindergarten through high school curriculum, "and, of course, in an age-appropriate way."

Gay rights advocates said they will be vigilant about making sure schools across California comply.

Carolyn Laub, the founder and executive director of the Gay-Straight Alliance Network, which works to establish gay-straight clubs in schools, said such clubs exist in 55 percent of California's high schools.

"We'll certainly be letting all of our constituents know about this bill, and when it goes into effect I can assure you there will be thousands of students" watching to see how it is implemented, she said.

Proponents have cited slain San Francisco Supervisor Harvey Milk as a person with historical significance, along with events such as the Stonewall Riots in New York City that helped launch the LGBT rights movement as examples of topics that could be taught.

Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson, a Democrat, praised Brown's move, saying, "Our history is more complete when we recognize the contributions of people from all backgrounds and walks of life."

Cutting into class time

Still, opponents questioned the effect the bill would have and the need for explicit instruction for all students about a relatively small group.

The bill "does absolutely nothing to reduce bullying, improve the poor state of our education system, ensure students graduate or prepare them for global competitiveness," said Paulo Sibaja, legislative director of the Capitol Resource Institute, a socially conservative organization in Sacramento. "Instead it diverts precious classroom time away from science, math, reading and writing, and focuses on the agenda of a small group of people."

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
education

California Companies Flee

As businesses flee, the wealthy and middle class will leave.  As the wealthy and middle class leave with business - nothing will remain except those who suck off the government (that will have no funds to pay the suckers).  The state will sink from 7th to 8th to 10th to 14th in world economy, 21st, 34th, passing up Zimbabwe ...




California companies fleeing the Golden State




By Tami Luhby @CNNMoney July 12, 2011: 12:51 PM ET


NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Buffeted by high taxes, strict regulations and uncertain state budgets, a growing number of California companies are seeking friendlier business environments outside of the Golden State.

And governors around the country, smelling blood in the water, have stepped up their courtship of California companies. Officials in states like Florida, Texas, Arizona and Utah are telling California firms how business-friendly they are in comparison.

Companies are "disinvesting" in California at a rate five times greater than just two years ago, said Joseph Vranich, a business relocation expert based in Irvine. This includes leaving altogether, establishing divisions elsewhere or opting not to set up shop in California.

"There is a feeling that the state is not stable," Vranich said. "Sacramento can't get its act together...and that includes the governor, legislators and regulatory agencies that are running wild."

The state has been ranked by Chief Executive magazine as the worst place to do business for seven years.

"California, once a business friendly state, continues to conduct a war on its own economy," the magazine wrote.

That is about to change, at least if Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom has anything to say about it. Newsom is developing a plan to address the state's economic Achilles heels, and build on its strengths. It will be unveiled at the end of July.

"California has got to get its act together when it comes to economic development and job creation," he said.

While not all companies investing elsewhere are doing so for economic reasons, some are shopping around for lower costs, lighter regulations, stable leadership and government assistance and incentives.

The most popular places to go? Texas, Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, Utah, Virginia and North Carolina, said Vranich. All rank in the Top 13 places to do business, according to Chief Executive.

No budget, no pay for California lawmakers

After 15 years in Monterey Country, Calif., Feel Golf relocated its headquarters to Florida earlier this year after it acquired Pro Line Sports, which was based in the Sunshine State.

"The whole state is a bureaucratic Santa Claus," said Lee Miller, chief executive of the golf equipment company, of his former home. "There's a very high cost of doing business."

In Florida, he found a better work pool, lower operating costs and no personal income taxes.

"Overall, it's just a better environment," he said.

PayPal opened a new customer services and operations center in Chandler, Ariz., in February, bringing 2,000 jobs to the area. The San Jose, Calif.-based tech firm, along with its parent eBay, also added 1,000 jobs in Austin, Texas, and expanded operations in Utah.

"They have business-friendly environments," said Kathy Chui, a spokeswoman for eBay.

Other states, which are revving up their job creation efforts in the weak economy, are making sure California firms know the advantages to doing businesses with them.

Utah, for instance, touts its stable government, balanced budget and AAA debt rating, said Todd Brightwell, vice president at the state's Economic Development Corp.

"We promote predictability," said Brightwell, whose agency features an online comparison between the states in terms of taxes, real estate costs, utility expenses, cost of living and other metrics.

Over the past 18 months, the state become much more proactive in courting California firms. It now visits there regularly to reach out to target companies. The strategy has been successful. Adobe has expanded operations in Utah, as has Electronic Arts.

California companies are also reaching out to other states. Sandra Watson, chief operating officer of the Arizona Commerce Authority, said she's seeing a growing number of California firms looking to expand outside the state.

The economic downturn has forced companies to find ways to reduce their costs, she said. Arizona is trying to capitalize on that by promoting its lower workers compensation and unemployment insurance taxes, as well as its aggressive incentive packages.

"There's a lot of competition out there and companies are re-evaluating their strategies," she said.

California, however, isn't sitting idly by. Not only is Newsom meeting with executives to hear their complaints, he's studying the best practices of other states. Earlier this year, he visited Texas, ranked #1 by Chief Executive, to learn more about its job creation efforts.

Newsom's plan will focus on California's premier industries, including biotechnology, agriculture and digital media. It will highlight the state's strengths in innovation and research and cultivate more manufacturing and exports. It also will examine how to address executives' concerns about regulation, taxes and layers of bureaucracy.

Later this year, California will set up a new agency that will serve as a focal point for economic development and job creation, he said. Among its goals will be to reverse the perception that California is business-unfriendly.

"We're going to start pounding away at this and begin to slowly turn this around," he said.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
california

Californexico ? There are moments when one might wonder.

This may be preferable to the Mexicans chanting support for Osama bin Laden during a soccer match a few years ago.  Mexico was an oddly split country - 20-30% believed the US government had destroyed the WTC.  Maybe they are getting better now that bin Laden is dead.  A few days ago three trucks carrying Mexican soldiers crossed the US border (their government, which lies almost every time they speak, told the US the soldiers were confused) - maybe they were on the way to the soccer game.



In Gold Cup final, it's red, white and boo again




Mexico rallies for a 4-2 win over U.S. behind overwhelming support at Rose Bowl. In what other country would the visitors have home-field advantage?




By Bill Plaschke

June 25, 2011, 10:15 p.m.



It was imperfectly odd. It was strangely unsettling. It was uniquely American.


On a balmy early Saturday summer evening, the U.S soccer team played for a prestigious championship in a U.S. stadium … and was smothered in boos.


Its fans were vastly outnumbered. Its goalkeeper was bathed in a chanted obscenity. Even its national anthem was filled with the blowing of air horns and bouncing of beach balls.


Most of these hostile visitors didn't live in another country. Most, in fact, were not visitors at all, many of them being U.S. residents whose lives are here but whose sporting souls remain elsewhere.

Welcome to another unveiling of that social portrait known as a U.S.-Mexico soccer match, streaked as always in deep colors of red, white, blue, green … and gray.

"I love this country, it has given me everything that I have, and I'm proud to be part of it," said Victor Sanchez, a 37-year-old Monrovia resident wearing a Mexico jersey. "But yet, I didn't have a choice to come here, I was born in Mexico, and that is where my heart will always be."

[to read the rest of the article, click the title link above]
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
mexico

Taxes

The top 5 tax states

Taking state tax and an average of local tax for a combined total of:


#1 - Tennessee -  9.44%

#2 - California - 9.08%


#3 - Arizona - 9.01%


#4 - Louisiana - 8.69%

#5 - Washington - 8.65%



So we are not the highest, but far from average.

On the other end, Oregon, Delaware, New Hampshire, and Montana all have 0% tax.
Alaska has a 1.1% tax.


Source: Tax Foundation












taxes

What a state we have, here in California.

This story is now old (November) and had been ongoing since the start of the Fall semester at this middle school, but I just learned about it.


The video to watch first:   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Po7k5O9LtBo&feature=player_embedded



What the video doesn’t tell us is more about the details of why he was told to take it down:



He flew the American flag on his bike as he rode to and from his school — Denair Middle School — for two months as he was gearing up for a school trip to Washington D.C. Cody’s display of American pride was cut short though when a campus supervisor asked him to remove the flag because it might be creating “racial tension” and there were some concerns for his safety.

January 7, 2011
http://www.turlockjournal.com/news/article/7371/

or the following

What seemed to be an innocent demonstration of patriotism soon spiraled into controversy when Cody's school administration forbade him from flying the flag because other students found it offensive. The Superintendent of the Denair School District spoke to the press saying he did not want to incite "racial tension" and that Cody was asked to not bring his flag to school for his own safety.



So … Turlock California … racial tensions????


How tolerant.
 

 

Take down the flag so as to avoid bothering people!!  In my country, I should not fly my flag so as to avoid bothering someone (who is not from my country, and to be honest, does not care much about my country) - not going to happen, regardless of racial tension.







 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
tolerance

There outa be a law ...

Well, in fact there are 725 new laws today in California.  Our state legislature made sure it found time to pass these necessary and reasonable laws, to protect and serve the people I suppose.


Smoking is a bad thing - smoke on a beach and get arrested.  However, we have seen the light in California and if you have less than an ounce of marijuana on your person - it will be a simple fine.


And while we are on the subject of pot - make a brownie with the stuff and that may be a fine, but make the brownie with Crisco and ... that is a crime.

I suppose what could make this worse is a NY law that places the price of a bagel at, say $2.00, but if you ask them to slice it, there is a slicing fee tax of 9%.  California has not gotten to that point, yet.

What is not a crime, and has not been, buit the legislature saw fit to ensure the law did not expire - was pharmacists are able, under AB 1701, to dispense up to 10 hypodermic needles or syringes to a person without a prescription.  I suppose also, without any questions.  What if I need 11 - and don't get me wrong, I don't care about drug use, but I do care about idiotic laws that waste time and cost money, if only to print and transmit the idiotic laws to everyone.

However, for insurance companies, it may seem like we have reached the limit - they may not charge individuals differently for their policy due to gender (this mainly the auto industry) but if you want to lease your vehicle to someone else, you may do so all the while you will be required to provide the insurance on the vehicle.  Watch companies refuse to do business in California, and or raise their rates incredibly high.

If that is not enough, if you have enough money you may be able to buy the right to use the carpool lane (AB1224).  It helps to have money.  Money money money. 

And what will not cost you any money - assuming you are under 21, is, if you are intoxicated and falling all over everything and everyone - clearly pissed, and a cop happens upon you.  What would happen in the old days (2010) - you could be arrested.  NOW, all you need to do is  run over to the officer and inform him that you are reporting an alcohol-related medical emergency.  It could be you who is shitfaced or your friend and to save him from being arrested, you invoke AB 1999 which protects anyone under 21 from prosecution for possession or consumption of alcohol if the person is reporting a medical emergency!

I suppose after all the silly laws, anyone under 21 should be pleased, if they drink.  And if they don't have a drivers license as yet, they will be given the 'new' license.  Reason - to help prevent fraud.  Most fraud is done by illegals and given the attitude in Sacramento - illegals should be welcomed, not chased away, so why are you spending millions to create a new license you are not interested in enforcing.

There ought to be a law.













term limits

Education: Claim Illegal Status and Pay In-State Rates

NOVEMBER 15, 2010


California Court Upholds In-State Tuition for Some Illegal Immigrants



Associated Press

SAN FRANCISCO—The California Supreme Court ruled Monday that some illegal immigrants are entitled to the same tuition breaks offered to in-state high school students to attend public colleges and universities.

While the ruling applies only to California, the case was closely watched nationally because nine other states including New York and Texas have similar laws.

Republican congressmen Lamar S. Smith of Texas and Steve King of Iowa filed a so-called friends of the court brief urging that illegal immigrants be denied the reduced rate.

The lawsuit considered by the court was part of a broader legal assault led by the immigration legal scholar Kris Kobach, who has filed numerous cases across the country seeking to restrict the rights of illegal immigrants.

He represented a group of U.S. students who filed the lawsuit seeking to invalidated the California law.

Mr. Kobach didn't return a phone call seeking comment about the ruling in California.

A unanimous state Supreme Court, led by politically conservative Justice Ming Chin, said the California provision was constitutional because U.S. residents also had access to the reduce rates.

The California Legislature passed the controversial measure in 2001 that allowed any student regardless of immigration status who attended a California high school for at least three years and graduated to qualify for in-state tuition at the state's colleges universities. In-state tuition saves each state college student about $11,000 a year and each University of California student about $23,000 a year.

A state appellate court in 2008 ruled the law was unconstitutional after a group of out-of-state students who are U.S. citizens filed a lawsuit alleging the measure violated federal prohibitions barring illegal immigrants from receiving post-secondary benefits not available to U.S. citizens based on state residency.

But the state Supreme Court noted that the California law says nothing about state residency,

The state law also requires the illegal immigrants applying for the in-state tuition to swear they will attempt to become U.S. citizens. The applicants are still barred from receiving federal financial aid.

"Through their hard work and perseverance, these students have earned the opportunity to attend UC," said University of California President Mark G. Yudof. "Their accomplishments should not be disregarded or their futures jeopardized."

Mr. Kobach also failed to invalidate a similar law in Kansas. His lawsuit in Nebraska is pending.

The law professor was the chief drafter of Arizona's tough new laws against illegal immigrants, which is pending before a federal appeals court.

He was elected earlier this month to serve as secretary of state in Kansas.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
illegals

Tsunami

In all my years of voting - from  West Los Angeles to Phoenix, Tempe to Westwood, and a half dozen other places I have never had to wait for nearly 30 minutes to vote.  The closest was in Westwood in 1996 (presidential year) when I had to wait for 10-15 people.  Today, at a polling site, I had to wait nearly 30 minutes, and more than 80 people were in line.  At a precinct where, in presidential years the numbers are 400-500 people voting - the number when I left was over 1200 (and 80+ were still in line).

The numbers are historic and I would be very concerned if I was inside looking at the wave about to capsize my boat and send me into near oblivion.










election

Jerry 'Moonbeam' Brown

David Axlerod - White House, Democrat, and pontificator extrodinaire -

No. I -- as I said, I think you're going to see an -- an election where, you know, people win who perhaps you didn't expect to win, people lose who -- who, perhaps, you didn't expect to lose on -- on both sides.



So I -- I mean what I would suggest to you is you -- you stay up for the full night and -- and total it up at the end. You know, we -- if, for example, Jerry Brown can withstand, you know, what will probably end up being $200 million of spending by his opponent and get elected governor of California, that will be a big victory in the nation's largest state.



Mr. Axlerod - if a Democrat can't win in a state that is a majority Latino, with a majority of voters labeling themselves as Democrats ... a Democrat can't win anywhere.  The big news will be is A) he loses, B) he wins by a few percentage points.  Thats will say a great deal.  That Democrats can't even win when the state a majority Democrat.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
democrats

Jerry Brown: Doing what I'd do, before I do it, is being a whore.

Brown or aide is heard slurring Whitman


In a private conversation inadvertently captured on voicemail, someone calls the GOP candidate for governor a 'whore,' saying she made a deal to protect law enforcement pensions while seeking endorsements.

By Seema Mehta, Los Angeles Times
Los Angeles Times
October 8, 2010


In a private conversation inadvertently captured by voicemail, Democratic gubernatorial nominee Jerry Brown or one of his associates can be heard referring to his Republican opponent Meg Whitman as a "whore," saying she cut a deal protecting law enforcement pensions while the two candidates competed for police endorsements.

The comment came after Brown called the Los Angeles Police Protective League in early September to ask for its endorsement. He left a voicemail asking Scott Rate, a union official, to call him, then apparently believed he had hung up the phone. The voicemail captured the ensuing conversation between Brown and his aides.

With frustration, Brown discussed the pressure he was under from police unions to pledge not to reduce public safety pensions. Months earlier, Whitman agreed to exempt public safety workers from part of her pension reform plan: the bid to enroll new government workers in 401(k)-style plans instead of pensions.

"Do we want to put an ad out? … That I have been warned if I crack down on pensions, I will be — that they'll go to Whitman, and that's where they'll go because they know Whitman will give 'em, will cut them a deal, but I won't," Brown said.

At that point, a voice — either that of Brown or a second person — can be heard saying: "What about saying she's a whore?"

"Well, I'm going to use that," Brown says. "It proves you've cut a secret deal to protect the pensions."

The situation, in which Whitman was receiving a labor endorsement while supporting the union's position on pensions, is a reversal from the usual position the two candidates have been in. Unions have been a mainstay of Brown's campaign and have spent millions of dollars in a bid to help get him elected. Whitman has repeatedly charged that Brown would be unwilling to confront the rising costs of civil service pensions.

Two audio recordings of the conversation were released to The Times on Thursday by the police union. On the initial recording, the voice making the "whore" reference appears to be that of someone other than Brown. A union official later produced what he described as an enhanced version of the recording. In that recording, it is unclear whether the "whore" remark was made by another person or by Brown himself.

The union has endorsed Whitman and is spending $450,000 on her behalf.

Brown spokesman Sterling Clifford confirmed the tape's authenticity, but said Thursday evening that campaign officials had been unable to determine who had said what during the discussion. "I am confident it was not Jerry Brown," Clifford said, after reviewing the tape. "Whoever said it is speaking over the top of him in several places."

Steven Glazer, Brown's campaign manager, said the discussion was "a private conversation" but that "at times our language was salty. We apologize to Ms. Whitman and anyone who may have been offended."
 
Whitman spokeswoman Sarah Pompei said: "The use of the term 'whore' is an insult to both Meg Whitman and to the women of California. This is an appalling and unforgivable smear against Meg Whitman. At the very least Mr. Brown tacitly approved this despicable slur and he himself may have used the term at least once on this recording."
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
jerry brown

California: The Big One is Almost Here.

Californians - our time is coming.  It is nearly here, and when it arrives, we are pretty much finished.

Get ready for the ride of our lives (and for many, the end of our lives).



Study: Southern California Is Overdue for a Catastrophic Earthquake


By Julie

08/21/2010
AOLnews
Cleveleandleader


According to a long-awaited, landmark study released on Friday, Southern California is overdue for a major earthquake a long the San Andreas fault.

Results of the study came after scientists spend years studying the geology of the Carrizo Plain area of the San Andreas fault, which is located about 100 miles northwest of Los Angeles. The study also discovered that earthquakes have occured far more often along the San Andreas than previously believed.

University of California, Irvine, researcher Sinan Akciz said in a statement:

"What we know is for the last 700 years, earthquakes on the southern San Andreas fault have been much more frequent than everyone thought. Data presented here contradict previously published reports."

Akciz's colleague and fellow researcher Lisa Grand Ludwig added:

"People should not stick their heads in the ground. There are storm clouds gathered on the horizon. Does that mean it's definitely going to rain? No, but when you have that many clouds, you think, 'I'm going to take my umbrella with me today.' That's what this research does: It gives us a chance to prepare."

The last major earthquake along that portion of the San Andreas fault occurred in 1857. However, UC Irvine and Arizona State University scientists found that earthquakes have occurred as often as every 45 to 144 years. That means the region is overdue for a catastrophic earthquake infamously referred to as "The Big One."

Results of this study echo what many seismologists in Southern California have been saying for some time now: that the San Andreas has been in a relatively quiet period and is due for a major quake.

The study utilized charcoal samples to look for earthquake activity dating back centuries. The results were published Friday in the journal Geology.



Now - a few comments about the massive and catastrophic quake which will hit Los Angeles sometime very soon - it will pretty much end things for all of us.

Our state has no money.

Our state is laying off state employees.

Our cities are ending contracts with various contractors and sub-contracting services because they HAVE NO MONEY.  The City of Los Angeles is short millions from even being close to having a balanced budget.  The cities have raised their local taxation levels already.  People are leaving the state (the ones with real money).  Our colleges and schools have been cut dramatically, and our federal government - Mr. Obama's heavy taxation has yet to occur, but is fast approaching and all those taxes are for the health plan he says is free. 

When our houses fall down - who are you gonna call? 

When we have no car, no power, no phone, no water, no food - who are you going to call?

The federal government?  Do you honestly think Obama can handle a crisis of this magnitude?  You don't trust the Congress (less than 25% approval rating), and more than half of all Americans don't trust Obama.

Mr. Obama has told us already, publicly, that if a nuclear device or any wmd goes off in the US, we will be on our own for more than 72 hours.  An earthquake is natures wmd. 

Our colleges and schools destroyed, the state out of money, our federal government busily working on our free healthcare ... I fear for our survival.  Will we manage - most of us will, yes.  Will the US overcome the challenge - better than anyone else, yes.  Will we be humiliated by Obama - yes.  He will accept the tents and water and pumps and blankets offered by Cuba and Iran, Syria, and Russia - not intended to help, but to humiliate.  And he will do so without any understanding.  We will suffer the quake, the high taxes afterward, and a collapse of much of what we still believe.

Can we make it out?  We may, depending almost entirely on the next 6-12 months.









earthquake

More Taxes: California Democrats - to fill the void, raise taxes.

On top of the federal taxes coming our way, the state will raise taxes.  tax tax tax tax.  Never met a tax they didn't like!




California Democrats unveil tax-increase package




7:25pm EDT
Reuters


SAN FRANCISCO, May 24 (Reuters) - Democratic lawmakers in California unveiled a plan on Monday for nearly $5 billion of tax and fee increases to help fill the state government's $19.1 billion budget gap.

The plan by state Senate Democrats would raise $4.9 billion by raising California's vehicle registration fee, suspending corporate tax breaks scheduled to begin next year and boosting the state's tax on alcoholic beverages.

Democrats control both chambers of the state's legislature and have said they would seek new revenue to help plug the shortfall.

Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, by contrast, has ruled out tax increases and is relying largely on deep spending cuts in his plan for balancing the state's books. He has called for $12.4 billion of cuts and would scrap the state's welfare system, a plan Democrats have rejected.

Republicans in the legislature's minority immediately criticized the proposed tax increases, signaling they will use their votes to block them. Democrats lack the votes to pass tax measures on their own.

Analysts expect budget negotiations between Schwarzenegger and lawmakers will drag on and press into the state's next fiscal year, which begins in July.

California's leaders are facing another year of weak revenue as a result of the recession and the downturns in financial and real estate markets.












taxes

Democrats in Congress

One of the differences between Democrats and Republicans -


The retiring Rep. Diane Watson says she '100% -- maybe 300%' endorses Bass, the California Assembly speaker, as her successor in the L.A.-area district.


Bass cannot be nor is it possible she is as daft as Watson, so - we will certainly not be worse off.

Watson is a whack job who should never have been sent to congress.

I have a video link somewhere of her - can be searched.  Where she mentions having returned from Cuba and all the wonderful things Fidel has done down there and how great his medical msystem is and .... she is a fool and she needs to retire.  I wonder whether she and Maxine share notes.







bass

I hope The One, the Obamessiah, is ready for a Big One in California.  I hope the Congress, ready to spend trillions on health care, is prepared to spend trillions to rebuild California.

Our time is fast approaching, and while we will not be as destroyed as Haiti - we are LONG overdue given the temblor activity along the fault zones on each side of the plate over the last couple years.

The Big One is Coming, sooner than later.








earthquake

Sales Tax in California

I had a person tell me that illegals paid taxes, and contributed as much as everyone else (legal) in taxes.

I have wondered about that issue for some time.

In gas - part is a gas tax, for the fed and some for the state.  It is too complicated for my tiny brain to figure out what it is I pay in state tax on gas (6% Sales Tax. 1.25% county tax. 1.2 cpg state UST fee. plus local sales tax), but I do have an odd habit, perhaps even an ecentricity ... I collect every receipt for everything.  It is possible a couple slide through, but in terms of overall value, each might be less than a dollar or two.  I collect every single solitary receipt and I scan them, then dispose of them.

I understand that it is a very ... 'old persons' thing to do, odd thing to do, weird behavior ... but it does allow me to evaluate spending (even if I don't act on any conclusions I draw).  One benefit is I just tallied up what I have spent since January 1, 2009, in sales tax for the state.  The grand total is $689.97.  I can buy 4 new tires, fill the car with gas, and get some new brake pads.  That is what my sales tax could buy, or it could pay for 10 bricks in a wall along the freeway.  My 2008 taxes show about  $3500 in state taxes paid after whatever deductions.  Minus the missing receipts and gas tax, I paid about $4200 in sales tax to the state of California. 

I think $4200 is quite a bit of money.  If there are 12 million households in California, and there is more than that, then 12 million X $4000 = 48 000 000 000 ??  (or 4.8 to the 10th)  I do not do math, which is why I scan my receipts, and calculators don't go up that high - they stick exponents off to the side which I never understood. If the total is only 4.8 billion, I am way off, but the secondary issue I have alluded to still holds.


48 billion. 

Now we add in all the rest



Corporation Tax  8.7 billion


Highway Users Taxes  3.1 billion


Motor Vehicle Fees 7.25 billion


Insurance Tax  2 billion


Liquor Tax 332 million


Tobacco Taxes 937 million


Other 8.9 billion


 32 billion + 48 billion = 80 billion.  We spend $112 billion, so we are short 30 billion.

But this total doesn't count all the other taxes and takings done by the state. 


One way we can remedy this is cut costs.  Using my plan, every household would be taxed the same amount - many cannot afford that much, but today many cannot afford the costs of living in California, so it evens out in the end.  Those who cannot afford would seek alternative accomodations, JUST as today those with more money leave the state and abandon us to the economic misery we now find ourselves.



Lower taxes is the answer.

Lower property taxes, lower sales taxes, lower payroll taxes.

The first year you would suffer a budget shortfall of at least $35 billion or so (less than we currently have been dealing with).  Even if the 2nd year you suffer a $50 billion shortfall as a result of lowered taxes, the combined total of the two years would just top that of our current state deficits. 

Thereafter, each year the revenues would increase.  More businesses would return to California, more people would move into the state with money, more people with skills and talents would create business and hire employees and pay taxes and ... within four years we could be climbing out of the hole, instead of digging ourselves deeper.

But hey ... $689 in sales tax is a lot to me.  It is out of the world to at least 10 million people who live in California, and I use no state resources (medical system). 







taxes

California Addresses the Serious Power Crisis: No Big Screen TVs

The PROBLEM is not entirely - what we use it on ... and these measures - no big screen TVs will eventually lead to licensing of computers in your home and an assessment of use fee's if you have more than 1.  Why?  On the pretense of energy conservation and ...

The problem though is not that 30 million citizens of California are using electricity - although that is an issue.  The problem is the millions of illegals who use electricity, thus taking away from the opportunity of those who are citizens to enjoy what we possess, further - the need to build more power plants.  How many power plants have been constructed in the last 40 years, yet our population has nearly doubled.

THAT is the issue, not big screen TVs (as much as they suck the power up and are silly after a certain point).




California appears poised to be first to ban power-guzzling big-screen TVs

Industry lobbying efforts appear to elicit little sympathy from the state Energy Commission, which may vote as soon as Nov. 4.



By Marc Lifsher
October 14, 2009
Reporting from Sacramento


The influential lobby group Consumer Electronics Assn. is fighting what appears to be a losing battle to dissuade California regulators from passing the nation's first ban on energy-hungry big-screen televisions.

On Tuesday, executives and consultants for the Arlington, Va., trade group asked members of the California Energy Commission to instead let consumers use their wallets to decide whether they want to buy the most energy-saving new models of liquid-crystal display and plasma high-definition TVs.

"Voluntary efforts are succeeding without regulations," said Doug Johnson, the association's senior director for technology policy. Too much government interference could hamstring industry innovation and prove expensive to manufacturers and consumers, he warned.

But those pleas didn't appear to elicit much support from commissioners at a public hearing on the proposed rules that would set maximum energy-consumption standards for televisions to be phased in over two years beginning in January 2011. A vote could come as early as Nov. 4.

The association's views weren't shared by everyone in the TV business. Representatives of some TV makers, including top-seller Vizio Inc. of Irvine, said they would have little trouble complying with tighter state standards without substantially increasing prices.

"We're comfortable with our ability to meet the proposed levels and implementation dates," said Kenneth R. Lowe, Vizio's co-founder and vice president.

Last month, the commission formally unveiled its proposal to require manufacturers to limit television energy consumption in a way that has been done with refrigerators, air conditioners and dozens of other products since the 1970s.

"We would not propose TV efficiency standards if we thought there was any evidence in the record that they will hurt the economy," said Commissioner Julia Levin, who has been in charge of the two-year rule-making procedure. "This will actually save consumers money and help the California economy grow and create new clean, sustainable jobs."

Tightening efficiency ratings by using new technology and materials should result in "zero increase in cost to consumers," said Harinder Singh, an Energy Commission staffer on the TV regulation project.

California's estimated 35 million TVs and related electronic devices account for about 10% of all household electricity consumption, the Energy Commission staff reported. But manufacturers quickly are coming up with new technologies that are making even 50-inch-screen models much more economical to operate.

New features, such as light-emitting diodes that consume tiny amounts of power, special reflective films and sensors that automatically adjust TV brightness to a room's viewing conditions, are driving down electricity consumption, experts said.

The payoff could be big for TV owners, said Ken Rider, a commission staff engineer. Average first-year savings from reduced electricity use would be an estimated $30 per set and $912 million statewide, he said.

If all TVs met state standards, Rider added, California could avoid the $600-million cost of building a natural-gas-fired power plant. Switching to more-efficient TVs could have an estimated net benefit to the state of $8.1 billion, the commission staff reported.

Consumer Electronics Assn. officials disputed that figure, arguing that it was based on out-of-date numbers that fail to account for recent industry innovations. "With voluntary compliance, manufacturers can meet the targets over time, managing the cost impact, yet not in any way impeding innovation," said Seth Greenstein, an association consultant.








 
 
 
 
energy