California Issues ...
- Thread starter GURPS
- Start date
California watchdog estimates $26 billion deficit just days after Gov. Newsom touts economy
The news comes the day after Gov. Gavin Newsom defended Democrats' economic record in a nationally televised debate. State Republicans blame Newsom and California Democrats for nearly doubling the state’s budget over the last six years and called for reductions in government programs to protect critical government functions from severe budget cuts.
“Despite all warnings that it was unsustainable, the Majority party has increased state spending by $116 billion over the last six years, nearly doubling the general fund budget in that short time,” said State Sen. Roger Niello, R–Fair Oaks, in a public statement. “Hopefully, the majority will see it is time for a more realistic budget strategy, instead of throwing money at a laundry list of projects that sounds nice on the national television debate stage.”
The LAO estimates that if spending remains unchanged, the state is likely to have a $26 billion shortfall for 2022-2023, $19.1 billion for 2023-2024, and $13.3 billion for 2024-2025, totaling a $58 billion shortfall over the next three years.
California Will Soon Fine Stores That Don’t Have A ‘Gender Neutral’ Kids Toy Section
The law applies to stores that sell “childcare items” or toys and employs a minimum of 500 employees across store locations, and it requires that they offer a section where “a reasonable selection of the items and toys for children that it sells shall be displayed, regardless of whether they have been traditionally marketed for either girls or for boys,” according to its text. Stores that do not comply with the law could face a civil penalty and charged $250 after the first offense or $500 for later offenses.
“Unjustified differences in similar products that are traditionally marketed either for girls or for boys can be more easily identified by the consumer if similar items are displayed closer to one another in one, undivided area of the retail sales floor,” the text of the law reads. “Keeping similar items that are traditionally marketed either for girls or for boys separated makes it more difficult for the consumer to compare the products and incorrectly implies that their use by one gender is inappropriate.”Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a slew of bills this year pertaining to gender ideology, including one bill that requires the State Department to create an “LGBTQ cultural competency training” by July 1, 2025, and another that requires the state to create an advisory task force to identify policies to assist LGBTQ students.
Budget Deficit Forces San Francisco to Eliminate Reparations Office
Despite these challenges, as Breitbart News reported, San Francisco leaders were considering reparations for long-term black residents, and were floating sums in the range of $5 million, though these were not based on any precise mathematical calculations.
Now, however, Mayor Breed has cut the program. The San Francisco Examiner reported:
Activists are nevertheless vowing to press ahead.
Mayor Breed’s reversal on reparations is not the first time that San Francisco’s progressive promises have been forced to yield to reality.
Last year, she increased funding for police, after first saying she would defund the police to the tune of $120 million. Earlier this year, San Francisco repealed a travel and contracting ban on conservative states, after officials revealed it was costing the city money without any impact on social policies in Republican-governed jurisdictions.
Gov. Gavin Newsom’s Administration Orders California Spending Freeze
Capital flight is real. There isn’t enough wealth coming from the wealthy any longer.
What is truly unexpected is that Gov. Gavin Newsom’s administration has just ordered a state spending freeze.
Clem72
Well-Known Member
You should always be suspicious whenever you hear mention of a pay "gap". It largely doesn't exist for similar positions and experience. Differences are almost always explained by the hours worked or the years of experience.
Take for example a hypothetical hospital where:
85% of the nursing staff is women, including all of the senior staff (highest paid).
55% of the doctors are women, and being contract staff are paid the same (per hour) as male doctors.
and most of the executive staff (CEO, CFO, CNO, etc) are women and represent the highest paid people in the organization.
In this hospital in every position and at every level women make the same or more than men.
BUT
If you took the average pay (median or mean) by gender, you would find that men make considerably more than women. Because even though most of the doctors are women, as a percentage more of the men working in this hospital are doctors than any other job so the average man's pay will be closer to the doctors pay while the average women's pay will be closer to the nurses pay.
And that is why every time you hear it reported that there is a "gap", it's a gap in the average...
Progressives ignore that fact.
U.S. Soccer says women’s team has been paid more than men’s team
The U.S. Soccer Federation released a letter from its president Monday saying that it has paid the women’s national team more than the men’s national team in recent years, a move that comes ahead of mediation in the women’s team’s pay-equity lawsuit against its employer.
Corderio said the federation’s analysis showed that U.S. Soccer paid female players $34.1 million in salaries and game bonuses from 2010-2018, while paying the men $26.4 million during the same period. Women’s team members receive salaries plus bonuses and the men receive only bonuses, though larger ones, according to the letter.
The compensation structure for the two teams is different because of their respective collective-bargaining agreements and not because of gender, Cordeiro wrote.
Molly Levinson, a spokeswoman for the players, called the letter “a sad attempt by USSF to quell the overwhelming tide of support the USWNT has received from everyone from fans to sponsors to the United States Congress.”
After nearly two centuries of uninterrupted economic and population growth, California has hit a pothole in the road. There had been a lot of warning signs that the Democrats' hostility to success and achievement was coming home to roost but the first finite, undeniable warning was when California lost a House seat in the 2020 reapportionment. This was the first time in history that California had lost a House seat and marked the end of a run of gains that started with a one-seat gain in the 1860 Census and culminated in a series of 5-7 seat gains between 1910 and 1980. My colleague Ward Clark has more to say about the population shift, particularly the addition of over a hundred thousand low-skill/no-skill immigrants; see The Exodus of Productive Citizens From California Proceeds Apace.
According to the LA Times, the pain is beginning to be felt as the outflow of high-earners (and maximum tax rate payers) is replaced by an inflow of people dependent upon public services.
According to the same budget analysts, the top one percent of California taxpayers, that is, those earning more than a million dollars per year, account for as much as 45 percent of state income tax revenue. By extension, one can assume they also pay a disproportionate share of property taxes, too.
What California seems to be doing is swapping a lot of people earning good money for not a lot of people who earn less.
According to the LA Times, the pain is beginning to be felt as the outflow of high-earners (and maximum tax rate payers) is replaced by an inflow of people dependent upon public services.
According to the same budget analysts, the top one percent of California taxpayers, that is, those earning more than a million dollars per year, account for as much as 45 percent of state income tax revenue. By extension, one can assume they also pay a disproportionate share of property taxes, too.
What California seems to be doing is swapping a lot of people earning good money for not a lot of people who earn less.
BOP
Well-Known Member
Is there a snort-laugh emoji available? Because that's what I just did.
BOP
Well-Known Member
Speaking of San Fran by the Bay, and cities that need to be eliminated (with prejudice), here's a song that hasn't aged well:Meanwhile, back in California, a dopey new bill overwhelmingly passed both houses of the state legislature yesterday and is now wandering lazily toward Governor Newsom’s desk. The new law will allow “Amsterdam-style cannabis cafés” throughout the state. Which is just what San Fransiscans need these days, to take their minds off the City’s out-of-control-crime problem, homeless epidemic, and controlled demolition.
The bill was proudly and openly modeled on pot cafés in Amsterdam, which are infamous for offering weed, coffee and other drinks, food, music, and other things that can’t be mentioned in a family blog.
I get the food part. I mean, they have the munchies, right? What do you want them to do? Starve to death?
But I do see a couple problems. I’m old enough to remember back when Californian Karens were busily outlawing indoor smoking because it was bad, or something. I guess indoor smoking is not so much of a problem anymore. Lung cancer? Secondhand smoke? Who cares! Second, serving coffee and weed? At the same time? Isn’t that mixing uppers and downers? Won’t something bad happen? Isn’t it like crossing the streams?
Finally, how well will signing this new law combine with Governor Newsom’s pivot to the center? Are Amsterdam-style drug cafés “the center” now?
After pot cafés, what will liberals want next?
In the end, despite all appearances to the contrary, California’s government just wants citizens to be happy. “Lots of people want to enjoy legal cannabis in the company of others,” bill sponsor Matt Haney (D-San Fran.) said in a statement. He continued, “There’s absolutely no good reason from an economic, health, or safety standpoint that the state should make that illegal. If an authorized cannabis retail store wants to also sell a cup of coffee and a sandwich, we should allow cities to make that possible and stop holding back these small businesses.”
Recreational marijuana was legalized for adults in California in 2016. I suppose this is the inevitable result. We’re all Amsterdam now.
☕️ MS. DIVERSITY ☙ Tuesday, October 3, 2023 ☙ C&C NEWS 🦠
Dr. Ryan Cole multiplier; shocking Tucker interview with VDH; more Trump fraud case analysis; SADS homecoming queen; WSJ op-ed rips peer review; Newson finds black lesbian Senator; and much more.www.coffeeandcovid.com
California Pizza Hut Operators Laying off All Delivery Drivers Due to Mandated Wage Increase
In their seemingly never-ending quest to make lives for Californians miserable, the state legislature passed a bill that Governor Newsom signed into law mandating a $20 minimum wage for fast food workers by April of 2024.
Now you'd think that would be great for the workers, who are often low-income and could use the extra money. But that can only happen if they have a job... and for at least 1,200 employees, they soon won't as multiple Golden State Pizza Hut franchises, collectively operating hundreds of stores, are laying off all their in-house drivers.
Has the state declared that the food delivery companies like Grub Hub are part of the fast food workers .?
If so delivery in CA just went way up.
Clem72
Well-Known Member
It's especially funny because drivers earn much more from tips than from their wages, like wait staff at a restaurant. So the state trying to help them out by giving them an extra $5 an hour ended up costing them a lot of money as they will probably end up working in some other capacity in fast food and earn a flat $20 an hour instead of $15 plus tips.
Sucks for customers too, as they will now have to rely on 3rd parties like grub hub with crazy fees and inflated menu prices....and still have to tip.
Gov. Gavin Newsom to Offer Health Insurance to the World’s Migrants in 2024 If They Can Get to California
Starting in the new year, illegal aliens in California will qualify for Medi-Cal, which is California’s state-funded version of the federal government’s Medicaid program. Since 2015, only illegal alien children qualified for Medi-Cal thanks to then-Gov. Jerry Brown (D).
Likewise, Newsom expanded eligibility for Medi-Cal to illegal aliens 50 years and older as well as those aged 19 to 25. This latest expansion is set to add about 764,000 Medi-Cal recipients to the state’s health insurance rolls.
Elected Republicans in California have warned that expanding taxpayer-funded health insurance to illegal aliens “will certainly exacerbate current provider access problems” as Medi-Cal “is already strained by serving 14.6 million Californians — more than a third of the state’s population.”
Eventually, California officials project that more than 1.2 million illegal aliens will be using subsidized health insurance.
The new policy comes as California’s population dipped below 39 million residents this year, driven mostly by Californians fleeing the state. The year prior, about 300,000 Californians moved out of the state — the most of any state in the nation that year.
A WISE move for a state with a budget deficit of 68 BILLION Dollars
California's New Law Will Prohibit Police Officers From Asking This Question When Pulling Someone Over
The new procedure is designed to reduce pretextual stops, a practice in which law enforcement officers stop a driver for a minor traffic violation or another minor infraction as a pretext to investigate a separate and unrelated criminal offense for which they don’t have the necessary reasonable suspicion or probable cause to justify the stop.
For example, an officer could stop a driver for failing to use a turn signal when the actual intention is to search for drugs or other illegal contraband. The initial stop might be legal, but the true motive is to find something else entirely without the direct evidence required to justify the investigation. Pretextual stops have been a subject of legal and public debate.
Proponents of pretextual stops might argue that they are a necessary tool for detecting and curbing crime. When officers stop vehicles for minor violations, they could uncover more serious criminal activities, which could lead to the apprehension of individuals who might otherwise evade law enforcement.
Supporters might also suggest that pretextual stops could have a deterrence effect. If would-be criminals know that a traffic stop could lead to a deeper investigation, it might cause them to think twice about engaging in criminality while driving.
By requiring officers to declare the reason for a traffic stop, AB 2773 will reduce pretextual stops, which can lead to unnecessary tensions between police and the communities they serve. Additionally, it could build more trust between law enforcement and civilians by mandating clear communication from the outset of the interaction and preventing officers from fishing for crimes without probable cause. This would go a long way toward protecting civilians’ Constitutional rights.
Last edited:
Clem72
Well-Known Member
See, I don't mind a pretextual stop (as long as the offense actually happened), but I am against them detaining you longer then necessary or trying to trick you into letting them check your vehicle. If someone is obviously drunk, or has someone tied up in the backseat, fair game. If they ask you if you have been drinking and you answer "only 8 or 9 beers", fair game. But when they start with the "I think I smell pot, open your trunk" they cross the line.
Ah Bullshit ...... this is a fishing expedition ...
Cop - do you mind if I search your car
Driver - why do you need to search my car if I had a tail light out
Cop - what is this 25,000 in the Trunk, I am confiscating this cash, there are traces of cocaine present I think you are involved in criminal activity